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

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

What are the units of "size"?

-
After providing example after example of weight being a component of size, the blip-tard now asks:
What are the units of "size"?


We have meters, liters and grams and we also have inches, quarts and pounds.





Prediction- the blip-tard continues to act like a cry-baby...

15 Comments:

  • At 10:12 PM, Blogger Richard Sugerman said…

    Isn't size more than one thing?

    The size of a person would be height and weight, I would think, because there are skinny people who are 5'9" and fat people who are 5'9". We need a multiple measure to accurately describe, or state their size, right?

    So stating the size of something, depending on what that something is, is a result of possibly more than one measure.

    A big pencil could be extraordinarily long but the same girth as a normal pencil, or it could be the same length as a normal pencil but fat as hell. Saying it is BIG is not enough.

    So size, IMHO, is a multiple measure and cannot be reduced to one measure, unless we define our terms before using SIZE as a sole measure.

    That's all I got...

     
  • At 7:00 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    RS:
    Isn't size more than one thing?

    Usually.

    RS:
    The size of a person would be height and weight, I would think, because there are skinny people who are 5'9" and fat people who are 5'9". We need a multiple measure to accurately describe, or state their size, right?

    Already covered that.

    RS:
    So stating the size of something, depending on what that something is, is a result of possibly more than one measure.

    Yup.

     
  • At 10:05 AM, Blogger blipey said…

    Yet, Joe, you seem to think that size is definitively a measurement involving ONLY one thing. Otherwise you would never make the statement that a piece of granite with the same dimensions as a baseball cannot be baseball "sized" because it weighs more.

    So, which is it? Are dimensions a part of size (this example indicates they are not). This example also indicates there must be an objective measure of size that eliminates granite from being baseball sized.

    It would help if you told which has a greater "size":

    1. one cubic foot of granite

    or

    2. ten cubic feet of Nerf?

    We can then do the proper calculations to determine the sizes of anything.

    Unless, of course, you're trying to tell us that "size" is completely subjective and up to the individual viewer?

    In which case, a piece of granite with the dimensions of a baseball could certainly be described as baseball-sized...so that must not be it. Yes. "Size" must have discrete units. What are they?

     
  • At 11:38 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Yet, Joe, you seem to think that size is definitively a measurement involving ONLY one thing.

    Wrong again asshole.

    I said:

    Football players- height and weight determines their size- well that goes for every person on this planet.

    If a police officer asks a witness about the size of the person seen fleeing the scene that officer wants height and weight estimates.


    Got that- size is more than one thing asswipe.

    Otherwise you would never make the statement that a piece of granite with the same dimensions as a baseball cannot be baseball "sized" because it weighs more.

    So you are stupid.

    And you think your stupidity and dishonesty refutes what I said.

     
  • At 11:44 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    OP-

    Prediction- the blip-tard continues to act like a cry-baby...

    another prediction fulfilled....

     
  • At 3:31 PM, Blogger Thorton said…

    Still waiting for you to tell us which has more 'size' Joe - A man 6' tall weighing 200 lbs. or a man 6' 2" tall weighing 195 lbs?

     
  • At 5:13 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Still waiting for you to tell us which has more 'size'

    You mean which is bigger or smaller?

    Do you understand English?

    And perhaps you can tell me the relevance of your question- I have only asked you several times now...

     
  • At 7:48 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    The appropriate question would be-

    Which is bigger?:

    1) A ball with a circumference of 9" that weighs 2 pounds

    or

    2) A ball with a circumference of 9" that weighs 5 ounces


    I say the ball that weighs 2 pounds.

     
  • At 5:25 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    No, Joe, that would be "heavier". Its sad an adult grasp these concepts..

     
  • At 8:02 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Richtard chimes in:
    No, Joe, that would be "heavier".

    Yes Richtard, a 2 pound ball is heavier than a 5 ounce ball.

    Very good.

    It also has more bulk- ie mass.

    Which means it isbigger:

    2 a : large or great in dimensions, bulk, or extent


    Richtard- stop arguing with me about the meanings of words.

    Obviously you are not as smart as a first grader...

     
  • At 10:29 AM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Joe is now using the highly scientific measure of bulk!


    It isn't bigger, it's heavier.

     
  • At 11:50 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Richtard,

    Science uses mass.

    The 2lb 9" ball has more mass, meaning it is bigger- that is going by the standard and accepted definition of "bigger".

    And just repeating your ignorance is not support for it.

     
  • At 12:41 AM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Lemme go find a kid's science site..

    *sigh*

    http://www.blobs.org/science/article.php?article=72

    "Mass is a measure of how much of something there is. It's not the same as volume, because volume gives an idea of how much space something takes up. It's also different from weight."

    "People often talk about weight when they mean mass. In practice, they end up being very similar and you might be able to get away with using them to mean the same. However, though the two are very easily confused, there is a very basic difference between them. Basically, they're talking about different things."

    "Volume is a way of measuring how much space something takes up. It's different from mass, which tells you how much of something there is, and it's different from density."

     
  • At 7:06 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Yup a kid's science site is about all Richtard is capable of understanding.

    Too bad there isn't anything in that which supports Richtard and refutes what I said.

     
  • At 7:33 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    If we have two objects and one has more mass than the other, the one that has more mass has more particles.

    It has more weight in the same environment.

    The force of gravity is greater on the object with more mass.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home