What Kind Of Definition Is That? - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum Message

God & Science Forum Message
Forums:	Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem


Home \| Discussion Forums \| God and Science \| Post	Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora

What Kind Of Definition Is That?

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on January 24, 2002 13:03:21 UTC

Why don't we take on a realistic definition (e.g., mine) so that we can really form a basis for this subject? If you really want to stick with such an unrealistic definition then I'll treat it legitimately. However, the opinion that people have of your analytical abilities should be tied into issues such as these. Do you really want to be identified wth such poor analytical skills?

Warm regards, Harv

Follow Ups:

Well, - bladesinger - January 24, 2002 - 16:44 UTC
Is anything wrong with my definition? - alexander - January 24, 2002 - 18:10 UTC
- Maybe - stormcrow - January 24, 2002 - 18:22 UTC
- Oen-mindedness should be tied to one's approach with evidence - harvey1 - January 24, 2002 - 19:31 UTC
  - You hit it on the head.. - bruce - January 24, 2002 - 20:48 UTC
  - Evidences and closemindness. - alexander - January 25, 2002 - 00:50 UTC
    - *Smile* - harvey1 - January 25, 2002 - 01:23 UTC
      - Yes, close minded is someone who doesn't respect facts and logic - alexander - January 25, 2002 - 18:41 UTC
        
        So then - harvey1 - January 25, 2002 - 19:03 UTC
        
        SAP considers Earth life as the ONLY possible life. Too narrow. - alexander - January 26, 2002 - 23:12 UTC
        
        Here's a SAP definition - harvey1 - January 26, 2002 - 23:44 UTC
        
        Why does universe have to "admit observers"? - alexander - January 26, 2002 - 23:53 UTC
        
        Observational selection - harvey1 - January 27, 2002 - 01:16 UTC
        
        Harvey, throw a pair of dices and explain the number. - alexander - January 27, 2002 - 01:41 UTC
        
        re: "super SAP" - harvey1 - January 27, 2002 - 02:30 UTC
        
        Nor SAP gives any explanation (nt). - alexander - January 27, 2002 - 03:09 UTC
        
        Sure it does - harvey1 - January 27, 2002 - 04:33 UTC
        
        Sure it does not. - alexander - January 27, 2002 - 04:39 UTC
        
        Very simply - harvey1 - January 27, 2002 - 07:34 UTC
        
        People don't like when I point on their errors. - alexander - January 27, 2002 - 16:46 UTC
        
        Well, I consider you a friend - harvey1 - January 27, 2002 - 17:21 UTC
        
        Yikes, the word is programmed - harvey1 - January 27, 2002 - 17:53 UTC
        
        weak anthropic principle - bruce - January 28, 2002 - 04:15 UTC
        
        Imaginary time - yanniru - January 28, 2002 - 15:56 UTC

Additional Information

About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy

Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2025 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins