2 questions for creationists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-12-2013, 07:23 PM
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 07:10 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(06-12-2013 06:52 PM)djkamilo Wrote:  The issue with YEC's will always be that they start with a theological assertion and will only listen to 'science' that supports it. Take away the theological assertion and you have ears and eyes opened to actual science.
Read up on the dating of KNM-ER 1470 and the KBS tuff. Scientists started with an evolutionary assertion and only accepted the 'science' that supported it. That's not a theist or atheist trait, it's a human trait.
Ok? I did, I fail to see your point. How do they support YEC? How does astronomy and astrophysics support YEC? How does paleontology? Geology?

“The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is because vampires are allergic to bullshit.” ― Richard Pryor
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2013, 07:33 PM (This post was last modified: 06-12-2013 07:58 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: 2 questions for creationists
All the dating systems, (dendritic, ice cores, geological), all the forms of radiometric dating, and every other dating system produces generally the same dates. The probability they could all , independently, be wrong, and still produce the same wrong dates, is zero.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ght?page=9 (see post 83).
YECism is simply ignorant bullshit, which NO reputable scientist entertains for 2 seconds.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
06-12-2013, 07:43 PM
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 03:37 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Robby, which is why I usually ask them to explain RMD but not carbon dating since it's not the most accurate.

I've never gotten an answer.

I think most of them think carbon dating = all radiometric dating.

Good point. Most YECs I talk to either just accept it on faith and refuse to talk about sciency stuff or they parrot stuff they've heard/read elsewhere. I have met a few who actually are able to spout some pretty impressive (but still wrong) stuff about varying rates of radioactive decay (which makes RMD date the world to 6,000 years!), gravity not existing and geocentricm.


(06-12-2013 03:48 PM)alpha male Wrote:  I.e., the universe is evidence of a creator god. Paul also notes this in Romans 1.

That's only evidence of a creator god if you assume a creator god exists in the first place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2013, 08:35 PM
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 05:06 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(06-12-2013 04:19 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Thus proving my point.
If that's the best you can communicate your point, it's no surprise we YECs are still around. From here, it seems like you screwed up and are now avoiding it.

Oh for crying out loud...

Carbon dating is best and highly accurate for shorter time frames which is why YECs derp about it not being accurate for longer period of times... but then there's... ummm... some uranium one that's extremely accurate for up to 2M years for larger time frame, sec... let me look...

Wait... no. YOU LOOK. You look it up. I'm not getting into a battle of ignorance over this again. There are globs and globs of evidence and actual scientific journals and studies on this. Everywhere. The fact that this is even still a "debate" is mind boggling. It's a real as gravity.

And here. I was nice. I looked some things up. Click here.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like kingschosen's post
06-12-2013, 08:40 PM
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 08:35 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(06-12-2013 05:06 PM)alpha male Wrote:  If that's the best you can communicate your point, it's no surprise we YECs are still around. From here, it seems like you screwed up and are now avoiding it.

Oh for crying out loud...

Carbon dating is best and highly accurate for shorter time frames which is why YECs derp about it not being accurate for longer period of times... but then there's... ummm... some uranium one that's extremely accurate for up to 2M years for larger time frame, sec... let me look...

Wait... no. YOU LOOK. You look it up. I'm not getting into a battle of ignorance over this again. There are globs and globs of evidence and actual scientific journals and studies on this. Everywhere. The fact that this is even still a "debate" is mind boggling. It's a real as gravity.

And here. I was nice. I looked some things up. Click here.

Don't bother with this one obvious troll and a waste of time. He whines that people are arrogant but will not bother with anything of substance. Let him wallow in his arrogant ignorance.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2013, 08:52 PM
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 06:54 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(06-12-2013 06:11 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Sorry bro but for the Universe to be 6000 years old everything in modern science has to be wrong.
No, there are plenty of areas of science that do not depend on the age of the universe.
Quote:Sticking your head in the sand is stupid and I'm not going to coddle someone too arrogant to admit that they could be wrong.
I never refused to admit that I could be wrong. You're projecting your own arrogance, and it's unfounded. So far you're nothing but hot air and false bravado. That may play on an atheist forum where you're in the majority, but it's no wonder you're not good at convincing skeptics in other environments.

Name 1 branch of science that would not have to be fundamentally wrong in things that for them to be wrong about would make consistent results impossible if science is off on the age of the universe by as much as it would have to be for the universe to be 6000 years old.. Just 1 branch and I will consider remove the fundie troll label.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2013, 09:09 PM
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 08:40 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(06-12-2013 08:35 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Oh for crying out loud...

