Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

Natural, non-natural and supernatural

natural- produced by or existing in, nature

non-natural- not produced by or involving natural processes.

supernatural- Being beyond, or exceeding, the power or laws of nature; miraculous

posted by Joe G @ 7:21 AM  

55 Comments:

  • At 10:13 AM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Thanks for teh definitions of each - can you give me three examples of each, becuase I'm a bit confused. Also, as some said at UD (which had changed!) could you do Zenn diagrams or tell me which sets are members of others?


    Thanks!

     

  • At 5:10 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Rich, I know you are confused.

    That is just bthe reality of being Rich.

    Also it was a Venn diagram.

    In the Venn diagram you would see that non-natural and supernatural overlap. You will also see there are regions in both which are exclusive.

    You would also see that non -natural and natural overlap and also both have regions that are exclusive.

    But I don't expect you to understand that.

    And as I told IDskeptic the BEST we can do is to track X back to before time-space started. What came before that is outside the realm of science.

    So in that light the best we can do is say it is beyond nature and leave it at that.

    That is until we observe the laws of nature being esceeded. Then we could say we observed something supernatural.

    So supernatural would involve the violation of the laws of nature.

    Non-natural need not violate those laws, just as humans building cars don't violate those laws but the car would not be produced by nature. The car is an artifact.

    Natural would be snow forming given the proper conditions.

     

  • At 7:28 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Thanks joe. How about those three examples or each, to clear things up?

     

  • At 7:41 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Rich,

    From my experience with you nothing will clear things up.

    And since I have never experienced a supernatural event I cannot give an example beyond what I have already spoon-fed you:

    So supernatural would involve the violation of the laws of nature.

    Non-natural need not violate those laws, just as humans building cars don't violate those laws but the car would not be produced by nature. The car is an artifact.


    Natural would be snow forming given the proper conditions.


    Now in order for me to "clear things up" I need specifics- as in what part of those don't you understand?

    Or you can continue to be the ignorant fool I have come to know.

    And BTW I see that IDskeptic has been "schooled"- LoL!!!!

     

  • At 8:18 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    BTW do you really need 3 examples of each, meaning 9 total examples?

    Or do you really only need 1 example of each?

    You are so proud of being as stupid as Borat it is hard to tell what the heck you want.

     

  • At 6:52 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    natural-

    1- a snowstorm

    2- a thunder storm

    3- a tornado

    non-natural-

    1- the processes beyond nature

    2- a solid cube of titanium floating in space

    3- Bohrium

    supernatural-

    1- having a planet move instantaneously to another system light years away

    2- having a solar system poof into existence

    3- being able to walk through a star

    anythig else Rich?

     

  • At 9:47 AM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    It seems you can't give me 3 examples of non-natural, Joe.


    1- the processes beyond nature

    [wrong - this is a definition, not an example]

    2- a solid cube of titanium floating in space

    [This would be natural]

    3- Bohrium

    [This would also be natural]

     

  • At 9:59 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    It seems like Rich cannot understand my response. So I will explain it AGAIN:


    1- the processes beyond nature

    [wrong - this is a definition, not an example]

    How can I give an example of something I cannot observe?

    It is as I said. Te best we can do once we reach that boudary beyond nature is say it is non-natural.

    2- a solid cube of titanium floating in space

    [This would be natural]

    Nope, nature operating freely could not produce such a structure.

    3- Bohrium

    [This would also be natural]

    Again not prodced by nature.

    So what this comes down to is your ignorance.

    And there isn't anything I can do about that.

    So while I have answered your questions you have refused to answer mine.

    My question to you is can you provide a testable hypothesis for an accumulation random mutations?

    I will start another thread just for you- or anyone that can answer it.

     

  • At 10:05 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    non-natural- not produced by or involving natural processes.

    Both the titanium cube and Bohrium fit the definition.

    IOW all Rich can do is say "Does not".

    But that is the level of argument I have come to expect from evolutionitwits.

