|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Înregistrare | Autentificare | Întrebări frecvente | Mesaje Private | Căutare | Mesajele zilei | Marchează forumurile citite |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Moduri de afișare |
|
|
|
#1
29.01.2015, 18:59:23
|
|||||
|
|||||
Citat:
Te las pe tine s-o ghiceste care.Indrazneste, c'mon I know you can do it.  Citat:
cum noi percepem stiinta. Citat:
Citat:
Dar daca tot vorbim despre procese.Procesele ireversibile au fost asa denumite, deoarece omul la stadiul actual al inteligentei sale, inca nu a gasit o metoda prin care sa-l faca reversibil. Acest fapt atesta ca omul inca nu a descoperit toate legile fizicii si inca mai are de lucru.Practic existenta conceptului de "ireversibil" atesta faptul ca omul inca nu a descoprit noi legii prin care sa-l faca "reversibil" Cunoasterea este limita de cunonstiinte, aabbaab. Citat:
evolutiei nu se justifica. 
|
|
#2
29.01.2015, 19:16:22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
Pot sa te intreb un lucru? Care ar fi "inversa" teoriei microbilor? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease Last edited by abaaaabbbb63; 29.01.2015 at 19:19:35.
|
|
#3
29.01.2015, 19:24:32
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
teorie politica mascata sub forma de teorie stiintifica. Insusi Darwin a spus ca cele prezentate de el sunt doar o teorie si ca exista probabilitatea oricand ca aceasta sa fie invalidata. Te rog, demonstraza in conditii de laborator, ca poti creea viata.Stai linistit au incercat altii inaintea ta si nu a mers, mergand pe "teoria" evolutiei. Cee ce este si mai comic o reprezinta faptul ca daca "teoria" evolutiei ar fi adevarata atunci ea ar demonstra (ar fi un manual) cum sa creezi viata. Insa omul nu poate creea viata.Prin urmarea "teoria" evolutiei nu poate demonstra insusi cauza pt care a fost emisa. Mda..., trist. 
|
|
#4
29.01.2015, 19:27:51
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
Iar evolutia nu este nicidecum lipsita de fundament stiintific. Am postat destul de multe "fundamente" in threadul din sectiunea de stiinta. Gasesti aceste informatii cu un simplu google: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolib...hp?topic_id=46 Last edited by abaaaabbbb63; 29.01.2015 at 19:30:14.
|
|
#5
29.01.2015, 19:34:25
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
Citat:
|
|
#6
29.01.2015, 19:38:12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
In legatura cu acel filmulet: manipulare, propaganda, si falsificare de informatie. "The Paluxy River Tracks, which caused a bit of a sensation back when they were first discovered, turned out to be a hoax. Thus the "astounding" nature of the find finds itself utterly discredited, and puts good old Carl Baugh, one of the Young Earth Creationists featured on the show, in the loony bin. The Klerksdorp Spheres have been explained as concretions made in volcanic sediments, and many of the claims made by the show regarding the spheres (that they are all perfectly round and made of an alloy which does not occur naturally) are false (none of the "spheres" have the same shape, they are also imperfect in shape and are most definitely not made of any kind of metal). Tiwanaku has been dated several times using carbon dating, and Arthur Posnansky dated the site before the discovery of the aforementioned method. The site also underwent much destruction and vandalism, and in order to accurately date a site using astronomy, the site must have remained undisturbed for a very long period. This is definitely not the case at Tiwanaku, where many of its structures were destroyed and even moved during the Spanish colonial period. The pyramids in Central America and Egypt are different in both design and use. Egyptian pyramids were tombs and were made to have smooth sides whereas their American equivalents had a step structure and were used as temples. There is also no written evidence in any of these cultures (the Mayans, Aztecs and Egyptians all had alphabets) indicating contact between the two civilisations and/or an original source for either culture. The Piri Reis map, which shows Antarctica free of ice, is definitely not accurate in its portrayal of the land mass beneath the Antarctic ice (as the show claimed it was). The area the show (and its so-called "expert" Graham Hancock) claims to be Antarctica could simply be a fanciful addition of a "Terra Incognita", which was a common thing back in those days." Last edited by abaaaabbbb63; 29.01.2015 at 19:41:21.
|
|
#7
29.01.2015, 20:00:18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
cine a creat dolarul ? Adica tu imi poti explica evolutia temperaturii dintr-un ceaun pus pe foc dar nu-mi poti explica de ce creste temperatura ?  "Stiu cum evolueaza dar nu stiu cauza evolutie ?" Pai daca nu stii cauza unei actiuni, n-ai cum sa stii evolutia ei,  Teoria asta a evolutie este doar o teorie politica , mascata sub forma unei teorii stiintifice. Dar stii ca acum astia "cei cu evolutionismul" vor schimba teoria evolutie cu transhumanismul ? (H+), care tot o teorie politica mascata sub forma unei teorii stiintifice ? Adica "domne asta cum maimutza nu mai tine, hai s-o incercam pe asta cu robotul". Dar stai, stai ca nu se termina aici. Mai vine si Ridley Scott cu alta teorie mascata sub forma unui film(Prometheus) care spune ca niste extraterestrii rai si egoisti ne-au creat. Adica daca nu mai merge cu darwinismul , hai cu transhumanismul si cu un eventual teosofism mai evoluat, modificat pe aici pe colo de universul din seria "Alien". Dar stai, ca incep altii sa vina cu cosmologia(un fel de miserupism intelectual) in care nu conteaza daca stii sau nu cum a aparut omul si nu conteaza unde se indreapta omul. Of Doamne...
|
|
#8
29.01.2015, 19:31:29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
|
|
#9
29.01.2015, 19:45:19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
|
|
#10
29.01.2015, 20:02:38
|
|||
|
|||
|
Citat:
|
|
|
Mod hibrid