EngineerAl

1. No, I haven't really told "us" as in the group here. I told you, and as I said, it would be pointless to do so, because you don't want to learn.

2. Your nonsense about lots of stars changes statistics is just that, nonsense. The odds of picking up one specially marked card in a deck of 52 is 1/52. You can spin that around your head forever. It doesn't change because you multiply up lots of stars, Nagging.

3. Richard Dawkins claims in one of his books that "impossible" may be defined as one chance in 10 to the 40th power.

Dawkins, pretending to be even MORE "intellectual" than you pretend, claims that "a cow really can jump over the moon" and a "marble statue can wave its arm" with something of the same probability as 1 chance in 10 to the 300th power.

So in atheist La-La Land, cows jump over the moon, marble statues wave their arms at you, but 1 chance in 10 to the 40th is "impossible."

Now how does 1 chance in 10 to the 10 to the 120th look?
Oh, pretty good, because... .there are lots of stars.

3. On to Carl Sagan: "Sex was invented." Cosmos, page 338

Really! By whom, Nagging? Defend his nonsensical remark.

4. “Astronomical spectroscopy is an almost magical technique. It amazes me still.” - Ibid, page 93

If a Christian, who you hate so very much, said that, you and other atheists and agnostics would scoff, laugh, and call him ignorant. He suffers from The Argument From Incredulity.

But when Sagan says it, well, that's "science" (wink, nudge).

There are many, many more "magical techniques" all around us, all around the universe. The difference is that people with common sense see intellect, design, creation, a Creator.
People with only a godless agenda, like you, stumble all over yourselves to fabricate intricate excuses, including infinite universes, big numbers multiplied together, and a "quantum vacuum." And you don't even question the absurdity of your fabrications.

5. Let's continue, shall we, Naggy? I have SO MUCH MORE to show you.

(Voyager 2 showed that) “Mars was a place.” - Ibid, page 121

Deep. Deep science. Mars was a place.

"We can be fooled." - Ibid, page 125
Well Naggy can't. That's for sure.

6. (To terrafarm Mars) “we would build canals.” - page 134

A. There is no water on Mars. Have you any IDEA how much it would cost to bring water there?
B. A glass enclosure would have to be built to contain the water and air. It would have to survive meteor impacts. Lots of them.
C. Where does all the oxygen come from to operate the bulldozers and heavy equipment to make canals, and glass enclosures? There is not enough money in the world to do as he proposed so blithely, this "scientist" you claim knows so very much.
D. Who wants to leave their home, and loved ones, and country to live on Mars?
E. What about the POLAR BEARS! All the burning of rocket fuel, and poof! There goes everything, if you believe Al Gore and other scholars like him.

7. Today we have preliminary designs for ships to take people to the stars. (Project) Orion was designed to utilize explosions of hydrogen bombs against an internal plate . . .” - Ibid, page 203

Sure, sure. "Plates" will survive a nuclear explosion. And the g-forces will be just fine for the people inside, won't they, Naggy.

I can't go on with the extensive nonsense in just ONE Sagan book, much less Dawkins' dreck.

But a final question for you, Nagging.

What was it that an eminent astronomer said about a Boeing 707 being magically created by an explosion somewhere?
Can you just write that down for everyone to see, including especially yourself? And be precise. Science is precise. You are not.

Blasthoff Loc: Life halved NY and IN

Does anyone understand the above post? If so, please try to explain it.

dljen Loc: Central PA

Most of us don't even try. This one's a radical. ;) ;)

EngineerAl

It's quite understandable, Huffy.

Nagging was as condescending and arrogant as Little Purple Flower, PeterL-S, and many other lefties here.
He pretended that statistics are negated by billions of stars in billions of galaxies. Are you with Nagging so far? You should be. He's one of you.

Nagging claimed that all those' astronomers are so smart that they're practically perfect. Like Naggy.

So I reviewed my notes from Carl Sagan's books, which I read years ago. He screwed up almost as much as Richard Dawkins.
I quoted them, by book and page.

If you have any specific questions, like "Can you really blow up a nuclear weapon to propel a spaceship?" the simple answer is:

Would you like to be 100 feet from a nuclear detonation?

I think you're really being disingenuous in your comments though. That does not surprise me in the least.

treehugger Loc: Eastern Idaho Highlands

:30:

magicray Loc: Tampa Bay, Florida

Group W bench