Yes, very Little. trainr, You should understand how cosmic variance imposes crippling constraints on the results of some equations before you claim such degree of accuracy as to be within a few thousand years. When we begin calculations that encompass all that ever existed in all time that ever was, we're working within margins of error that swallow multiples upon multiples of your "six thousand year" packets. You have to include functions to derive the average pulse per second of the CBR since the beginning of time (which were, at one time, about a million squared per second!), then count the total number of those pulses since time began! All this must be calculated while taking account of time dilation, cosmic density and... everything anywhere that has ever been. Any claim to have, "done the math" is as comical as your misunderstanding of relativity. Apparently you've read one of those, "Science proves the Bible" books. These authors introduce the reader to scientific principles and proofs, dumbed down and meshed neatly into a narrative of faith. They do some math that looks impressive and is numerically correct, but bereft of meaning. They imbue the eager reader with a little knowledge, and a lot of danger that he who bought the book will make a fool of himself. I suggest you not shop for science at church. I can't stop reading your side splitting rendition of, "special relativity." If I tried to write the opposite of Einstein's version, I couldn't do better than what you accomplished with such lampoonish brevity. This is my favorite part: "Einstein discovered by analysis that light is peculiar to our universe and doesn't seem to conform to universal laws; all conforms to light, making things relative to light (hence the "relativity" of this theory, which is no longer a theory, but a law). Although the speed of light is known to us as 186,000 m/sec, in reality, the actual speed is instantaneous, but the rate of time's passage varies (is "relative") to make it appear that light always moves at this speed." I'd be interested to hear your take on some other subjects like evil robots and the flux capacitor. Anti-Madder
You're not disagreeing with me so much as you are disagreeing with an MIT PhD. Your post actually didn't make much sense. You dealt with supposed errors but didn't actually present any alternatives. Please explain how one takes account of "everything anywhere that has ever been." Apparently, you feel this is required before one can make a calculation.
Why dont you use some of that science to prove the virgin birth or walking on water... the market is quiet, I could use the laugh
It is interesting how you refer to those who do not agree with you as "pigs" and "dogs." Is this the humility, tolerance and respect that you were taught as a christian? If so, then I think that there are a few ayatollahs who would readily agree with you, and with whom you surely have much to talk about.
I think that you need to take into consideration that trainr believes Larry Williams is a legitimate trader and "trainr" of traders. I believe that this places his cognitive skills into proper context. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=62386&perpage=6&pagenumber=4 Interestingly, TylerSJI is cut of that same cheesecloth, as noted in an earlier post of his in this thread: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=976633&highlight=larry+williams#post976633 Against this background, I would conclude that further discussion is fairly pointless.
I agree... but I think what is so frustrating is that we are not dealing with inbred red necked yokels here (they could be forgiven their ignorance)... these guys are educated and intelligent... which just makes you want to weep for the world
Interesting you should bring that up. Anyone reading that thread has to notice how you were shot down there, as well. Thanks.
You don't have a clue. Which is it -- do you accept the bible as true or not? If you do, then you have some serious problems in your own conformity. If not, why do you think you can use it to point out someone's weakness? NOTE2: It doesn't really work, because if you disagree with the bible but use it's precepts, you appear to be more of a hypocrite than the person you criticize. And, it's more than patently obvious that your only goal is to criticize and destroy. To paraphrase Karl Marx: "Criticism is a weapon; it's purpose is to destroy." Why do you feel so threatened by these ideas that you are compelled to destroy them?