     

  • At 11:43 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    1- the processes beyond nature

    [wrong - this is a definition, not an example]

    OK I will change it to:

    The processes that brought nature into existence.

     

  • At 5:28 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    "The processes that brought nature into existence." is clearly supernatural, Joe.


    "IOW all Rich can do is say "Does not"."

    Oh, let me play: IOW all Joe can do is say "Does"

     

  • At 7:37 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    I do love how Richie argues:

    "The processes that brought nature into existence." is clearly supernatural, Joe.

    No explanation, just a bald assertion. Pretty much the same as saying "does not".

    And no explanation about the slam-down he took over my other two examples. Like sponge-bob he just absorbs the blows and keeps the ignorance flowing.

    Very typical of all evolutionitwits- debate via assertion and by all means never substantiate anything beyond minor semantic quibbling.

    Rich you are clearly a wanker and a screamer.

    I hear you are so good that you gain a stroke when switchng hands.

     

  • At 10:38 AM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    I see you've descended into name-calling, Joe. The sure sign of a losing position.

    Come and say that to my face sometime.

    Joe doesn't like it when I assert, but he does it himself and its okay.


    One of the meanings of the prefix "super" is "Supercede, to come before others". So what came before nature would be supernatural.

     

  • At 11:44 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    One of the meanings of the prefix "super" is "Supercede, to come before others".

    I believe the word is supesede.

    PREcede means come before others.

    Supersede means to take the place of.

     

  • At 11:47 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And BTW when the opportunity presents itself I will say it to your face.

    Your last post proves you don't even have a grasp of the language you are trying to use.

    What else am I to think about you?

    I call them as I see them and you continue to confirm my observations.

     

  • At 11:50 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    (typo two posts above- should be supersede)

    I was too busy laughing at Rich and couldn't proofread...

    gotta go...

    you go rich!!!

     

  • At 4:53 AM, Blogger blipey said…

    Ooooh, I can play too!

    Is a tornado on the Moon natural, non-natural, or supernatural?

    Since, a tornado has been previously defined as natural, should not a tornado on the Moon also be natural?

     

  • At 7:10 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Ooooh, I can play too!

    Yes blipey, you can play with yourself- as usual.

    Is a tornado on the Moon natural, non-natural, or supernatural?

    Which Moon? Warren Moon?

    A tornado ON Warren Moon?

    Most likely artificial.

    But thanks fer payin'...

     

  • At 11:41 AM, Blogger blipey said…

    Why don't you just go and publish all those papers, textbooks, and refutations of all things non-Joe that you've got laying around your super lair?

    Otherwise don't even pretend to have conversations--it just makes you look like an asshat.

     

  • At 11:58 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Why don't you just go and publish all those papers, textbooks, and refutations of all things non-Joe that you've got laying around your super lair?

    Is that gibberish supposed to mean something?

    Otherwise don't even pretend to have conversations-

    I don't have to pretend, I have conversations.

    However as I have already said- having a conversation with a dolt like you is pretty much impossible.

    And that is because you don't know anything.

    BTW you don't look like an asshat because your head is all the up your rectum.

    Ya see blipey that is where pieces of shit, like you, reside- on the walls of the rectum (as well as other places). IOW clowny you are nothing but a cling-on.

    Do you also think that supercede(sic) means "to come before others", as Richie does?

    Most likely as you both talk out of your asses.

     

  • At 12:06 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Just so that I am clear- although that doesn't seem to work with neither blipey nor Richie- having a conversation with either of you is a contradition in terms- that is a conversation and blipey is an oxymoron.

     

  • At 5:39 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    That's right, Joe. Respond to the obvious asshat baiting, but fail to respond to the comment of substance.

    How about a tornado on the Moon? Natural? Non-natural? Supernatural?

    Looking forward to further proof of your asshatness.

     

  • At 5:43 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    supercede (a correct spelling, so I'm not sure why you have sicced it) means to supplant or to take the place or order of another thing.

    So, depending on context, it could mean "to come before", most likely when discussing the precedence of a thing.

     

  • At 10:02 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    supercede (a correct spelling, so I'm not sure why you have sicced it) means to supplant or to take the place or order of another thing.

    That is because the word is SUPERSEDE- "s" instead of "c":

    su·per·cede

    variant of supersede
    usage Supercede has occurred as a spelling variant of supersede since the 17th century, and it is common in current published writing. It continues, however, to be widely regarded as an error.

    Wiktionary says:

    The form supercede is commonly considered a misspelling of supersede, since it results from confusion between Latin cedere (“‘give up, yield’”) and sedere (“‘to sit’”).[1] The original Latin word was supersedere (“‘to sit above’”), but the ‘c’ spelling began to be used in Middle French, appeared in English as early as the 1400s, and is still sometimes found. Most dictionaries do not include this spelling; a few list it as a variant, sometimes identified as a misspelling.[2] A search of general dictionaries at Onelook All Dictionaries finds 4 instances of "supercede" excluding this one (with one flagged as misspelling), and 24 of "supersede".

    That is why I sicced it.

    So, depending on context, it could mean "to come before",

    Only if you are an ignorant asshole.

    Oh that is right- both you an Richie are ignorant assholes.

    PRECEDE$ means "to come before".

    English lesson is over.

    Now pull your head out of your ass.

     

  • At 10:25 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    blipey,

    YOU have never POSTED anything of substance- NOTHING, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH.

    You have failed to post a testable hypothesis for your position.

    You have failed to post anything that would demonstrate you have any knowledge of anything.

    And as proof that you are a fucking freak all I have to do is post a list of your comments.

    So until YOU start doing something other than being a pimple on the ass of proigress your posts will be ignored.

     

  • At 10:37 AM, Blogger blipey said…

    Joe, pull your head out of your mother's ass and do something useful.

    Both Random House Dictionary of the English Language and the Princeton University WordNet list supercede as an acceptable spelling. Have you ever looked up the word "theater"?

    Anywho, precede certainly does mean to come before. Now, if you'll concentrate on the definition of the word rather than its various spellings, you might grasp what I was talking about.

    If a thing has superseded another thing--as, say computers have superseded typewriters--then in a way computers have come before typewriters in precedence. We would rather use a computer than a typewriter, or we would have quicker access to a computer than we would a typewriter.

    So, as I said, in some sense, supersede can mean to come before. That's the interesting thing about language, Joe; it's nuanced. Try to keep up.

     

  • At 10:45 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Well clowny all the major dictionaries say it is a misspelling and even give the REASON.

    Now pull your head out of Richie's ass and actually do something besides act like a little whiny baby.

    If a thing has superseded another thing--as, say computers have superseded typewriters--then in a way computers have come before typewriters in precedence.

    No you fucking moron. TYPEWRITERS came first. And computers didn't replace typewriters a computer program did.

    IOW once again you expose your ignorance.

    So, as I said, in some sense, supersede can mean to come before.

    Only to people who are ignorant fucking whiny little babies.

    The thing doing the superseding came AFTER.

    What came BEFORE gets replaced.

    But thanks for once again PROVING you are notrhing bt a pimple on the ass of progress.

    Now go back to juggling things- that is if you are good at it- because you suck at debating- but that is because you are an ignorant wanker and a screamer- just like Richie.

    Language is nuanced. Too bad you have no clue as to how to use it.

     

  • At 10:48 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    BTW there isn't any grasping what you are talking about.

    That is because all you do is spew ignorance laiden shit.

    But that is what you are- ignoarnce laiden shit.

    Now fuck off and come back only if you are prepared to present a testable hypothesis for yoyr position.

     

  • At 11:01 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Typewriters preceded word processors. (came before)

    Word processors superseded typewriters. (came after and replaced- in some/ most cases)

    But thank you for the laughs.

    That appears to be all you, Rich, Zachriel, Olorin, rishy, et al., are good for.

     

  • At 11:02 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And please clowny do tell me when you are in the New England area again.

    We can meet and catch up on all the laughs you haven't provided on the internet.

     

  • At 2:55 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And one more point to prove blipey is a clueless loser:

    When something is superseded, it means it is REPLACED. Therefore there isn't any "precedence"- there is only the new, meaning there isn't a choice.

    English lesson is over...

     

  • At 3:48 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    Joe, you'd shit yourself if I appeared at your door and interrupted your super, top secret, level 5, for your mom's eye's only wacking off.

    When did Random House become a craptastic dictionary?

    Do you know what supplant means? Have you heard of literature? poetry? analogy?

    Now, about the question at hand...

    Would a tornado on the moon be natural, supernatural, or non-natural?

    thanks for clearing this up.

     

  • At 4:03 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    clownie, you child molesting freak, if you showed up at my door I would thank whoever or whatever there is to thank.

    I would consider myself as one of the luckiest people in the world.

    When did Random House become a craptastic dictionary?

    Why do YOU think it is?

    Do you know what supplant means?

    Supersede. Did you have a point?

    Have you heard of literature?

    Unlike YOU, I have. Again do you have a point- besides the one at the top of your bitty little head?

    Now, about the question at hand...

    Your hand is on your daddy's dick.

    And the question YOU need to focus on is what are the alternatives if not by intelligent design or special creation and can YOU put it in the form of a testable hypothesis.

    So please, by all and any means, show up at my door and we can discuss your mental issues further.

    Please- and if you could bring Rich with you that would be greatly appreciated.

     

  • At 4:04 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Would a tornado on the moon be natural, supernatural, or non-natural?

    There are many moons, each with its own unique characteristics.

    So you would have to be a little more specific.

    That is if you can.

     

  • At 4:10 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    The ORIGIN(s) of a word can tell quite a bit about it:

    supersede
    /soprseed/

    • verb take the place of; supplant.

    — USAGE The standard spelling is supersede rather than supercede.

    — ORIGIN Latin supersedere ‘be superior to’.

    The "s" not the "c" is present when the word ORIGINATED

    and this:

    The Eng. spelling with -c- was influenced by the unrelated verb cease.

    IOW it was a fuck-up by fuck-ups and perpetuated by more fuck-ups.

     

  • At 4:15 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    But anyway, in order to tell if a tornado on any moon is natural, non-natural or supernatural, we would need to investigate- it up close.

    Otherwise we wouldn't know.

    And only clowns would try to make a determination without an investigation.

    And it is pretty funny that you think that is how questions are answered.

    But then again, that is par for the course for your position.

     

  • At 6:57 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    bye-bye blipey.

    If you ever let go of your daddy's dick and stop diddling your mother, perhaps you will have time to stop by.

    We will see who gets a case of the shits.

    bye-bye you child molesting freak...

     

  • At 6:59 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And please learn the difference between IMPLY and INFER.

    Just because you, a dick-licking punk, can INFER something does not mean it was IMPLIED.

     

  • At 11:17 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    blipey,

    The only way I will answer any of your questions is face to face.

    You know when you show up at my door.

    You have nothing to offer that is worth posting on my blog.

    But we can clear this up when wee meet.

    But that means you have to lety go of your father's dick and get your fingers out of your mothers soiled undies.

    And yes you have to stop licking your sister too.

    THEN you can come here, or at least tell me when you will be in New England and where you will be performing.

    I will be there. I will be easy to spot- I will be the one heckling you as you try to juggle or whatever else you do.

    As for a tornado on the moon- As I have already said, and your ignorance won't allow you to accept, it would take an investigation.

    However you, being a child molesting clown, wouldn't understand that. But neither would Michael Jackson- and you two have quite a bit in common.

     

  • At 9:59 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    blipey,

    Just in case you read this- get a dictionary and read the definition of the word "investigation".

    Ya see in order to answer your question a) it would have to be observed (hint- it never has) and b) an INVESTIGATION would have to be conducted. Ya see that is how it is done. But you being an ignorant child-molesting clown, obviously have no clue as to how things are done.

    Now go back to jerking-off you father and diddling your mother.

    That appears to be what you are good at.

     

  • At 6:08 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    Do you ever go out in public, Joe? Do you trip over your own feet? Do you stutter? Do you have to have strangers wipe the drool off your cut-off wife-beater tee? Do you routinely have grade school children ask their mommies why God made the bad man? Do you wake up screaming with a dim feeling that you parents never loved you?

    Well, I'm not sorry.

     

  • At 8:41 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Do you ever go out in public, Joe?

    Yes, daily.

    Do you trip over your own feet?

    No.

    Do you stutter?

    No.

    Do you have to have strangers wipe the drool off your cut-off wife-beater tee?

    I don't have a wife-beater tee, I don't drool and strangers seem to know better than touch me.

    Do you routinely have grade school children ask their mommies why God made the bad man?

    No, but grade school children often ask me why blipey the clown touched them inappropriately.

    Do you wake up screaming with a dim feeling that you parents never loved you?

    No, but sometimes I do wake up to take a piss and scratch my ass. Ya the two usually go together.

    Well, I'm not sorry.

    Yes you are. You are pretty much the most sorry individual I have ever come across.

    As a matter of fact if I was as sorry as you I would have killed myself long ago.

    So please do society a favor- play in traffic, jump from a high-rise building- anything- a fuckin' clown?

    YOUR parents must have killed themselves- what a disappointment that must have been.

    "Yeah, look at MY son's resume- he swims, plays volleyball and juggles! They call him blipey."

    You rock- now go back to being a blind sheep.

     

  • At 9:47 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    Continuing to acknowledge only the chaff? Still erasing all of the pertinent questions?

    Shame. Shame. Shame.

    One might think that you can't converse. Is it pity you're looking for? We can all come by your cage and give you gruel if it'll make you feel better.

    Now, how about going back and working on the the posts of substance (I can repost the questions if you can't remember what you censored.). Try not to add to the impression that you're avoiding things.

     

  • At 9:49 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    Tornadoes. On the Moon. A natural phenomenon? Supernatural? Non-natural?

     

  • At 10:46 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Tornadoes. On the Moon. A natural phenomenon? Supernatural? Non-natural?

    I have already answered tat question you loser piece of shit.

    Here it is AGAIN:

    THERE HAS TO BE AN INVESTIGATION"

    What part of that don't you understand?

    I do understand that you are a clown and don't know anything about science. But your continuance of asking questions that have already been answered proves that your syphilis ridden brain has failed to function.

    That's it blipey, bye-byePS I haven't deleted your comments. I have archived them.

    I will be using them in my defense. You know after we meet and you have an accident...

     

  • At 10:53 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Continuing to acknowledge only the chaff?

    All you post is chaff- ignorance laiden chaff.

    So what eklse am I supposed to respond to?

    Still erasing all of the pertinent questions?

    I haven't erased anything and you have not asked a pertinent question.

    All you have done is jump into a descussion I was having with Rich and instead of asking for clarification decided you knew best what was being discussed.

    IOW once again you have demonstrated that you are an asshole.

    One might think that you can't converse.

    Not with an imbecile like you, anyway.

    You are an agenda driven moron.

    You don't have any pertinent knowledge.

    You don't have anything of substance to say.

    You don't have anytthing to add.

    Now, how about going back and working on the the posts of substance

    I will as soon as one comes to my blog.

    However I know you will never post or ask anything of substance.

    All you can do is take things out-of-context because that is all your syphilis ridden brain can muster.

    So if you have a question please save it for when we meet.

    All you future comments will be archived for future reference only.

     

  • At 1:17 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And blipey, if your parents were alive and could read they would be saying something like-

    "Just look at our boy! He jumped into a thread, forced his ignorance upon it, all to cover up for a friend's ignorance and stupidity. Now no one remebers that Richie thought that supersede was thnat same as precede."

     

  • At 1:12 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    No, precede and supercede do not mean the same thing. I don't think anyone claimed that they did.

    Is it your claim that posts on a blog about tornadoes can be used as defense in a murder trial? Successfully?

    Are you a Larry Falafel brothers? That's too cute.

     

  • At 2:40 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    No, precede and supercede do not mean the same thing.

    Yes I know.

    I don't think anyone claimed that they did.

    1- You are incapable of thinking and 2) Richie Hughes said One of the meanings of the prefix "super" is "Supercede, to come before others".

    One of the meanings of PREcede is "to come before (others)".

    There isn't any such definition pertaining to supersede.

    And as a matter of fact YOU tried to defend that position.

    IOW once again you have proven to be a twisted and demented twirp.

    Is it your claim that posts on a blog about tornadoes can be used as defense in a murder trial?

    No. It is my claim that you are an intellectual coward and a child molester.

    And what is cute is that your bitty little brain can muster the power to use the internet.

    I am sure I will see you on that program that catches internet child stalkers.

     

  • At 2:43 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And BTW I even started a thread exposing Richie's ignorance of the English language which actually helped me to best define the intelligent designer(s).

     

  • At 3:30 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    No, I said that "supercede" could be taken to mean comes before in certain usages.

    Just as "emperor" and "sovereign" can in some ways be said to be like, they are not the same thing.

    Supercede, as explained by both Rich and myself can mean comes before in precedence--like a pecking order (something I recall you're semi-familiar with from the NH threads).

    This does not mean that "supercede" and "precede" have identical definitions.

    So. Tornadoes. On the Moon. Can you come up with a set of circumstances for which it might be said that the phenomenon was Natural?

     

  • At 3:48 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    1- You are fucking wrong about your interprtation of the word supersede.

    Once something is replaced there isn't any precedence, just what noiw exists.

    There isn't a pecking order. Just the new.

    IOW once again you have proven to be an illiterate moron.

    So. Tornadoes. On the Moon.

    What tornadoes would that be?

    Are you seeing them? Perhaps you should either a) reduce your meds or b) increase them- I'm not sure which side you are teetering on.

    Can you come up with a set of circumstances for which it might be said that the phenomenon was Natural?

    I am sure I could but what is the relevance?

    IOW what the fuck does this exercise have to do with anything?

    Please be specific.

     

  • At 7:02 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    You refuse to give examples of things that are Natural, Supernatural, and Non-natural, so I am attempting to understand what you mean by those terms.

    A tornado. On the moon. What circumstances are you thinking about that would make that a Natural occurrence?

    A word processor has superceded a typewriter. This does not mean that the typewriter no longer exists. It means we may have a preference for the word processor; it comes before the typewriter in our desire to use it.

     

  • At 7:13 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    You refuse to give examples of things that are Natural, Supernatural, and Non-natural,

    Umm we have already PASSED that stage of the discussion.

    But thanks for once again proving you are an ignorant twit.

    so I am attempting to understand what you mean by those terms.

    I mean EXACTLY what the definitions mean.

    And you couldn't understand what is meant by those words. Ya see it is your MO to not understand. But that is because you are an nignorant fuck.

    A word processor has superceded a typewriter.

    No typewriters still exist. And are still used. Not everyone has a computer and not every computer has a word processor.

    It means we may have a preference for the word processor; it comes before the typewriter in our desire to use it.

    It doesn't mean any such thing.

    Ya see I go by the actual, standard, and accepted definitions.

    Supersede does not mean what you are trying to make it mean. And you couldn't find a reference to support your claim if your life depended on it.

    IOW you are continuing to prove that you are an ignorant fuck.

     

  • At 7:17 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And BTW I will reserve judgement on a tornado on the Moon for when one occurs.

    Science isn't done psychically- it relies on REAL data. And that is something you will NEVER present.

     

<< Home