Mac vs. PC

[Inv3rted]

Time is relative, my friend. Only human arrogance dictates that an almighty God, whom himself is timeless and omnipotent, works on a human scale of measurement. 6,000 god years = 6billion human years. Quite darned possible if you ask me. Also science stated that the Earth had much shorter days when it was formed. Something like a 4 hour day. Imagine how old, relatively, the earth would be if our days were still based on that scale. Probably trillions of years old. It all just depends on the perspective of the observer, so technically no one is correct.

Fun little fact to make ya expand ideas :)

A year isn't defined by the length of 365 days. It's defined by the time that it takes to orbit the sun. That length hasn't changed much over the last 4.5 billion years. Therefore, a year has stayed pretty much the same length throughout the history of this planet. I don't care if one billion human years is one thousand for 'God', the Earth is not 10,000 orbits of the Earth around the sun old.

Enough said.

[Ad Bot]

[tapemaster21]

And before you say that Windows is more widely used, considered how many embedded systems (ie. Devices like cellphones, etc) that may be utilizing the Linux kernel for it's OS.

Let's talk desktops then. Cuz windows mobile is ok, but not to par with things like XP or Ubuntu.

[zz_tophat]

A year isn't defined by the length of 365 days. It's defined by the time that it takes to orbit the sun. That length hasn't changed much over the last 4.5 billion years. Therefore, a year has stayed pretty much the same length throughout the history of this planet. I don't care if one billion human years is one thousand for 'God', the Earth is not 10,000 orbits of the Earth around the sun old.

Enough said.

Universe is big yo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAVjF_7ensg

[Rughugger]

A year isn't defined by the length of 365 days. It's defined by the time that it takes to orbit the sun. That length hasn't changed much over the last 4.5 billion years. Therefore, a year has stayed pretty much the same length throughout the history of this planet. I don't care if one billion human years is one thousand for 'God', the Earth is not 10,000 orbits of the Earth around the sun old.

Enough said.

As I said, it's all based off of the perspective of the observer. You see it on the scale of just the solar system. If you compare it to the revolution of the galaxy, or even the universe itself, you can find that it could be either a lot faster or a lot slower than how you currently view it. Time is relative, distance is constantly changing because space time is changing. We are just unable to see it on a mass scale at the moment. Don't need to be all pissy about it. lol

[General Nick]

And before you say that Windows is more widely used, considered how many embedded systems (ie. Devices like cellphones, etc) that may be utilizing the Linux kernel for it's OS.

Same with planes n stuff.

At least the pilot controls are made with Ada.
Some are.
I'm not talking about the entertainment system either.

Also, Linux isn't bad, it's just I don't really want to get used to it :|

[Bisjac]

Well, it actually is true that 40% of this country believes the universe is less than 10,000 years old.

but thats not normal stupidity that is the reason. its just religious folk that dont learn right.
christian creed says that the universe isn't very old. idiots lol

[Inv3rted]

As I said, it's all based off of the perspective of the observer. You see it on the scale of just the solar system. If you compare it to the revolution of the galaxy, or even the universe itself, you can find that it could be either a lot faster or a lot slower than how you currently view it. Time is relative, distance is constantly changing because space time is changing. We are just unable to see it on a mass scale at the moment. Don't need to be all pissy about it. lol

Um, so the years described in the Bible are supposed to be referring to the rotation of an arbitrary object in the universe without mentioning this?

How can you make this assumption?

[Bisjac]

the bible was written by guys that thought the world was flat and there was a new sun every day. hard to time that
not to mention the calendar has changed 5 times since Charlemagne and, the jews of the bible days used an entirely different one.

but the final creed of how old the world is (according to Christians) isn't even based on anything in the bible.
religions have always made stuff up whenever they felt the need. usually as a political tool.

[Rughugger]

Um, so the years described in the Bible are supposed to be referring to the rotation of an arbitrary object in the universe without mentioning this?

How can you make this assumption?

You never know. The Bible itself isn't a book of facts. It's a collection of parables intended to help guide a person towards a more moral standing that improves quality of life not just for oneself, but for the community around them. If you accept everything as whole full-bodied truth, then you've never understood religion to begin with.

I make this assumption because I believe that science is the answer in understanding god and how he works, not a means to deny his existence. After all, science and math was created to find a means to get closer to god. You may think him as a non present entity now, but you can not deny that without him, we'd hardly be as advanced today as we probably could be.

[Bisjac]

The Bible itself isn't a book of facts. It's a collection of parables intended to help guide...

that's how the modern world decides they want to take it but as it was written up, it WAS literal facts.

[Inv3rted]

You never know. The Bible itself isn't a book of facts. It's a collection of parables intended to help guide a person towards a more moral standing that improves quality of life not just for oneself, but for the community around them. If you accept everything as whole full-bodied truth, then you've never understood religion to begin with.

I make this assumption because I believe that science is the answer in understanding god and how he works, not a means to deny his existence. After all, science and math was created to find a means to get closer to god. You may think him as a non present entity now, but you can not deny that without him, we'd hardly be as advanced today as we probably could be.

The old testament isn't a moral guideline.

Nor is it helpful to scientific understanding.

[pitchblack]

Check it out! I have a Windows mac version :D

http://i328.photobucket.com/albums/l323/DarkWolf993/macorpc.jpg?t=1252946735

[CapTMeaT]

I voted Mac on accident. D:
-Mac
+PC

[Fjeld]

It seems the wrong answer is popular :D

[Rughugger]

The old testament isn't a moral guideline.

Nor is it helpful to scientific understanding.

You've never fully read the Bible so like you'd know. And I find many many examples of moral guidelines. And all it takes is one good minister to point them all out. It's up to the reader to make that call for himself it it morally applies to his life or not. But you closed your mind to any supporting argument I make already, so I won't beat a brain-dead horse about it.

that's how the modern world decides they want to take it but as it was written up, it WAS literal facts.

In the day, it was. But like most languages that hadn't adapted written language yet, tales always had the tendency to be exaggerated. When it was finally written, it most likely contained a lot of things we fund hard to believe. Same is true for the Greek mythos. We know it's full of stuff, but it was the best they could do to try and understand what was going on around them.