x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

No iPad 3 this year

0. phoneArena 19 Sep 2011, 06:46 posted on

We’ve been hearing rumors about the iPad 3 launching this Holiday season since before the iPad 2 launched, but that made little sense from the get-go - why would Apple break their successful yearly launch tradition…

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 11:16

77. hepresearch (unregistered)

Only the "brainwashed" believe in evolution? Dinosaur and human footprints together? Where is your "evidence", Pete?

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 11:18

78. hepresearch (unregistered)

Be more specific. Which theory has been disproven? How was it disproven?

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 11:22

80. darth8ball (Posts: 520; Member since: 02 Aug 2011)

If you can say there can't be an explosion out of nothing how can you say there could have been a being existing in nothing to create EVERYTHING.
Science has gone beyond the big bang being an explosion from NOTHING creating the Universe.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 11:32 1

82. hepresearch (unregistered)

Pete... if there cannot be a "Big-Bang" explosion ex-nihilo (out of nothing), then there cannot be a "creation" ex-nihilo either... if God does exist, He is not, and never was, a God of cheap magic and parlor tricks.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 11:34

83. darth8ball (Posts: 520; Member since: 02 Aug 2011)

I couldn't have said it better myself, oh wait I did say it...LOL

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 11:45

86. hepresearch (unregistered)

yes, you did... but sometimes two witnesses are better than one... ;-)

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:29

90. hepresearch (unregistered)

unfortunately, Pete can't see individual viruses, and therefore your borrowed third-party observation is unconfirmed... 8-P

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:50

93. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

lol.. except if you take a microbiology course, they pretty much force you into this experiment with all sorts of microbes, as colonies are much easier to see than viruses.. lol The end result is still the same though.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:53

95. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

im at work so i cant look up the specifics.. but you can!

basically as they have found atoms that are smaller than atoms, quarks, quazars, and all sorts of other items they began to understand different energies better and have a more well though theory than the big bang. its still.. big bang like, but with a lot more understanding now.

also there was an article in.. wired i think.. the other day where they have all but proved the existance of the edge of the universe where it intersects with another.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:54

96. PeterIfromsweden (Posts: 1230; Member since: 03 Aug 2011)

Still microevolution doesn't produce macroevolution. There has never been a sinlge finding in archeological record that proves macroevolution (ape to man or dinosaurs to birds for example).

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:57

97. PeterIfromsweden (Posts: 1230; Member since: 03 Aug 2011)

I wrote this to remixfa earlier, too se picture evidence please watch the links.
There has been found footprints of humans and dinosaurs in exactly the same geologic layer, at exactly the same place.. They have been found side by side, and even some where the human footprint has been inside that of a dinosaur footprint.
Here are the links.​/index.php?option=com_content&​task=view&id=48&Itemid=24 (don't worry, this link is safe. It will take youtowww.creationevidence.com)
And here is a very detailed video of the footprints.
I recomend you start watching at 23 minutes and 40 seconds (that's when the evidence for the footprints are showed)
they have also been trough scanning, and proven to be real human footprints, not faked.
Also, there has been found for example a old hammer buried inside lower cretaceous rock !

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:57 1

98. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

love that arguement. dont know why i didnt throw it up there earlier.. lol.

oh yea,
because the standard answer is
god exists outside of time, and therefor rules dont apply to him because its the god of all things and was just always there..

or some nonsense. ;)

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:57

99. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

again, without some kind of verification, there is no proof.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:58

100. PeterIfromsweden (Posts: 1230; Member since: 03 Aug 2011)

Just gave you verification.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 12:59

101. PeterIfromsweden (Posts: 1230; Member since: 03 Aug 2011)

seems like there was something wrong with the link.
Here i post them again.

Please jump to 23 minutes and 40 seconds in this video for the evidence.


posted on 20 Sep 2011, 13:54

106. hepresearch (unregistered)

I already studied the specifics a long time ago, and I keep up from day to day with the preprints coming from ArXiv and SPIRES; I just wanted to hear it from you...

Atoms smaller than atoms? Understand "different" energies better? More "well thought" theory than the Big Bang, but still "Big Bang like"? Alright, you really have just told me nothing useful...