Carbon dating is best and highly accurate for shorter time frames which is why YECs derp about it not being accurate for longer period of times... but then there's... ummm... some uranium one that's extremely accurate for up to 2M years for larger time frame, sec... let me look...

Wait... no. YOU LOOK. You look it up. I'm not getting into a battle of ignorance over this again. There are globs and globs of evidence and actual scientific journals and studies on this. Everywhere. The fact that this is even still a "debate" is mind boggling. It's a real as gravity.

And here. I was nice. I looked some things up. Click here.

Don't bother with this one obvious troll and a waste of time. He whines that people are arrogant but will not bother with anything of substance. Let him wallow in his arrogant ignorance.

Maybo so. But, I don't think he's trolling. I think he's closed to his beliefs.

I was there too, man. When I was a YEC, I reveled in pseudoscienced and ate it up.

We're taught that evolution is anti-Christian. We're taught the area of science that deals with evolution is mostly made up and inaccurate. We're taught evolution teaches circular reasoning: how do you date dinosaur bones? By looking at the rocks. How do you date the rocks? By looking at the dinosaur bones.

har har har

And we all laugh.

By the way, that was an actual quote by Hamsammich when he came to my school to speak... I took notes -_-

We're taught that if there's evolution, then there can be no inerrant scripture thus destroy God.

When I finally realized that we can definitely have God, the Bible, and evolution all in one, it made things a lot easier.

It was an obvious path for me... othersl not so much.

I say all that to say that I don't think he's here to be open to science. I think he's here to gather arguments and come up with "good enough" YEC rebuttals to fool the common man during face-to-face conversation.

Without someone being able to look things up and fact check his YEC "science", some of it can sound pretty convincing.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2013, 09:26 PM (This post was last modified: 06-12-2013 09:29 PM by RobbyPants.)
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 08:40 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Don't bother with this one obvious troll and a waste of time. He whines that people are arrogant but will not bother with anything of substance. Let him wallow in his arrogant ignorance.

I don't think alpha is trolling. In all honestly, back when I was still Christian yet believed in science, I didn't know where to place my belief when I would hear two different people fervently claiming contradictory things.

Edit: Ninja'd by KC.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
06-12-2013, 09:37 PM
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 09:26 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(06-12-2013 08:40 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Don't bother with this one obvious troll and a waste of time. He whines that people are arrogant but will not bother with anything of substance. Let him wallow in his arrogant ignorance.

I don't think alpha is trolling. In all honestly, back when I was still Christian yet believed in science, I didn't know where to place my belief when I would hear two different people fervently claiming contradictory things.

Maybe, but YEC is the most intellectually dishonest position in the world. It falls apart with any inspection, every field in science refutes it because they all depend on something that requires the universe to be older than 6000 years. I'm not even talking about evolution, I understand how someone who has been lied to about what evolution is can think it is faulty, I'm talking about Nuclear Physics, Electricity requires an old universe to function the way it does. The computer he is sitting at requires a 13.798±0.037 billion years year old universe to function correctly because of the base theories that were followed to make it work. It has no legs and in this day and age with google right there it is inexcusable to be spouting that level of hypocritical bullshit.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
06-12-2013, 09:43 PM
RE: 2 questions for creationists
(06-12-2013 09:37 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(06-12-2013 09:26 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  I don't think alpha is trolling. In all honestly, back when I was still Christian yet believed in science, I didn't know where to place my belief when I would hear two different people fervently claiming contradictory things.

Maybe, but YEC is the most intellectually dishonest position in the world. It falls apart with any inspection, every field in science refutes it because they all depend on something that requires the universe to be older than 6000 years. I'm not even talking about evolution, I understand how someone who has been lied to about what evolution is can think it is faulty, I'm talking about Nuclear Physics, Electricity requires an old universe to function the way it does. The computer he is sitting at requires a 13.798±0.037 billion years year old universe to function correctly because of the base theories that were followed to make it work. It has no legs and in this day and age with google right there it is inexcusable to be spouting that level of hypocritical bullshit.

Oh, I agree, but there's a difference between trolling yourself (so to speak) and trolling others. Christianity has a lot of defense mechanisms built into it. If you fail to penetrate even one of them, you will not break free. I know. It took me years.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: