Instigator / Pro
4
1377
rating
62
debates
25.81%
won
Topic
#1471

# The moon does take 27.3 to revolve around the earth and is 27.3 compared to the size of earth. the other 27.3 in other things count to. Will also talk about 7.

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

oromagi
Tags
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
7
1922
rating
117
debates
97.44%
won
Description

Con dismissed my articles because he did his own math. Cons math is unreliable. I procrastinated on doing this debate again. I was stupid and thought oral was not mouth. Plus i wanted to debate Theatheist but he is not here so and he just repeated you and just repeated your number over and over again.

The article i will be used was originally posted to janesix all credit goes to her. I actually wanted her to do this debate but she disappeared

Round 1
Pro
#1
Thanks for taking the time. When you did your last debate you did our own math and got 27.25 exactly one fourth. It is a strange coincidence that it just happened to one fourth. So even if your is true it still god.

Here is the extensive list of thing that run on 273. Janesix deserves all credit here.I wanted her to do this debate but she disappeared. She found this site credit to her.

Moonatic was right

Add to the fact the moon takes 27.3 days to orbit Earth and just so happens to be 27.3% the comparitive size of the earth!! YES, THAT'S RIGHT. READ IT AGAIN MORONS. I mean...wake up. The earth has 365/366 days to orbit the sun and yet it is 366% larger than our moon! I MEAN.....WTF"

• The ratio of Earth’s diameter to Moon’s diameter is 0.273.  (The moon is 27.3 % the size of the Earth).
• Comparing a square’s perimeter to a circle having an equal circumference, the circle’s diameter is 27.3% longer than the edge of the square. (easier to visualize in the illustration).
• Inscribe a circle inside a square.  The four corners make up 27.32% of the total area.
• This is reached through the formula: (4 – pi) / pi = 0.2732
• The relationship  of  the Great Pyramid’s  height to half its base is 1.273:1 (or 4:π) and thus ‘squares the circle’.
• -273.2 degrees Celsius is the temperature of Absolute Zero.
• 27.32 is the freezing point of water on Kelvin scale (K).
• Absolute zero of water is 273.2% colder than the temperature it takes to boil.
• 273 days = average length of pregnancy (10 sidereal months).
• 27.3 days = human menstrual cycle.
• 27.32 earth days is the sidereal period of the moon (moon completes one full rotation, one ‘moonth’).
• 1/273.2 per C is the expansion/reduction of gas (Gasses expand by 1/273 of their volume with every degree on the Celsius/centigrade scale).
• Sunspots  revolve   about  the  Sun’s  surface  in  27.3  days.
• Water  changes  phase  at  273°K.
• 273  days  from   the  summer  solstice  to  the  vernal  equinox.
• 2,730,000 is the circumference of the Sun in miles.
• The triple point of water is defined to take place at 273.16 K.
• The Cosmic Background Radiation is 2.73 K.
• The Earth and Moon orbital periods are reciprocals.  1/27.32 = 0.0366 (366 days in a sidereal year) (1/366 =.002732) 27.32 days in one ‘moonth’.
• 273 m/s2 = acceleration of the Sun.
• .273 cm/s2 = acceleration of the moon along its path around the Earth.

Boy i wonder Why the Egyptians created all there pyramids with 273

27.32 is  pi-pyramids

Pi-Pyramid is constructed using a Circle with the same circumference as the sum of all four sides of it’s Square base, the circle is then interpolated as its Height, which is 4/Pi (1.27324…)

A pi-pyramid is one of the three pyramids of giza it is 27.3

Amongst so many others the Great Pyramid repeats the all important number 27.3, a kingly number amongst the most noblest of numbers. Too many ancient sites to mention encode the number 27.3 through their dimensions. They are catalogued throughout my series, An Ancient Legacy:

3) Pi-Pyramid is constructed using a Circle with the same circumference as the sum of all four sides of it’s Square base, the circle is then interpolated as its Height, which is 4/Pi (1.27324…)

is 27.3 percent, and the orbit of the Moon takes 27.3 days. Sidereal rotation period 27.321582 d (synchronous). 27.3 days is also the average rotation period of a sunspot. Great Pyramid has Base to Height ratio 440/280 = 11/7 = 1.5714285 which is almost perfect approximation of 1/2 Pi: 3.142857.

The ancient Egyptians built

pyramids but the pyramids keep repeating 273 because the Egyptians were mirroring gods 273.

Its like how the Egyptians created there pyramids.

God created life and his creations repeating 273.

God created the precise number 273 so the Egyptians copied them and used 273.

Amongst so many others the Great Pyramid repeats the all important number 27.3, a kingly number amongst the most noblest of numbers. Too many ancient sites to mention encode the number 27.3 through their dimensions. They are catalogued throughout my series, An Ancient Legacy:

The Egyptians made there pyramids 273 to mirror gods 273.

Asteroid belt to sun is 273AU
Because god measured the AU

mercury to venus is 273 AU

Because god measured the AU

Then Venus to earth is 273 AU
Because god measured the AU

I can see con dismissing all this by saying y source believe in conspiracy theory's like pizza gate. I believe in Pizza-gate.You can not say someone is unreliable because of there views.
Con
#2
thanks, crossed, for instigating this debate.

RESOLVED: The moon does take 27.3 to revolve around the earth and is 27.3 compared to the size of earth. the other 27.3 in other things count to. Will also talk about 7.

OBJECTION:  PRO's resolution is grammatically unparsable.

BURDEN of PROOF

Wikipedia suggests:

"When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim especially when it challenges a perceived status quo.  This is also stated in Hitchens's razor.". [1]

In this case, PRO as instigator and claimant bears the entire responsibility of proof.

CON interprets the resolution (using R1 arguments for context) to mean that the repetition of the number 273 in nature is evidence of intelligent design and ergo, God.  PRO must do more than merely recount instances of the number 273 in nature, PRO must demonstrate why the use of 273 is more intelligent that the use of say 272 or 274.  PRO must also demonstrate that an intelligently designed universe proves God as designer as opposed to alternative intelligences- hyper advanced aliens, for example, or a Matrix-type computer generated simulacrum universe for another.

I.  Moonatic was right

• For clarity, let's note that PRO is not citing the good information found in the EarthSky website which refutes PRO's argument fairly effectively.  PRO is citing a comment posted to the bottom of the article 7 years ago by username "Moonatic" who claims that the moon is inhabited and actively observing us.  Moonatic's evidence is personal telepathic reconnaissance. [2]
• Moonatic and PRO seem not to have read the article that Moonatic is commenting about because that article soundly notes:
No one knows the odds, because no one knows how many planets and moons there are in space. Astronomers have discovered 893 planets in distant solar systems so far (as of June 21, 2013), and we don’t know much about their moons.

By the way, although it’s fascinating that they are so similar, the sun and moon aren’t always the same size as seen from Earth. In fact, the moon and sun are rarely exactly the same size. The moon’s distance from Earth varies slightly over the course of a single month. So the moon’s apparent size in our sky is always changing.
Moonatic's claim that regarding odds is refuted.  Until humanity has a rough approximation of how many planets are in the universe and can calculate an appropriate sampling size no human can approximate the odds of solar/lunar similarity as seen from various planets.  Moonatic's claim for high improbability has no observational basis.

II. An (uncovincing) Juggle of Numbers

The ratio of Earth’s diameter to Moon’s diameter is 0.273.
Depends on where you take the measurement.

• The Earth's equatorial diameter is 12,756 km[2]
• The Moon's equatorial diameter is  3,474 km. [3]
3474/12756=0.2723

(The moon is 27.3 % the size of the Earth).
• False.  PRO needs to define size.
"What about surface area? The surface area of the Moon is 37.9 million square kilometers. That sounds like a lot, but it’s actually smaller than the continent of Asia, which is only 44.4 million square km. The surface ares of the whole Earth is 510 million square km, so the area of the Moon compared to Earth is only 7.4%.

How about volume? The volume of the Moon is 21.9 billion cubic km. Again, that sounds like a huge number, but the volume of the Earth is more like 1 trillion cubic kilometers. So the volume of the Moon is only 2% compared to the volume of the Earth.

Finally, let’s take a look at mass. The mass of the Moon is 7.347 x 1022 kg. But the Earth is much more massive. The mass of the Earth is 5.97x 1024 kg. This means that the mass of the Moon is only 1.2% of the mass of the Earth. You would need 81 objects with the mass of the Moon to match the mass of the Earth.
The average diameter of the reference spheroid is 12,742 kilometres? [4]

Inscribe a circle inside a square.  The four corners make up 27.32% of the total area.  This is reached through the formula: (4 – pi) / pi = 0.2732
• We can be certain PRO's formula is wrong because it contains no variable
• The diameter of this circle will be equal to the side of the square.  So, area of this circle:   Ratio of the square to the circle inscribed in it: x(squared):  = 4:
• so if the side of square which is also the diameter of the circle is 5, the area of the square is 25 and the area of the circle is 19.625.  25 - 19.625= 5.375
• 5.375 is 21.5% of 25
• 4 - [pi] = .86.  .86/4=0.215 21.5% again.  The area of a square minus the area of the circle circumscribed by that square is 21.5% of the square's total area, not 27.32% as asserted by PRO.
• Here's another example: https://sciencing.com/area-part-square-circle-middle-8166634.html
• PRO's formula and assertion are false.
The relationship  of  the Great Pyramid’s  height to half its base is 1.273:1 (or 4:π) and thus ‘squares the circle’
-273.2 degrees Celsius is the temperature of Absolute Zero
27.32 is the freezing point of water on Kelvin scale (K)
Absolute zero of water is 273.2% colder than the temperature it takes to boil.
The triple point of water is defined to take place at 273.16 K.
1/273.2 per C is the expansion/reduction of gas (Gasses expand by 1/273 of their volume with every degree on the Celsius/centigrade scale).
Water  changes  phase  at  273°K.
• PRO is rounding up but this is one number that you can't round.  -273.15 Celsius is the temperature at which all the particles of a molecule of ideal gas cease movement.  At -273.2- the molecule is still vibrating and by definition, not Absolute Zero. [7]  So, PRO's second stat is both inaccurately rounded but also suffers from a misplaced decimal point.  The last four data points are just different ways of expressing the same fact in scale (Kelvin).

273 days = average length of pregnancy (10 sidereal months).
• This is inaccurate.  Wikipedia advises:

"Childbirth on average occurs at a gestational age of 280 days[8]

27.3 days = human menstrual cycle.
• There are no decimal points in the menstrual cycle:
The menstrual cycle, which is counted from the first day of one period to the first day of the next, isn't the same for every woman. Menstrual flow might occur every 21 to 35 days and last two to seven days. [9]

"The typical length of time between the first day of one period and the first day of the next is 21 to 45 days in young women and 21 to 35 days in adults (an average of 28 days." [10]

Sunspots  revolve   about  the  Sun’s  surface  in  27.3  days.
The Sun rotates at different speeds at different latitudes.  With careful observation, PRO might find a particular sunspot for which his statement proves true but the generalization is quite misleading.

The Sun rotates faster at its equator than at its poles. This differential rotation is caused by convective motion due to heat transport and the Coriolis force due to the Sun's rotation. In a frame of reference defined by the stars, the rotational period is approximately 25.6 days at the equator and 33.5 days at the poles. Viewed from Earth as it orbits the Sun, the apparent rotational period of the Sun at its equator is about 28 days. [11]

273  days  from   the  summer  solstice  to  the  vernal  equinox.
That is only sometimes true.  In 2019, the Summer solstice took place on June 21 and the 2020 Vernal Equinox will be Mar 19- 272 days in a leap year.

2,730,000 is the circumference of the Sun in miles.

"The sun's circumference is about 2,713,406 miles (4,366,813 km)."
• No intelligent designer would employ British Imperial units which were historically inexact and variable.  The English mile is derived from the distance a team of oxen could plow without resting. Let us assume that any intelligent would measure in meters, derived from the invariable measure of the speed of light.
The Cosmic Background Radiation is 2.73 K.
• PRO is again preferentially rounding numbers that are rendered woefully inaccurate by that rounding.
"The CMB has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature of 2.72548±0.00057 K."
• PRO's rounded number falls outside of the range of measurement.
The Earth and Moon orbital periods are reciprocals.  1/27.32 = 0.0366 (366 days in a sidereal year) (1/366 =.002732) 27.32 days in one ‘moonth’.
• PRO is defining a day on Earth and calling it a coincidence.
• A Julian year is  86400 seconds or 365.242 days.  A sidereal year is 87624 seconds or 365.256 days.  Neither should be rounded to 366 which renders PRO's claim of reciprocity less accurate.
273 m/s2 = acceleration of the Sun.
• The Sun's gravitiational acceleration is 28.02g or  (28.02*9.8) 274.6 m/s2 [12]

Great Pyramid has Base to Height ratio 440/280 = 11/7 = 1.5714285 which is almost perfect approximation of 1/2 Pi: 3.142857.
• see base, height, ratio assertions all refuted above.
• an almost perfect approximation is a self-cancelling, meaningless descriptor.  The number 1 is an almost perfect approximation of the number 2.

Asteroid belt to sun is 273AU
between 2.2 and 3.2 AU [13]

mercury to venus is 273 AU
Then Venus to earth is 273 AU
Ouch.  One AU is the distance from the Sun to the Earth so these distances are obviously less than one AU. [14]

I believe in Pizza-gate.
Yes, that figures.

Round 2
Pro
#3
Thanks for responding. Sorry for procrastinating

Burden of proof

Pro prove that there are 2.73 numbers and that god did it.Con there are no 2.73 numbers. Or there are 2.73 numbers but it has nothing to do with God.Your choice.Proof of god would be intelligent design. This debate is not weather the intelligent design is aliens or something.

The user nemiroff say's  the YouTube crash course is reliable. Crash course talked about Averegro constant.

Crash course said this
6.02 x 10^23 molecules per gram

This is another way to say 2.73 according to below.

“Avogadro’s Number” and was expressed as 2.73 x 10^26 molecules per pound, but is now more commonly known as “Avogadro’s Constant” and is expressed as 6.02 x 10^23 molecules per gram.

Con dropped a lot of points.

Con takes numbers from universal today and does his own math. The numbers from Wikipedia was not doing him to hot. Anyway clearly con did wrong since the site that he sourced supports some of my 2.73 stuff.

The source that con got his info from said this

Universe Today. Space and astronomy news. Tag: The Big Bang. ... These anomalies are regions in the CMB that fall beneath the average background temperature of 2.73 degrees above absolute zero ...

Let me remind you of the other 2.73 stuff

• -273.2 degrees Celsius is the temperature of Absolute Zero.
• 27.32 is the freezing point of water on Kelvin scale (K).
• Absolute zero of water is 273.2% colder than the temperature it takes to boil.
• The Cosmic Background Radiation is 2.73 K.

Clearly God  fined tuned all the temperatures.That is my argument god fined tuned temperature

(The moon is 27.3 % the size of the Earth).
• False.  PRO needs to define size.

The moon is 27.3 percent compared to the size of the earth

pyramids

We can be certain PRO's formula is wrong because it contains no variable

No it has variables i only copied and pasted a little but so you get the understanding.It is not measuring how tall it is so you can dismiss all of cons math.
The three pyramids were built to represent the three angles. Perfect pyramid pi pyramid and phy pyramid

1) Phi-Pyramid has a Mid-Base-Side to Apex length of the ‘golden ratio’ of Phi, and a Height equal to the square root of Phi (1.27202…)
2) 14/11-Pyramid has a Height of 14/11 (1.27273…)
3) Pi-Pyramid is constructed using a Circle with the same circumference as the sum of all four sides of it’s Square base, the circle is then interpolated as its Height, which is 4/Pi (1.27324…

Point 27.3

d.  -273.15 Celsius is the temperature at which all the particles of a molecule of ideal gas cease movement.  At -273.2- the molecule is still vibrating and by definition, not Absolute Zero. [7]  So, PRO's second stat is both inaccurately rounded but also suffers from a misplaced decimal point.

I am saying that these numbers have been dialed to 273. It is not dissqaulified if it has a couple decimals.OR if those decimals are rounded

Avergregro constant is 2.73159732 which is a pound.

Charles law is heat expands at 1 over 273.per unit of temperature. Do you see the pattern

The last four data points are just different ways of expressing the same fact in scale (Kelvin).
All of our temperature's work on a 2.73 cycle. It still has 273 why. Because it is a divine number

Cycles

the cycle of lightning is 27.3.

Also a 2.73 GH cycle

Atmospheric tides work on a 27.3 day cycle. God fined tuned both

he major public buildings, cathedrals, mosques as well as Hindu and Buddhist temples keep repeating the ancient temple proportions that include dimensions of 27.3 in key ancient units of measurement. The so called modern foot being an ancient unit of measure, no less but more likely much older than 2500 years old.
Why do they repeat this number 273. Its because it is divine

-273.15 is absolute zero

Charles law of heat expands at 1 over 273

other temperature 273 numbers.

Too many ancient sites to mention encode the number 27.3 through their dimensions.

Con try's to dismiss the Au points but Wrong AU

Sidereal pregnancy

i said
273 days = average length of pregnancy (10 sidereal months).

con said
• This is inaccurate.  Wikipedia advises:
con said
"Childbirth on average occurs at a gestational age of 280 days[8]
My reply side real months times this by 10.

The length of the sidereal month is 27.321 days or 27 days

Side real day

There are no decimal points in the menstrual cycle:
The decimal point signify how many minutes. Minutes go by in a menstrual cycle. So yes it does

Moonatic
He trashed monastic because he disagrees and he says it is bad because comment. but why is comment quote bad.He says the article debunks moonatic but it is the other way around, He commented to debunk article.

New points

Extended all dropped points

Cycles

the cycle of lightning is 27.3.

Also a 2.73 GH cycle

Atmospheric tides work on a 27.3 day cycle. God fined tuned both

menstrual cycle is 27.3 days in sidereal days.

human fertility  cycle run in harmony with it to because god fine tuned

helosperic current runs on 27.3 days

I will bring more 273 points next round over to con

I recommend you watch all video
Con
#4
Thx, crossed for instigating this debate.

RESOLVED: The moon does take 27.3 to revolve around the earth and is 27.3 compared to the size of earth. the other 27.3 in other things count to. Will also talk about 7.

CON interpreted the resolution to mean that the repetition of the number 273 in nature is evidence of intelligent design and ergo, God.  PRO must do more than merely recount instances of the number 273 in nature, PRO must demonstrate why the use of 273 is more intelligent that the use of say 272 or 274.  PRO must also demonstrate that an intelligently designed universe proves God as designer as opposed to alternative intelligences- hyper advanced aliens, for example, or a Matrix-type computer generated simulacrum universe for another.

PRO counters in R2 that there's no need to distinguish evidence of ID from evidence of God.  PRO simply demands that VOTERS interpret any evidence of ID as evidence of GOD.  VOTERS are prohibited from speculating about alternate sources of ID.  CON encourages VOTERS to find that PRO cannot win this debate without establishing a reason 273 is special and defining the designer for whom 273 represents special meaning.  In other words, PRO has no intention of covering the bare minimum claims of this debate.

CON recommended that as the claimer of extraordinary claims the BURDEN of  EXTRAORDINARY PROOF is entirely PROs.  PRO has not objected to this responsibility.

Let's note that PRO has ignored almost all of CONs R1 counter-arguments.  Worse, PRO accuses CON of dropping arguments but fails to cite a single argument dropped (because none were dropped).

I.  Moonatic was right

P1: PRO cited a telepathically supported claim that the odds that the Moon formed naturally are "flipping STUPIDLY improbable." [1]
C1: CON argued that humans have no evidence of moons beyond our own Solar System, so odds cannot be calculated with any accuracy.
P2:  PRO states:

He says the article debunks moonatic but it is the other way around

C2:  CON considers the argument dropped and extends C1.

II. An (Unconvincing) Juggle of Numbers

P1: PRO argues ratio of Earth to Moon's diameter is .273
C1: CON points out that neither are perfect spheres so PRO must specify which diameters used.

•    For example the ration of Earth to Moon's equatorial diameter is only .272

P2: PRO fails to specify, calls CON's math bad without elaboration.
C2: CON considers the arg dropped and extends C1.  Which diameter, please?

P1:  PRO argues that the Moon is 27.3% the size of the Earth
C1:  CON counters that this is not true using definitions of size such as surface area, volume or mass.  CON asks PRO to define size.
P2:  PRO re-iterates P1 without elaboration.
C2:  CON considers the arg dropped and extends C1.  What size do you mean?

P1: PRO claimed that a square has 27.32% more area than a circle with a diameter equal to one side of the square.
C1: CON proved mathematically and with links that any such square is only 21.5% larger.
P2:  PRO ignored CON's refutation.
C2:  CON extends C1

P1: PRO claimed the Great Pyramid's height to base ratio was 1.273:1
C1:  CON showed that the Pyramid's height to base ratio is 1.205:1
P2:  PRO ignores CON and argues
•    has a Mid-Base-Side to Apex length of the ‘golden ratio’ of Phi, and a Height equal to the square root of Phi
⁃    PRO must define Mid-base side and Apex.
⁃    but also….not 273, right?
•    has a Height of 14/11 (1.27273…)
⁃    14/11th of what?
⁃    but also….not 273
•    is constructed using a Circle with the same circumference as the sum of all four sides of it’s Square base, the circle is then interpolated as its Height, which is 4/Pi (1.27324…
⁃    one side of Giza = 230.34 m X4 =921.36m  So circle with circumference of 921.36m is "interpolated" (inserted) as Giza height.
⁃    height of Giza= 146.7m  PRO's point is unfathomable
C2:  CON extends C1

P1: PRO states that absolute zero is -273.15C,  but restates this is a number of different ways in different places to suggest multiple 273s.
C1: CON points out that rounding absolute zero distorts the meaning of the term & notes multiple definitions of Kelvin as if separate facts.
P2: PRO argues that a few decimal places should be rounded
C2: CON concedes that -273 is nearly absolute zero and fine for shorthand but not for measuring the universe.
•    CON still objects to the fluffing of multiple definitions of Kelvin to look like more than one fact.

P1: PRO states that the avg human pregnancy lasts 273 days
C1: CON cites wikipedia showing the avg human pregnancy lasts 280 days
P2:  PRO explains that he is multiplying lunar cycles by ten and seems unconcerned with the actual length of gestation.
C2:  CON extends C1

P1: PRO states human menstrual cycle = 27.3 days
C1: Con counters that human menstrual cycles are notoriously variable but average 28 days.
•    since menstrual cycles are counted by days with any flow, decimal is not meaningful
P2:  PRO argues that the .3 indicates minutes.
C2:  CON requires evidence from PRO that women typically note the minute their period has ended.

P1:  PRO claims that the asteroid belt to sun is 273 AU, Mercury to Venus is 273 AU and Venus to Earth is 273 AU.
C1:  CON explains that all these measurements are  wrong by two orders of magnitude.
P2:  PRO explains that CON is using the "Wrong AU" but does not explain what AU PRO is using
C2: What AU does PRO mean if not "astronomical unit."  The distance from the Earth to the Sun.

PRO has stated that CON "dropped a lot of points."  CON has shown here that CON refuted all of PRO's major points, however much scattered and erratic in presentation.  CON objects to PRO's statement as a tactic used in bad faith.  PRO knowingly misrepresents CON's conduct.

III.  New Points

Let's note that most of PRO's new arguments appear before the "New Points" header and are actually casually intermixed with old arguments to bewildering effect.

•    PRO argues that Avogadro's number was once expressed as 2.73 x 10^26 molecules per pound and cites a source called "hackingtheuniverse.com"
⁃    The weight of the US pound was derived from the weight of 7,000 grains of cereal in the court of Queen Elizabeth I and therefore, variable. [2]
⁃    For evidence of ID, units of measurement should be derived from universal constants- grams, for instance.
⁃    PRO offers an inaccurate and abandoned measurement as evidence of God's design.

•    PRO argues that lightning cycles every 27.3
•    PRO argues that atmospheric tides cycle every 27.3
⁃    PRO cites a youtube video about decoding the pyramid.  Does any meteorological source back this claim?
-    PRO evidence for lunar cycles that repeat every 27 or 28 days- but that's not 273.  PRO needs to show that these cycles repeat every 27.3 days.

•    PRO argues that major buildings and temples often use 273.
⁃    Human architecture can't be used as proof of non-human intelligence.  This argument is irrelevant.

When all the false and misleading arguments are dissmissed, PRO's case mostly amounts to two stats:  the Moon orbits the Earth every 27.321 and molecules stop moving at -273.16 degrees celsius.  Everything else here is either some reiteration of these stats, or some badly or needlessly or inaccurately rounded number to shoehorn close numbers into 273 or just plain wrong.

PRO has already said he does not intend to show why the Moon orbiting every 27.321 days is special to the Moon's hypothesized creator or why -273.16 can only be a number selected by God (and God alone- no other alternative creator will be considered by PRO).

CON expects that VOTERS will find this jumble of numbers unconvincing as proof of anything.  CON looks forward to PRO's R3 response.

Round 3
Pro
#5

273 is a perfect code computer people use to deblurr images.Gaussian blurr is based on a value of a mask in which is the code 273. which is the best known way to blur an image and deblur image.It is a code that makes stuff that are blurry clear and is a code that makes stuff blur together while still being intaacted. So 273 is a code that makes stuff perfect. Because it is a code that makes stuff perfect and not blurry.It must be the reason why God used it.It must be the code god used to create life

God connected many things with 2.73.Which is a perfect code.Computer people use 2.73 to de blur computers.

Burden of proof
Con is wondering why my god created life and not other ones.
What is God.God is the deity who created everything.If aliens created life then the aliens is god.If an intelligent being put us in the matrix and created life then that entity is god.Though i am pretty sure it is the god of the bible.Israel has been attacked by every country.Literally almost all nations on the planet want to kill Israel.China Russia all of the middle east. If the bible was not real. Almost Every country in the world would not be trying to kill a country that is 33 times smaller then Texas.Even the USA Obama gave a couple million dollars to the Palestinians to kill Israel.Plus the evidence for creation is of a kind creator.Giving to others can help with many disease's.This is proof of a soul And is specific to the god of the bible because this fits gods moral system.

Almost every country in the world is trying to destroy a country called Israel that is 33 times smaller then the state of Texas. This would not happen if the bible was not real.

2.73

I listed a bunch of examples of 2.73.Con has changed his tactics of instead trying to dismiss all of them.He want me to show how it lintels a god which i am happy to do.It would be Very hard for con to dismiss them all because a lot of them are just there and blunt. Literally there are people who spent life looking at 2.73 like averegro constant  and Charles law of heat expands at 273. 273 is a code that makes everything perfect according to Gausiann blur.

2.73

God connected many things with 2.73.Which is a perfect code.Computer people use 2.73 to de blur computers.

Moonatic is right

Summary of argument.Con did his own math with Wikipedia numbers in past debate.I debunk it.Con gets new site with numbers that are slightly different and does some more stupid math.I show that site does approve of my 2.73 constant and say if my 2.73 is so stupid why does your source support my 2.73.Con agrees but says that the other one is still wrong.Con did the same math that he used in the last one.Note con has shown that he is unreliable in showing the size of the moon in comparison of the earth.SO i dismiss con as unreliable.Since all site on the internet provided by experts say the moon circumference is 27.3 in comparison to the earth.Like al the internet sites say the moon circumference is 2.73 in comparison of the earth or they will say 27 plus.I counter that all of the internet is more reliable then con.

Argument 1
P1: PRO states human menstrual cycle = 27.3 days
C1: Con counters that human menstrual cycles are notoriously variable but average 28 days.
•    since menstrual cycles are counted by days with any flow, decimal is not meaningful
P2:  PRO argues that the .3 indicates minutes.
C2:  CON requires evidence from PRO that women typically note the minute their period has ended.
Side real months. There is no .3 of the day.It has to be minutes or a couple hours.Note it can not be 24 hours because that would not be .3

listen your rounding 28.Plus i said average not every female is going to have 27.3 days.Plus your number is nearly identical to mine since it is an average number.You actually validated it.

Argument 2
PRO states that the avg human pregnancy lasts 273 days
C1: CON cites wikipedia showing the avg human pregnancy lasts 280 days
P2:  PRO explains that he is multiplying lunar cycles by ten and seems unconcerned with the actual length of gestation.
C2:  CON extends C1
again a side real month is 27.3 days.If you times this buy 10 you get 273.A normal month is 30. side real is 27.3

AU

i screwed up if you look at video it is 0.273 and that kind of thing

Temperature.

I agree with the 273.15  is absolute zero in Celsius  state.Other temperature coincidentally go with 273 all of the one i have listed.Water freeze's at 273.15 Celsius

Con accuses me of dropping arguments and list a number thing even thought the original post was not numbered.He says that i accuse him of rebutting even though he says i did not list what to rebuttal.He only rebuttal a handful like 5 6 or 7 of my 273 examples.That first page alone listed 21 example's of 273
Pyramids

The angle was 2.73.Con spends half a page on saying the height is not 2.73 and makes a fool of himself by listing numbers that have nothing to do with it.

The three pyramids of giza were angled with 3 different different prevent angles.One was 27.3

Ancient weighting system are encoded in 273 and many Buddhist temples are encoded with 273

2.73 cycles

Lightning cycle of 2.73.He ignores it and makes a claim that he did not source it which is false.But here another site

Global Lightning Parameterization from CMIP5 Climate Model Output ... sonal cycle in global lightning activity with a minimum in ... 4 IPSL-CM5A-LR 1.88 3.75 2.73 1 ...

I extend my last source and extend my new one.

Here is an article where they found out that the lightning cycle is 27 days and the sunspot is 27 days cycle and they figured that tracking one tracks the other.

signals waxed and waned on a 27-day cycle
27.3 days on average.I linked my source.

Oramagi hate America.

he says the American system is unreliable.because queen Elisabeth created it to weigh her cereal. Cereal did not come to existence till 1800

averegro constant is called a constant.Because it is a constant 273 is a constant.Averregro measured stuff in pound moles.

if quantities of a substance are measured in pound-mole (lb-mol), then the Avogadro constant NA is 2.73159734(12)×1026

pounds moles are

The mole is the base unit of amount of substance in the International System of Units or System International, defined as containing exactly particles, e.g., atoms, molecules, ions or electrons

7

I forgot about the 7 thing.I don't want to do it anymore but the rainbow has 7 color's.Each color has the same saturation if you look at it.We do not have a dark blue with a light red.The red is the same saturation as the blue.There all the same shade.It would make since that he would do this.He litters the number 7 in the bible.7 days of creation.Joseph's  and his 7 year famine that Pharaoh’s Dreamed and 7 years of plenty..7years of the great tribulation.7 trumpets that blow before end times etc.

plus the rainbow is perfectly arched.From looking.Even tiny ones the rainbow is still arched perfectly.

Con

Something like 27.356785657. still prove my point watch video.He list many numbers like this.It does not change the fact that it is on purpose

Over to con

Con
#6
RESOLVED: The moon does take 27.3 to revolve around the earth and is 27.3 compared to the size of earth. the other 27.3 in other things count to. Will also talk about 7.

PRO's responsibility is to prove that the repetition of the number 273 in nature is evidence of intelligent design and ergo, God.  PRO must do more than merely recount instances of the number 273 in nature, PRO must demonstrate why the use of 273 is more intelligent than the use of say 272 or 274.  PRO must also demonstrate that an intelligently designed universe proves God as designer as opposed to alternative intelligences- hyper advanced aliens, for example, or a Matrix-type computer generated simulacrum universe for another.

In R3, PRO advises that no distinction will be offered between potential intelligent designers, essentially refusing to care about the motives or purposes of any set of creator(s)- evil machines or benevolent magicians, PRO simply doesn't care.

CON argues that PRO essentially concedes the debate by this refusal: how can PRO prove that iterations of 273 are of ontological significance without showing why 273 is meaningful to creation and its creators?  Put another way, PRO wants to prove that 273 is a secret code but refuses to decrypt that code or consider any potential content or even the codemakers'  likely intent.   CON suggests that the former is not possible without the latter- secret codes are not proven secret codes until they have been decrypted and their purpose discerned.

I. MOONATIC is RIGHT

P1: PRO argues that a user claiming telepathically derived authority correctly calculates the impossible odds against the Moon's natural occurance.
C1:  CON argued that humans have zero examples of exo-planetary moons from which to assess such odds and showed that we'd need hundreds before hoping for
some accurate estimation.
P2:  PRO merely claims without explanation that the telepath debunks CON's assertion regarding absence of exo-planetary moon data.
C2:  Extend C1
P3:  PRO re-uses the header without making any new reference to the claim.
C3:   Extend C1.
II. An (uncovincing) Juggle of Numbers

DROP #2

P1: PRO argues ratio of Earth to Moon's diameter is .273
C1: CON points out that neither are perfect spheres so PRO must specify which diameters used.

•    For example the ration of Earth to Moon's equatorial diameter is only .272

P2: PRO fails to specify, calls CON's math bad without elaboration.
C2: CON considers the arg dropped and extends C1.  Which diameter, please?
P3:  PRO calls CON's math stupid and question's CON's sources rather than answering CON's rational request for clarification.
• This is because PRO's cited ratio is only true under carefully cherry-picked diameters and not true for most Earth-Moon diameter comparisons.
C3: Extend C1.

DROP #3

P1:  PRO argues that the Moon is 27.3% the size of the Earth
C1:  CON counters that this is not true using definitions of size such as surface area, volume or mass.  CON asks PRO to define size.
P2:  PRO re-iterates P1 without elaboration.
C2:  CON considers the arg dropped and extends C1.  What size do you mean?
P3:  PRO ignores the direct question.
C3:  Extend C1

DROP #4

P1: PRO claimed that a square has 27.32% more area than a circle with a diameter equal to one side of the square.
C1: CON proved mathematically and with links that any such square is only 21.5% larger.
P2:  PRO ignored CON's refutation.
C2:  CON extends C1
P3:   Crickets chirping
C3:  Extend C1.

DROP #5

P1: PRO claimed the Great Pyramid's height to base ratio was 1.273:1
C1:  CON showed that the Pyramid's height to base ratio is 1.205:1
P2:  PRO ignores CON and argues
•    has a Mid-Base-Side to Apex length of the ‘golden ratio’ of Phi, and a Height equal to the square root of Phi
⁃    PRO must define Mid-base side and Apex.
⁃    but also….not 273, right?
•    has a Height of 14/11 (1.27273…)
⁃    14/11th of what?
⁃    but also….not 273
•    is constructed using a Circle with the same circumference as the sum of all four sides of it’s Square base, the circle is then interpolated as its Height, which is 4/Pi (1.27324…
⁃    one side of Giza = 230.34 m X4 =921.36m  So circle with circumference of 921.36m is "interpolated" (inserted) as Giza height.
⁃    height of Giza= 146.7m  PRO's point is unfathomable
C2:  CON extends C1
P3:   PRO argues:

"The three pyramids of giza were angled with 3 different different prevent angles.One was 27.3"
C3:  In R1 & R2, PRO specified the Great Pyramid of Giza, the measurement of which was used to refute PRO.
• PRO tries hide in a cloud of ambiguity by now claiming that one of the three pyramids is referenced but no longer specified.
• PRO needs to define the meaning of "prevent angle," no relevant definition can be found by CON.
OBJECTION:  If PRO wishes to change the object of a claim, PRO must specify the change.  Shifting to "well, there's some relevant proof in there somewhere" can only be considered tactical obfuscation.

• CON extends C1.
DROP #6

P1: PRO states that absolute zero is -273.15C,  but restates this is a number of different ways in different places to suggest multiple 273s.
C1: CON points out that rounding absolute zero distorts the meaning of the term & notes multiple definitions of Kelvin as if separate facts.
P2: PRO argues that a few decimal places should be rounded.
C2: CON concedes that -273 is nearly absolute zero and fine for shorthand but not for measuring the universe.
•    CON still objects to the fluffing of multiple definitions of Kelvin to look like more than one fact.
P3: PRO agrees that absolute zero is -273.15 not -273.  PRO ignores CON's complaint that many of PRO's examples of 273 are merely restatements of absolute zero (which is not quite 273).
C3:  Extend C1.

DROP #7

P1: PRO states that the avg human pregnancy lasts 273 days
C1: CON cites Wikipedia showing the avg human pregnancy lasts 280 days
P2:  PRO explains that he is multiplying lunar cycles by ten and seems unconcerned with the actual length of gestation.
C2:  CON extends C1
P3:  PRO continues to defend 273 day term without evidence.
C3:  Extend C1

DROP #8

P1: PRO states human menstrual cycle = 27.3 days
C1: Con counters that human menstrual cycles are notoriously variable but average 28 days.
•    since menstrual cycles are counted by days with any flow, decimal is not meaningful
P2:  PRO argues that the .3 indicates minutes.
C2:  CON requires evidence from PRO that women typically note the minute their period has ended.
P3:  PRO ignores CON's request and ridiculously asserts that 28 is close to 27.3.
P3:  Extend C1.  PRO has basically confirmed that PRO has no interest in incidences of precisely 273.  If PRO considers 28 the same thing as 273 then there are really a host of numbers that PRO should be willing to call evidence of 273.  2.73 can be rounded to 2 or 3 and the numbers 2 and 3 appear all over the place.

DROP #9

P1:  PRO claims that the asteroid belt to sun is 273 AU, Mercury to Venus is 273 AU and Venus to Earth is 273 AU.
C1:  CON explains that all these measurements are  wrong by two orders of magnitude.
P2:  PRO explains that CON is using the "Wrong AU" but does not explain what AU PRO is using
C2: What AU does PRO mean if not "astronomical unit."  The distance from the Earth to the Sun.
P3: PRO admits to "screwing up."
C3:  CON wonders why PRO won't just admit as much about all of these highly inaccurate claims.  Extend C1

• PRO claims 21 examples of 273.  In R2, PRO showed that once removed the inaccurate data and duplicate data we have two numbers that are not 273 but do contain those numbers in that sequence:   the Moon orbits the Earth every 27.321 and molecules stop moving at -273.16 degrees celsius.
III. COMPUTER PEOPLE USE 2.73 to de-BLUR COMPUTERS

• CON has worked as a Senior Systems Analyst @ Sun Microsystems, HP, and Oracle so I am computer people.  I have no idea what PRO means.
• 2.73 whats?
• I suspect PRO means degaussing but that process is essentially magnetic, not software.
• CON has not explained the claim sufficiently to warrant further refutation.
IV. LIGHTNING CYCLE

• FIRST SOURCE: So- at one of 17 sites monitored, average 2.73 mm/day precipitation.  PRO's number does not even measure a lightning cycle much less give us some clues about what a lightning cycle is.  CON is confident that if we measured avg. precipitation at many sites some of those sites would average 2.73 mm/day precipitation- far more sites than would average 2.73 then say 4.20 mm/day.  PRO is claiming as proof of God that there's a place that averages 2.73 mm/day rain.
• SECOND SOURCE: Is 27 day cycle, which
• refutes PRO's first source claim and also
• is not 273, is it?
V. OROMAGI HATE AMERICA

VI. CEREAL did NOT COME into EXISTENCE UNTIL 1800

• PRO is apparently unaware of the older senses of cereal:
1. A type of grass (such as wheat, rice or oats) cultivated for its edible grains.
2. The grains of such a grass.
3. Breakfast cereal.
• That is, Queen Elizabeth called 700 grains of wheat one pound.
• That's why Avogadro's Number is anachronistic, irrelevant.  Why would God be reflected in an inaccurate measurement?
VII. 7 (look! there's another seven! and another one!)

• PRO forgot about the "7 thing"
• CON begs PRO not to bother..
VIII.  RAINBOWS

• no

Round 4
Pro
#7
I said why 2.73 is important in the last round.2.73 is used to deblur computers.Let say i have a  red Dragon  as my screen saver but it is blurry and looks like an apple. But If i put 2.73 in my computer it unblurs my Red dragon picture and looks 4k.This is a thing.So 2.73 is the code for perfection

273 Unblur images and make them 4k. 273 can blur images without ruining them.If i put 272 in my computer it will not unblur the image.Only 273 can do that.

273 is used to perfectly blur an image and to perfectly unblur an image.

It does not need to be exactly 2.73 it could be 273757876555

I assume cons philosophy is that Wikipedia reliable because why would it be wrong.

All site on the internet agree with the 2.73 moon is 273 and takes 273.

Con got random numbers and got 272 something does his own math i debunk it then he gets numbers from another site and does the same thing.To keep this from going on forever.The sources that say this are more reliable then oramagi.The entire internet is more reliable then oramagi math.Note the site where oramagi got his nuber for his bad math universal today.Say the moon is 27.3 diameter compared to the earth.The site where he gets his numbers agree's with me.

See i got this from the same site oramagi used
The diameter of the Earth is 12,742 km, so the Moon's diameter is about 1/4 that of the Earth (27.3% to be exact). Need another comparison? ... This makes it about 1.5 times larger than the Moon ...

Like most objects in the Solar System, the Moon spins on its axis, completing a day in 27.3 Earth days

So it takes the moon 27.3 to go around the earth and is 27.3 the size of the earth

Notice this is the same exact site to where oramagi got his numbers. Oramagi got his numbers from universal today.The same site which confirms what is said.Stop ###### me

The ratio of Earth’s diameter to Moon’s diameter is 0.273.
ormagi said
Depends on where you take the measurement.
Oramagi numbers
• The Earth's equatorial diameter is 12,756 km[2] THis site uses universaltoday same site that says my 273 is true,
• The Moon's equatorial diameter is  3,474 km. [3]
Con got his numbers from the same site that says the moon is 27.3 diameter compared to the earth.Universal today his own site debunks his garbage math.

The diameter of the Moon is 3,474 km. (Diameter of the Moon in miles: 2,159 miles)
Need to put this in context? The diameter of the Earth is 12,742 km, so the Moon’s diameter is about 1/4 that of the Earth (27.3% to be exact) From universlatoday

pyramid.

oramagi math has nothing to do with the pyramids what i am saying.I have put the section in google docs for your convenience's

birth side real months
pregnecy.The average pregnecy is 273 in Side Real months.Not normal months.Same with menstrual cycle

Averegro did not use American pounds.

AU
.273
decimal

Extended points

Sidereal pregnancy

i said
273 days = average length of pregnancy (10 sidereal months).

con said
• This is inaccurate.  Wikipedia advises:
con said
"Childbirth on average occurs at a gestational age of 280 days[8]
My reply side real months times this by 10.

The length of the sidereal month is 27.321 days or 27 days

Lightning cycles
Again they use sunspot cycle to track lightning cycle because they are dialed exactly the same.

Rainbow

??????

Temperature

the tempeture's are all dialed with 273.SOme our 273.15 but all have 273.

Averegro used pound moles not American pounds

pounds moles are

The mole is the base unit of amount of substance in the International System of Units or System International, defined as containing exactly particles, e.g., atoms, molecules, ions or electrons

Con
#8
DROP #1

P4:   No new arg
C4:   Extend C1

DROP #2

P1: PRO argues Moon-Earth diameter ratio is .273
C1: CON points out that neither are perfect spheres so PRO must specify which diameters used.

•    For example the ratio of Earth to Moon's equatorial diameter is only .272

P2: PRO fails to specify, calls CON's math bad without elaboration.
C2: CON considers the arg dropped and extends C1.  Which diameter, please?
P3:  PRO calls CON's math stupid and question's CON's sources rather than answering CON's rational request for clarification.
• This is because PRO's cited ratio is only true under carefully cherry-picked diameters and not true for most Earth-Moon diameter comparisons.
C3: Extend C1.
P4:  PRO simply fails to comprehend a very simple point: because the Moon and the Earth are not perfect spheres the measure of either body's diameter will differ according to the angle of the measurement.
C4: Because PRO does not comprehend, PRO has failed to specify which angle(s) allow for the desired ratio to prove true.
So while the equatorial diameter does not round up to the desired ratio number, the polar diameter does.  PRO's argument that Universe Today contradicts CON's stats/math for equatorial diameter ratio is false.  Universe Today is using a general, rounded number while CON is examining one specific measurement.  Both statistics are proved to be true.

DROP #3

P4: PRO fails to comprehend that "size" could indicate a number of measurements, almost none of which work out to the Earth-Moon ratio desired by PRO.  The Moon in not 27.3% of Earth in terms of surface area, volume, mass or a host of other measurements.
C4: Extend C1

DROP #4

P4: Crickets chirping
C4:  Extend C1.

DROP #5

P4:  Rather than explain or argue, PRO cut and pastes source form R1 into a google doc.
C4:  In short, if VOTERS will scan this pile of nonsense, VOTERS will note that the numbers 273 appear only once and only a sequence within a very different number: 1.2732395. That number is not derived from Egypt's pyramids and is merely the result of dividing 4 by Pi.  Essentially, PRO is only saying that when one divides the number 4 by Pi, one gets an irrational number that does contain 2 and 7 and 3 in sequence.  Entirely unimpressive and entirely disconnected from the pyramids.  This argument should be ignored as pure gobbledy-gook.

DROP #6

P4:  PRO and CON agree that zero Kelvin is -273.15.  Con has complained that PRO fluffed his arguments by making variations on this one fact look like indepdendent arguments (for example:  "Water changes phases at 273 degrees Kelvin" or "Gasses expand by 1/273 of their volume with every degree on the Celsius scale"  these are only consequence of the same measurement: " zero Kelvin is -273.15" and not an independent fact or measurement.
C4:  PRO has ignored CON's complaint.

DROP #7

P4:  PRO merely repeats that the average length of human pregnancy is 273 days without any medical citations.
C4:  Using sidereal months does not change the number of day in the average human pregnancy which is 280 days.

DROP #8

P4:  PRO drops menstrual cycle arguments
C4   Extend C3 argument.

DROP #9

P4:  PRO drops AU claims after CON demonstrate falsehood
C4:  Extend prior arguments.

DROP #10

P4: PRO failed to confirm or deny if the subject was
• degaussing
• hardware or
• software.
C4: Extend C3 argument.  PRO's argument in undecipherable at present.  CON expects that PRO is arguing that the three numbers appear in sequence somewhere in some image processing code but CON is unable to find some universal application for the number 273 in image processing.

DROP #11

P4:  PRO offered a paper from a  wherin 2.73 represented avg daily precipitation at one of 17 locations.  A totally unimpressive and cherry picked stat.  PRo offered a second paper that notes that sunspot cycles vary wildly but average approximately 27 days.

• PRO claims 21 examples of 273.  In R2, PRO showed that once removed the inaccurate data and duplicate data we have two numbers that are not 273 but do contain those numbers in that sequence:   the Moon orbits the Earth every 27.321 and molecules stop moving at -273.16 degrees celsius.
C4: Extend C3.  PRO's methodology is little more than scattershot selection.  Yes, if we google "273" we are going to find those three common numbers in sequence fairly often.  To match PRO's claim of intelligent code, PRO must show how these occurrences of 273 are surprising or unusual.  Just finding a natural cycle that repeats every 27 days is not going to prove ID

DROP #12

P4:  PRO did not continue the accusation that CON "hates America" after the ad hominem was met with CON's objection.

C4:  PRO's argument was never deciphered and should be safely ignored.

DROP #13

P4:  PRO argues that Avogadro used the English pound, not US.
• In 1811 the US standard pound and the UK pound were identical by weight.
• CON's argument that the number is anachronistic and inaccurate and therefore ineligible as evidence of intelligent design is not countered by PRO's claim.
C4:  No contradicting evidence presented.  Extend C3.

DROP #14

P4:  The number 7 was not presented as evidence of ID.
C4:  The number 7 can be safely disregarded as evidence of ID.

DROP #15

P4:  Rainbows were not presented as evidence of ID.
C4:  Rainbows can be safely disregarded as evidence of ID.

Round 5
Pro
#9

For example the ratio of Earth to Moon's equatorial diameter is only .272

no its not.Con got his numbers from universal today.com

• The Earth's equatorial diameter is 12,756 km[2]
• The Moon's equatorial diameter is  3,474 km. [3]
3474/12756=0.2723
Con did his own math with numbers from universal-today.com he divided the moon diameter from the earths diameter.Con clearly screwed up because the very site he god his numbers says the moon is 27.3 compared to the earth.

The site where he got his numbers literally says i am right.

he got his 12.756 km number from universal today

The problem is universaltoday.com agrees with what i saying.

The diameter of the Earth is 12,742 km, so the Moon's diameter is about 1/4 that of the Earth (27.3% to be exact). Need another comparison? ... This makes it about 1.5 times larger than the Moon ...

Like most objects in the Solar System, the Moon spins on its axis, completing a day in 27.3 Earth days

Oramagi is doing fraud.The own site universal today agrees with me that the moon is 27.3 percent the size and the earth and say it is an exact number.He got his numbers from 27.3

point 5
: 1.2732395

Con agrees with my : 1.2732395 number. 273 was built into it extend

Con says i  dropped arguments.The only one dropping argument is him.Since he does not have an argument now since universal today{the site where he got his own numbers says the moon is 27.3 compared to the earth] he says he needs new numbers that have nothing to do with it.The site he

Point math

Con brought up some numbers from universaltoday.com. I brought up a page where universaltodays says the moon is 27.3 diameter compared to the earth. Now con wants me to find measurements that have nothing to do with it for him.This is cons job.

Oramagi new point

Moon is not a perfect circle.Thus we can not find diameter.You can find diameter of objects that are not perfect circles

Au.

the 273 is actually .273 i did not drop

Hate america.

Con bashed american measuring system and claimed averegregro used american measurments. He did not he used the international one

P4:  PRO argues that Avogadro used the English pound, not US.
• In 1811 the US standard pound and the UK pound were identical by weight.
• CON's argument that the number is anachronistic and inaccurate and therefore ineligible as evidence of intelligent design is not countered by PRO's claim.
C4:  No contradicting evidence presented.  Extend

He used an international measuring system.Not one that was invented for queen Elsbeth food.

7 rainbow.

THis is intresting since rainbow is suppose to represent gods promise not to destroy the earth so it is a little convenient that he uses 7.Whenever god has an opportunity he uses 7.Most of this is by memory.

7 years of famon with pharo's dream

7 years of abundance with pharo's dream

it took 7 days for gods to completely flood the earth

God had 7 of each animal enter Noah ark.

7 days of creation

7 years of tribulation.

7 lights from the sun according to the book of enoch.There are 7 lights from sun that makes a rainbow.Wonder if that is what it is talking about

Forgive debt after 7 years

revenge on Cain would be 7 fold by god

he used 7 every time he says a commandment

7 trumpets

erse 1. - Seven women shall take hold of one man. This verse has been well called a "companion picture to Isaiah 3:6, 7."As there, in the evil time of God's judgment, the

God uses 7 every time. He speaks.It probably is not a coincidence that the bible.It is cons job to find his math numbers not mine. I provided what i needed to provide

Drop 6

Con agrees with the 273 in temperature.But says it is how we meausre them. I don't know what he is saying.

Drop 7

273 is used to perfectly de blur an image. COn does not understand. I have tryed to explain.The only way he would understand is if he watched the video

Con
#10
thx, crossed

PRO never presented a truly contestable assertion for PRO to prove and CON to disprove.  The closest we have comes from R2:

"Pro prove that there are 2.73 numbers and that god did it.Con there are no 2.73 numbers. Or there are 2.73 numbers but it has nothing to do with God.Your choice.Proof of god would be intelligent design. This debate is not weather the intelligent design is aliens or something."
PRO's responsibility was to prove that the repetition of the number 273 in nature is so astonishing and persistent that repetition serves as evidence of intelligent design and ergo, God.   But, PRO advised that no distinction would be offered between potential intelligent designers, essentially refusing to care about the motives or purposes of any set of creator(s)- evil machines or benevolent magicians, PRO simply doesn't care.

CON argued in R3 that PRO essentially conceded the debate by this refusal: how can PRO prove that iterations of 273 are of ontological significance without showing why 273 is meaningful to creation and its creators?  Put another way, PRO wants to prove that 273 is a secret code but refuses to decrypt that code or consider any potential content or even the codemakers'  likely intent.   CON suggests that the former is not possible without the latter- secret codes are not proven secret codes until they have been decrypted and their purpose discerned.

In lieu of any explanation, PRO simply offered a gish gallop of examples, rife with inconsistent rounding, deceptive repititions and bewildering nonsense.  PRO never gets around to saying anything like "look at all theses examples where the number 7 is preceded by a 2 and followed by a 3!  The normal rate of occurrence of for any three digit number in the measurement of all natural phenomenon is something like X but this particular combination occurs with unexpected frequency."  Reading between the lines of PRO's gooey prose we can assume that PRO believes that there is something unexpected about finding this combination when measuring absolute zero or measuring the equatorial diameter of the Moon but PRO seems to have no information about normal rates of occurrences of three digit numbers.

I very much doubt, for example, that 273 occurs more frequently in our measurements than its near neighbor 270.  270 is divisible by 10 in a base 10 system.  270 degrees describes a right angle in geometry.  In math theory, 270 is a harmonic divisor, a practical number and a Harshad number.  Therefore, I assume that if we compiled many astronomical measurements, 270 would appear more often than 273.  IF 273 appeared far more often than numbers that should be predictably more frequent, PRO might have some kind of case.  But PRO does no such research nor makes any such claim.   PRO simply cherry picks a few actual occurrences of 273 when measuring absolute zero or the Moon then fluffs the numbers with a lot of misinformation, inconsistent rounding, bad math and pure hokum.  Here's a summary of PRO's many arguments:

Moonatic

A self-proclaimed telepath claimed in a comments section that the odds that our Moon could have the same series of numbers describing sidereal period (27.3 days) and diameter ratio to the Earth (.2727) are so unlikely that the Moon therefore must be an alien observation post.  CON argued that we'd need to observe many more moons before we could know what the odds were.  PRO ignored this argument.

Moon-Earth diameter ratio is .273

This is true for mean diameter, polar diameter and untrue for equatorial diameter as shown by CON R1.  CON never comprehended the notion that two imperfect spheres can have a variable ratio between diameters depending on where the diameter is measured.  As late as R5, PRO irrelevantly insists that imperfect circles have diameters and that one source confirms mean diameter.  Since the number is variable how can we know which variable should be selected to represent God's code and which variables ought to be disregarded as less important?  Nevertheless, CON concedes the point as generally true.

The Moon is 27.3% the size of Earth

If the Moon were 2 dimensional, this would be roughly true but size also means volume (Moon is 2% Earth's volume) and mass (The earth weighs 81.5 times as much as the Moon).

Squaring a Circle

PRO claimed that a square has 27.32% more area than a circle with a diameter equal to one side of the square.  CON proved mathematically and with links that any such square is only 21.5% larger after which PRO dropped this argument.

Pyramids

PRO claimed that Ancient Pyramids at Giza were built using 273.  After a lot of mumbo-jumbo this amounted to the notion that if one divides 4 by Pi you get 1.2738.  If we lob of the number before the decimal and don't round then yes,  we do see the numbers 273 in sequence but this hardly seems significant.

Kelvin

PRO and CON agree that 0 Kelvin is expressed in Celsius as -273.15.  PRO stated this fact six different ways in an effort to look like six different arguments.

-273.2 degrees Celsius is the temperature of Absolute Zero
27.32 is the freezing point of water on Kelvin scale (K)
Absolute zero of water is 273.2% colder than the temperature it takes to boil.
The triple point of water is defined to take place at 273.16 K.
1/273.2 per C is the expansion/reduction of gas (Gasses expand by 1/273 of their volume with every degree on the Celsius/centigrade scale).
Water  changes  phase  at  273°K.
Avg. Pregnancy = 273 days

PRO never this claim with evidence.  CON used sources to support 280 days.

Avg. menstrual cycle = 27.3 days

PRO never supported this claim with evidence.  CON used sources to support 28 days.

AU

PRO inaccurately claimed
• the distance from Asteroid belt => Sun = 273AU  (actually between 2.2 and 3.2 AU),
• the distance from Mercury => Venus = 273AU (closest at .32AU)
• the distance from Venus => Earth (closest at .28 AU)
In R5, PRO corrects the number to .273AU which is still rounding error off from being accurate for the third claim and utterly wrong for the first two claims.

The number 273 perfectly deblurs a digital image

Neither PRO nor the recommended YouTube video explained the mechanism of this claim or provided an example.  VOTERS should judge whether this claim has any merit but CON was unable to discern PRO's meaning.

The cycle of lightning is 27.3

For evidence, PRO offered a paper which records 2.73mm of precipitation at one location where lightning was observed.  PRO offered no follow up.

If the Avogadro Constant is expressed in the archaic form of pound-moles, then the estimated number of constituent particles begins with 273.  CON points out that pound-moles do not reflect a universal constant and are therefore not useful to science.  That is, any proposed intelligent design would be expressed in universal constants like meters and grams, not feet and pounds which reflect archaic measuring systems rife with inconsistency.  PRO is saying that if we make a less accurate count, we arrive at God's perfect number which would not be discovered in an accurate count.  CON submits this as further evidence of deliberate distortion to support PRO's claim.

The number 7 often appears in the Bible

Given the frequency of the number in every life and the popularity of the number seven as lucky in most Western cultures this should not be surprising- Pleiades, Hydra heads, Wonders of the World, Agamemnon gifts Achilles 7 towns and 7 women.

PRO argues that rainbows have seven colors although this claim is not always true and the division of colors is both arbitrary and an artifact of human eyesight.  That is, humans eyes often see 6 or seven bands but by definition, a spectrum of light varies across a continuum without discrete division.  A color blind eye might see two or three bands.  A very sophisticated spectrum analysis might discern hundreds of discrete color bands.

Earth and Moon orbital periods are reciprocals.

PRO's math was only true if a sidereal year= 366 days but sidereal year = 365.242 days.  When this was pointed out, PRO dropped the argument.

Sun's acceleration = 273 m/s2

Depends on location, but using Wikipedia's surface gravity number = 274.6 m/s.  PRO made no reply

Moon's acceration = .273cm/s2

Way off.  Wikipedia has this number att 1.625 m/s2.

CONCLUSION

CON argues that once we strip away all the bad rounding, duplication, gross inaccuracies, and unparsable statements we are left with one interesting coincidence: that the Moon's sidereal orbital period expressed in days on Earth is fairly approximate to the ratio of mean diameters when the Moon is compared to the Earth- both can be rounded to 27.3.  Furthermore, absolute zero can be expressed in Celsius as 273.15 which is a different number than 273 but does contain the same three numbers in the same order.  CON would not go so far as to call this a numerical coincidence.  VOTERS should remember that the Moon's orbit and size are dynamic- those numbers were not true one billion years ago and won't likely be true one billion years from now.  If 273 is meant to be a signal from some intelligent designer for mankind to interpret, would not an intelligent designer use constant values to ensure reception?

Everything else claimed by PRO has been demonstrated to be more or less bullshit.

If VOTERS find these 3 data points unconvincing evidence of design, please VOTE CON for better arguments.

If VOTERS find PRO's sources harmed PRO's case (i.e. citing telepathically-derivied opinion as evidence) please VOTE CON for better sources.

If VOTERS find PRO's sentence structure and random organization harmed PRO's case, please VOTE CON for better S & G.

Thanks again to crossed for instigating and thanks to all VOTERS for their kind consideration.