Proved the existence of the "edge" of the universe where it "intersects with another"? You read way too much into that article... they have not "proved" anything... they have hypothesized that it is that way, and what they have "seen" causes them to get excited and think that they CAN prove it, but it is not direct proof. The article hypes up the idea so that the average reader will excitedly read it and think that it is all but proven already.

Be more careful of where you get information, and how you read it.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 14:02

108. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

peter thats because you are trying to find a smoking gun.. a magic jump. truth is, there isnt one.. it happens over time. micro IS macro if you take 100 generations of humans, you can tell genetic differences from the start to the beginning.. if you zoom out to 1000 generations then you are looking at new species.. if you zoom in to 5 generations you barely see any difference.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 14:04

109. hepresearch (unregistered)

First link... garbage. The first link is broken, and the reference location where it links to is not about "creation evidence" at all; it is nothing but a search engine for advertisments. A non-answer...

Second link... has been removed from YouTube. First of all, seriously? A YouTube video is your evidence? Do you know how often YouTube videos are faked? The video is gone now, anyway, so I can't even find out if it was real or faked. A non-answer... again...

The rest of what you have said I cannot confirm anywhere, and have never heard mentioned before either, except by you. I cannot confirm or deny anything you have just said, and therefore, the answer is null. You have proved absolutely nothing except that you are not very careful about where you get information and which information you are willing to accept as fact without asking questions.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 14:05

110. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

lol i wasnt trying to be inciteful, i was typing between customers.. lol.

and i said "all but proved". :) as in not proved but getting close.

all science is is 95% theories and only a few "laws" which even the laws have changed or been broken over time. nothing is ever 100%.

The only way we will ever know if those spots are truely the end of the universe is to send something right through them and have them continue to transmit data.. we are eons from that type of technology and even further away by far from an answer just by the distance that would need to be traveled.

i am quite aware of the science if i make a good case for it or not.. i am at work.. lol

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 14:08

111. PeterIfromsweden (Posts: 1230; Member since: 03 Aug 2011)

I can't check the first link at the moment, but it should lead to a good site (at least if you are in sweden).
the second link the youtube video is about a professor giving a lecture so it is valid. I just cheked and the video is not removed. i think you clicked on the wrong youtube link. the first one i gave you was something wron with, however look at some comments further down and you'll see that i gave you a new link that works. That might have been why you couldn't see the video.


Check this link, this will work. This will show you all the evidence you need to see dinosaur footprints together with human footprints.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 14:25

113. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

ok, i looked at your picture on the "creationism is real" page.. lololol

1) because they did an xray of it doesnt prove any authenticity. an Xray is not a timestamp, nor has it ever been.

2) find me a human that has that exact footprint. from the looks of it the big to was elongated and curled in, hense the deeper depression. look at the length of those toes and how they are formed at the foot.

IF and this is a big IF, this is somehow authentic.. which its not, that is not a modern human's footprint. Thats my take on it. humanoid at best, but not human. congrats peter, you may have just proved evolution...l lololololol

oh, except for the fact, that thats the worst dino impression ive ever seen. its nearly flat with no signs o weight impressions in it where the dino would have leaned as the dino was ambulating as well as the fact that foot print is extreeeeeeeemley well preserved for how old it SHOULD be.. lol

that video that you keep posting.. NONE of the tracks they are showing look so clear and concise. That should raise a flag to you.. lol.

"and he bulldozed 6 layers deep and magically uncovered many human foot prints". so.. he bulldozed without hurting those foot prints huh? lol.

its also amazing that those footprints cross over each other without ever touching.. infact the dinosaur tracks perfectly "leap" over the human tracks if you look at the picture with all the trails in it.
also, if it was a dinosaur, by looking at the picture, it must have been 2 legged, not 4.. there isnt enough footprints for a 4 legged animal. if it was a 2 legged dinosaur it had a tail.. why is there no tail marks? lots and lots of unanswered questions by those "footprints" peter. only a fool would take that at face value as its being presented. Most humans also invented foot coverings of some sort to protect their feet from barbs and such. even this guy makes mention of the fact that human tracks that show toes are a rarity.

your making your case worse, not better.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 14:27

114. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

also, i forgot to mention, look at the depth of those tracks. that dinosaur must have been anorexic because the depth is nearly the same as the human tracks. more weight = deeper prints.

my guess? a guy walking around with funny shoes on.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 14:47 3

115. hepresearch (unregistered)

The first... ummm... garbage... Dr. Don Patton has a Ph.D., not in any science or from an accredited graduate program, but in "Christian Education" from the "Pacific College of Graduate Studies" which is a graduate division of "Luther Rice University", an American-based college that claimed to be accredited in Australia as late as 1993, but has never been accredited in the United States at any time. He has never produced any official diploma or other credentials to support his claim to either a bachelors degree or a Ph.D., and he is by no means a scientist by accepted standards, even though he very convincingly (to the untrained ear) pretends to be a well-established "Christian" geologist. The claims he makes in the video are very poorly justified, and sometimes even completely wrong, even though he insists that his "research" utterly "destroys" the Theory of Evolution. When faced with contrary evidence, he offers joking conjecture to refute it. The video was NOT taken at a major university, as is claimed by many viewers (who actually do not agree on the university in which it takes place), but was in fact taken in a mega-church. His story of giving a presentation at a major university, and also of participating in and carrying out studies at Kansas State University, actually fail to be historically verified. Some of the pictures in his "evidence" presentation are clearly photo-shopped, while others are very poorly displayed, and yet others are simply incomplete or inconsistent with the accompanying statements in the talk. Even some of the other "experts" he cites in his presentation talk are people who, well, never actually existed. The presenter has no credibility, and the video is junk. Even the person(s) who posted the video calls them self "slaves4christ"... boy, that sounds so upbeat and wonderful, don't it?

The second... although it uses terms designed to make it sound scientific, it does not follow any proper standards for the writing of abstracts, references, etc... I should know, I have edited/published a couple of scientific papers in my time. Furthermore, the references from scholars in the actual field do not offer any evidence of any kind, or validation thereof, but only conjecture that the condition of evidence AS DESCRIBED by the authors would call Evolution into serious question. And, you know, I would think that most people would know that a CT-scan procedure does not consist of a series of "800 X-rays". Stupid... this is just as much a piece of intellectual garbage and foolery as the video is, just not quite as pretty or colorful.

What is extra funny is that these two pieces of "information" actually reference... each other! LOL!!!

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 15:11

117. bolaG (Posts: 468; Member since: 15 Aug 2011)

Wow, you just completely killed his references.Your guys' debate is very entertaining to read during my down time at work. You have a great amount of education and experience by the looks of it. I enjoy reading your post. Lets see if Peter can come back from this one haha

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 15:38

120. hepresearch (unregistered)

well, how are you to believe that what you are seeing is real, and not some parlor trick? It depends on who, or what, you trust...

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 15:40

121. hepresearch (unregistered)

ummm... microevolution implies an overarching macroevolutionary mechanism whether it has had time to take place or not. And, put simply, there are people who can look at "evidence" and not see it for what it is. This happens all the time

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 15:45

122. hepresearch (unregistered)

Well, you can never put enough nails in a coffin to keep it closed forever...

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 15:48

123. remixfa (Posts: 14327; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

religious ferver can unbind any nail to a person that believes strong enough.. evidence or not.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 15:53

124. hepresearch (unregistered)

nothing we understand ever is 100% true, but there is truth out there... so don't ever stop looking for it! Without a leap of help, we can never get to 100% in a finite amount of time. This is where religion, if true, ought to excel, while science will have to travel in finite steps.

posted on 20 Sep 2011, 16:01

125. hepresearch (unregistered)

religious fervor of a truly negative variety, that is...

a true seeker of truth has an open mind, but will also bind themselves to absolute truth when they come upon it.

And as for faith, is serving others in the community, and having love for people, not an act of great faith? It is the same as the faith that drives the scientist to research and experiment... serving others, and loving my neighbors, is my ongoing experiment, and has become my desire as I have come to know of the truth of the principle of love and service through the "evidence" of increased capacity to trust, to learn, to care and empathize, and to grow.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories