Re: Opinions on Carvin basses?

On Jul 18, 6:00 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Benj <bjac...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hey Rich I really don't want to highjack the Carvin thread like
alt.guitar.amps, but you are being reasonable so I'll keep it short.

Occam's razor.

Actually proves nothing. As Einstein said: Explanations should be as
simple as possible, but not simpler!

The burden of proof is on the creation science crowd to explain why an
additional, unobservable variable is needed to provide an explanation.

Well, actually "creation science" is a step further than "intelligent
design" which is a step beyond "we don't know" which is a step WAY
beyond "evolution is fact"!

And if you're really a scientist, you know that the fact that natural
selection theory is incomplete is insufficient *unless and until* your
introduction of that as-yet-extraneous variable is capable of better
explaining observed phenomena *and* of making more accurate predictions.

Absolutely. If the current theory is insufficient, then clearly other
ideas are needed. How can other ideas be generated if no discussion is
allowed? THAT is the real issue here, not "who is "right"".

It's entirely possible that life forms higher than man exist somewhere
in the physical universe. Point?

Point? Point is that if those lifeforms are engaged in "planet
forming" here, then that is an "explanation", right?
The argument has been made by evolutionists that even if this is true
then one still has to ask how the OTHER higher lifeforms evolved? By
"chance" could still be valid there too, no? Valid point, and would
depend on the data for THAT civilization, but if no discussion is
allowed, then what does it mean?

Sun goes around the Earth, right?

Now you're being silly. Technically, it's a matter of the reference
frame. "Earth goes around the Sun" is closer to being correct in an
inertial frame than "Sun goes around the Earth". Of course that
neglects the Sun's motion.

Actually I'm NOT being silly for a number of reasons. The first is
that the old scientific argument of the sun going around the earth had
EXTREME political overtones in the day as "evolution" does today.
Hence the analogy. And Secondly, allow me to point out that we DO NOT
KNOW if the sun goes around the earth or not!!! To answer that
question in the absolute, one would have to know with absolute
certainty where the precise center of the universe is located! IF that
center is located on the planet earth then the statement is clearly
true. If it located elsewhere, it is not. But how many times have you
ever heard someone point out that the sun indeed MIGHT be going around
the earth? School kids are taught that the earth goes around the sun
as FACT when clearly is it not known to be a fact! I suspect that part
of that is a reaction to the politics of the older times still
reaching out to today! See how it works when politics gets involved?
This argument has NOTHING To do with the fact that astronomical
calculations are much easier if you use the sun as a center. {not that
they can't be done the other way!}

Simply poking holes in an admittedly incomplete theory does nothing as
far as validating any alternatives. But you knew that.

Yep. The issue is why is a incomplete theory being promoted as
absolute fact?

Ah, now we get down to the crux of the matter. This has nothing to do
with science; it has to do with ideology. Interesting that you should
raise this issue, since the right has consistently, over the past 20 or
so years, attempted to turn scientific issues into political ones,
motivated not so much by their religious beliefs as by their utter
distaste for the left. As a prime example I give you "global warming"
as portrayed by the right as the brainchild of Al Gore as opposed to the
scientific version.

AMEN! However, Anthropogenic Global Warming if not a "brainchild" of
Algore, is certainly having him as one of it's most visible salesmen.
Note even the term "anthropogenic" (means man-caused) is used to beg
the question and win the argument even before discussions begin. I
hope you DO understand that the Algore version of AGW is NOT the
scientific one! [see below for more]

Would it surprise you if I told you that I know many conservatives who
are atheists? The entire atheist -> leftist association is a straw man.

No, especially in the Science community. Still there is a grain of
truth the leftist-atheist connection in general. As well as a
connection between atheism and evolution theory as clearly pointed out
by one of the evolution scientists in the Stein movie.

And yours? To check out all the Michael Moore "documentaries". You
know they're objective, right? No one would make a documentary with a
slanted point of view, right? Go see them; you may come away from it
with a whole set of new "facts" that might not have dawned on you
otherwise.

A bit extreme example in that I do not believe Ben Stein dropped so
low as to fake footage and edit to make people say what he wanted so
he probably won't win an Oscar. But, the point is still clear. When
politics get involved in a scientific issue be it crime or biology or
climate change, facts tend to get bent to an agenda. This is where
science leaves and politics begins. The problem is when nobody speaks
up and says HEY! Dig? Next thing you know everybody is acting like a
talking head on TV blindly parroting everything Algore says as
absolute truth. Sorry people, it's lies. CO2 CANNOT cause enough of an
effect to cause global warming! Al's data is backward (probably on
purpose). He says increased atmospheric CO2 causes the rise in sea
temperature. Actually it's the opposite: a rise in sea temperature
means it can't hold as much CO2 and releases it to the atmosphere.
(like warm soda pop) So now we must ask just WHO is in on the ground
floor of "carbon credit" trading? Plus ca change!

And yeah, A Carvin is a nice modern bass that is very well made and
one of the best features is the "custom" options you can order (if
new) to make it just the bass you love. Carvin electronics are some of
the most quiet out there too!

Yer Welcome! :-)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New Properties of the Very Deep Earth Discovered
    ... scientists have to probe deep into the interior. ... clumpy patches (ultralow velocity zones) at these incredible depths. ... This work was supported by Earth Sciences Research and the National ... differential rotation bands on the Sun positively shout out that the ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: global warming free will and other vehicles of blame
    ... the container (in this case, Earth) in the form of visible light, and ... as are scientists doing any research. ... Of course, if global warming is real, and the world isn't one big ... believe me - that's politics. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • An open challenge to Muslims!
    ... not the Earth but the Sun that moves". ... Quran ---but also the Bible, the Gita, the Mohabharat and the Vedas ...
    (alt.religion.islam)
  • Re: Creatiionism and science
    ... But, since the sun is ... Most scientists think the earth is rather old, and most of the evidence does rather point in that direction. ... Doing science by sitting around and reasoning went out of fashion quite some time ago. ...
    (rec.juggling)
  • Re: Treatment of the Non-Muslims
    ... >>> one time says that Earth was created first and another time he says ... Have you seen the sun set over the ocean? ... Scientists also agree that the sun will cease to ... This verse was revealed for a specific time and purpose. ...
    (uk.religion.islam)