keppler:

He is used to that. The moment you refute whatever he copies and has no way to respond (after all, what he posted initially was not his argument), then he picks up another which he learned, hence making a red herring. So much for someone who is posting fallacies

You know him well!

FatherOfJesus:
[s][/s]junk logic with fallacy faulty equivalence. Now you have willingly come up to showcase the gross decline in science education in our country. Probably that’s how you guys reason in church.

Your mathematics is grossly flawed as it doesn’t represent the case with dark energy and matter. The best illustration you would have given is when you have a mathematical expression x + 12= 20, we know the value the total energy in the universe is 20 in Thisbe case and the value for baryonic matter is 12, x is the value of dark matter and energy. We already know it’s there.

It’s not even rocket science, if you estimate total mass of the observable universe, we can expect an in-ward contraction due gravity but We see the universe expanding at a constant acceleration instead of contracting, it means that there is a force responsible for that acceleration which is greater than total force of attraction between galaxies. Dark matter has been felt in the expansion rate of the universe, using the expansion rate you can determine its mass and properties.
It’s not the nonsense evangelical and fallacious Mathematics you presented up there.
Someone that sees the way you are using [sup] will think you know what you are doing.

I just can't laugh

You keep on making wrong claims, I show you how it's wrong and in your rebuttal, you show how you are wrong, agreeing with my claims. Just that you add ad hominem to make you feel better.
What is different from what I wrote? LWKD

keppler:

I just can't laugh

You keep on making wrong claims, I show you how it's wrong and in your rebuttal, you show how you are wrong, agreeing with my claims. Just that you add ad hominem to make you feel better.
What is different from what I wrote? LWKD

You showed how ill-educated you are.
Do you have to be [sup] for some simple maths? Someone that sees the sup will think you know what you are talking about. Lol

Even as you were correct in your maths, you were deficient in reasoning owing to the fact that dark matter hasn’t only been proven mathematically but it’s effect observed in reality.
Nothing to say about your god.

No maths and nothing to show in reality. All evidence is in the comic book of the Bible

keppler:

I just can't laugh

You keep on making wrong claims, I show you how it's wrong and in your rebuttal, you show how you are wrong, agreeing with my claims. Just that you add ad hominem to make you feel better.
What is different from what I wrote? LWKD

Now show us the mathematical proof and the observable effect that warranted the equivalence with dark matter/energy?

FatherOfJesus:
You showed how ill-educated you are.
Do you have to be [sup] for some simple maths? Someone that sees the sup will think you know what you are talking about. Lol

Even as you were correct in your maths, you were deficient in reasoning owing to the fact that dark matter hasn’t only been proven mathematically but it’s effect observed in reality.
Nothing to say about your god.

No maths and nothing to show in reality. All evidence is in the comic book of the Bible

You know what? You should have known me by now that I don't deflect topic. I don't fall for red herrings and wouldn't care about ad hominem since I know that those fallacies don't make arguments valid.
I have driven my point that dark matter CANNOT BE TESTED as against your initial claim and only reinforce it that it was used to explain what was being observed, which was why I used the simple Math analogy.

My case is closed

keppler:

You know what? You should have known me by now that I don't deflect topic. I don't fall for red herrings and wouldn't care about ad hominem since I know that those fallacies don't make arguments valid.
I have driven my point that dark matter CANNOT BE TESTED as against your initial claim and only reinforce it that it was used to explain what was being observed, which was why I used the simple Math analogy.

My case is closed

Tu Quoque fallacy

Since dark matter cannot be seen and scientists have not detected it directly, My God exist.

Just show us a mathematical validation for your god abeg

FatherOfJesus:
You don’t have to see God to accept him.

You just have to test him with a method that will give repeated results. For example we can’t see dark energy yet but we can test it, we can measure it and we know it’s there.

Now what method do you propose we used in testing god and that will give repeated results anytime?
Which god are we testing? We have more than 4,000 of them.

I'm taking about the creator of the universe. There is only one God and there are concepts or beliefs of God not a lot of creators of the universe

Truthisobjectiv:


I'm taking about the creator of the universe. There is only one God and there are concepts or beliefs of God not a lot of creators of the universe

You can’t say there is only one god when other gods have different creation myths than Christianity.
For example in Hinduism, it’s believed that this universe we live is not the first and won’t be the last and that Brahma made these infinitesimal universe out of himself and that this universe will ultimately be destroyed by Shiva.

Even in the Norse creation myth, he have entirely different creation story.

So you cannot limit creation and God to just two options. It’s a fallacy of false dilemma.

What guarantee is it that your own Christian story is the truth and shouldn’t be treated as any other religious creation myth?

This creates a problem, it will invalidate the Bible’s narratives many times. Even if we have a creator, why should it be that of the Bible or not the Hindu?