Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

proving the obvious


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
98 replies to this topic

#1    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 01:42 PM

say for example I put a bar magnet behind a piece of plane paper and put Iron filings upon the paper,the magnet creates a pattern,now I wish to prove to someone that the magnet actually exists,but they are so stupid and stubborn they refuse to lift up the paper,they are firmly set in their religeous belief that ,the pattern developed because of the properties of the indepent individual Iron filings due to chance,environmental factors,other filings drifting in and other silly theorys,as I dearly wish them to stop wasting their valuable time,I keep telling them the magnet exists and giving many clear cut ,simple examples why.so if they are unable to accept my examples and are unprepared to look behind the paper I would still like to be of assistance to them,any Ideas on how I can help them understand this simple fact?


#2    mowo

mowo

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 493 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2003

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:24 PM

If they are unable to see behind the paper, what makes you so confident that you can?


#3    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:31 PM

because I have read the techniques described and implimented by past paper lifters and I have successfully used these techniques,and viewed the magnet.


#4    PsychicPenguin

PsychicPenguin

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts
  • Joined:25 Nov 2003
  • Location:Atlantis

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:31 PM

Just because you have a pattern of iron doesn't mean that there is a magnet. Don't you think that the more likely explanation is that an intelligent being put the iron fillings in a pattern? wink2.gif


#5    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:34 PM

I really believe that a lot of people are afraid to look behind the paper because they are comfortable with their theories about the filings,so if they actually see the magnet it will cause great disturbances to their belief systems.


#6    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:35 PM

QUOTE (PsychicPenguin @ Apr 16 2004, 03:31 PM)
Just because you have a pattern of iron doesn't mean that there is a magnet. Don't you think that the more likely explanation is that an intelligent being put the iron fillings in a pattern? wink2.gif

of course penguin ,that is correct,the magnet is simply ba tool of the higher being,
like a bucket to a child building sandcastles.


#7    PsychicPenguin

PsychicPenguin

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts
  • Joined:25 Nov 2003
  • Location:Atlantis

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:42 PM

You are jumping to a conclussion there. There is no indication whatsoever that a higher being is involved in the formation of magnetic lines. The only required ingredient to produce the field is the magnet itself. There is a big difference between a sandcastle and the magnetic field. A better comparison will be wind creating sand dunes. No intelligent being neccessary  devil.gif  thumbsup.gif

Edited by PsychicPenguin, 16 April 2004 - 02:43 PM.


#8    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:58 PM

QUOTE (PsychicPenguin @ Apr 16 2004, 03:42 PM)
You are jumping to a conclussion there. There is no indication whatsoever that a higher being is involved in the formation of magnetic lines. The only required ingredient to produce the field is the magnet itself. There is a big difference between a sandcastle and the magnetic field. A better comparison will be wind creating sand dunes. No intelligent being neccessary  devil.gif  thumbsup.gif

excuse me,the wind is a side effect of the suns activity the sun is a tool of God,or it can be traced back to an ultimate energy source.

im not sure about which came first the magnet or the magnetic field,take dynamic magnets,of which the earth has a shell,now did the magnetic shell exist first and form the material of earth or vicer versa.


#9    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 03:00 PM

QUOTE (PsychicPenguin @ Apr 16 2004, 03:42 PM)
You are jumping to a conclussion there. There is no indication whatsoever that a higher being is involved in the formation of magnetic lines. The only required ingredient to produce the field is the magnet itself. There is a big difference between a sandcastle and the magnetic field. A better comparison will be wind creating sand dunes. No intelligent being neccessary  devil.gif  thumbsup.gif

there is not a big difference,both are set moulds which form a uniform,same pattern everytime they are applied to the material they are affecting.


#10    PsychicPenguin

PsychicPenguin

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts
  • Joined:25 Nov 2003
  • Location:Atlantis

Posted 16 April 2004 - 05:45 PM

I am assuming that this is a continuation of your argument in the evolution vs creationism. Am I correct?

Magnets attracting iron is a natural process.
Wind creating sand dunes is a natural process.
A child making a sand castle is an artificial process.

Evolution is a natural process.
Creation is an artificial process

So your example on magnetism actualy shows how creationists ignore naturalistic process and attribute the iron powder allignment to a higher being.

The cause of magnetism and ultimate cause is NOT the original problem. Please refrain from changing the topic. As a reminder this is the original topic that you posted.

QUOTE
say for example I put a bar magnet behind a piece of plane paper and put Iron filings upon the paper,the magnet creates a pattern,now I wish to prove to someone that the magnet actually exists,but they are so stupid and stubborn they refuse to lift up the paper,they are firmly set in their religeous belief


So what caused the allignment? Is it magnetism, which is a naturalistic process, or a higher being?

Is magnetism a naturalistic process? (if your answer is no i suggest you go and learn a litle bit about physics).


#11    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 05:55 PM

you have just defeated yourself ther pengers,you state that the child creates something by a different process than the other things came about including evolution,i presume you believe the child arrived at his present position by evolution ,then your statements can only be incorrect .


#12    PsychicPenguin

PsychicPenguin

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts
  • Joined:25 Nov 2003
  • Location:Atlantis

Posted 16 April 2004 - 05:57 PM

QUOTE (The Proposer @ Apr 16 2004, 06:55 PM)
you have just defeated yourself ther pengers,you state that the child creates something by a different process than the other things came about including evolution,i presume you believe the child arrived at his present position by evolution ,then your statements can only be incorrect .

Show me where it is incorrect, using sound logic and reasoing. Also show me how your argument is correct. I can barely understand what you are trying to say.  disgust.gif  


#13    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 06:11 PM

you state that a child making a sandcastle is artificial,yet you say evolution is natural,if all aspects of the childs present state arrive naturally through evolution how can his next step of creating the sandcastle be artificial?


#14    The Proposer

The Proposer

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 212 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2004

Posted 16 April 2004 - 06:14 PM

my statement about magnetism wasnt going off topic it was in reply to your assumption that the magnetic field depended on the actual magnet being present,all i was saying is that its a bit chicken and egg,I cannot determine either way.


#15    PsychicPenguin

PsychicPenguin

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts
  • Joined:25 Nov 2003
  • Location:Atlantis

Posted 16 April 2004 - 07:27 PM

Let's define the problem better shall we? I define an artificial process as something that involve intelligence in the creation. This is just the same as saying chemical process is something that involve treatment with chemical reactions. It is true that both intelligence and chemistry are natural, so maybe I should call it artificial and non-artificial instead of artificial and natural.

Now with this in mind:

In the creation of sandcastle there is intelligence involved, which is the intelligence of the child. Therefore sandcastles are artificial. If you find a sand castle on a beach there is a good chance that an intelligent being created it.

Sand dunes, on the other hand, are created by wind. There is no indication that intelligence is involved in the creation of sand dunes. Therefore sand dunes are not artificial.

Going back to our magnetism problem. Is there any intelligence involved in the creation of magnetic lines? Do you have to design the pattern or the pattern just show up with a magnet being present?

And no, your statement about magnetism is not off topic, but your statement about the ultimate cause is.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users