Observation Shows Overwhelming Evidence for a Creator

[DonFerrari]

o_O.Q said:

DonFerrari said:

Care to show what anulates or negates light?

For two things to be opposite just because they are poles isn't opposition. If you "sum" the hottest and the "coolest" the lightier and darkest, etc you wouldn't end with 0. The people without knowledge or in simple conversation simplify them to opposites by comparison not that they really are. Even if we just had two temperatures one would be hot and the other would be cold, that still wouldn't make them opposite unless they were the poles on the scale.

 

On the animals, yes most think they are inferior because they lack critical thinking or other forms of racionality.

 

On the learning, that is evolution. No being knew how to have more than one cell at the beggining, or how to swim, walk, fly. It was learnt through milleniums. But I conced no know specie outside humans are capable of the same learning (although some apes can learn some complex things and some animals can learn tricks).

"Care to show what anulates or negates light?"

 

i just explained it all waves and particles can be negated, since light consists of paticles moving in a wave like fashion they can be negated... otherwise our theories on particles and waves are rubbish

" If you "sum" the hottest and the "coolest"

actually no thats false if you dump ice into boiling water depending on if you matched the temperatures correctly you could achieve equilibrium ( on our temperature scales ) between the two

 

" the lightier and darkest"

 

i already conceded that i was incorrect here and explained that light due to its wave paticle duality must have a negation

 

"Even if we just had two temperatures one would be hot and the other would be cold, that still wouldn't make them opposite unless they were the poles on the scale."

 

well the fact that they cancel each other pretty much makes them opposites to me

 

"No being knew how to have more than one cell at the beggining, or how to swim, walk, fly. It was learnt through milleniums."

 

fair enough how did the cells learn though? you seem to be implying that cells have consciousness

For all I know maybe they can negate with same wavelenght and 180 degree phase or anti-matter for particle side of duality. I doubt it would happen since one wave don't interfere on the other. You can negate a mechanical wave like sound but I don't remember that being true for eletromagnetic wave. And when you colide matter and anti-matter you get light and energy (which is the opposite of energy???). if you mix ice and vapour you would end up with water and maybe one of the two depending of pressure (the opposite is vaccum or you accept scale as well?). That equilibrium isn't the zero because there would be energy still, there is no anti-temperature or anti-energy. Cells may not have conciousness, but some kind of inteligence or purpouse they may have. Or you can associate with just being molded by enviroment, but you also said enviroment lacks inteligence. So you either accept natural course, incremental evolution or that god created all as it is and always will be. For one there are several evidence (no proof yet) while the other have nill but a book made by men. Which is more likely?