"Real" ringworlds

[narf poit chez BOOM]

What was the point of saying that? It is irrelevant to the preceding quote. The meaning of the quote and the post following it is exactly the same. The semantics do not invalidate his point.

seen is not the same as percieved. if you hear an object, you percieve an object, even if you don't see it. i believe there are ways of percieving that involve spiritual senses rather than physical ones.

This is because most of the world would say that lighting is a transfere of electrons created by static electricity.

just becuase lightning is a transfer of electrons doesn't rule out god creating the lightning. if i throw a rock with a quantum cannon and you discover newtons laws, it doesn't rule out the quantum cannon. not to sure that quantum physics is right, though. just stating, don't want to start anothere debate.

Hmmm. Step out for ~24 hours, and there's a ton to respond to. [Smile] I guess I'll just have to excerpt quotes from the Last three pages:

2 pages for me

Don't make Fyron straighten you out on evolution versus origins. Unless, as 99.9% of people, you use evolution to mean how everything came to be here, from the beginning to the present. Again, no origins theory can be proved, as there would have been no observation.

no mortal observation. so, origin theory can be proven.

Well, we don't know that. If that person was receiving direct revelation from God, I would think they could accept that as evidence.

yup.

[ May 20, 2003, 23:52: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]