help with a debate please
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-12-2012, 07:53 AM
help with a debate please
I'm currently being ranted at on facebook by some god fearing christians who are throwing all sorts of nonsense at me. Some help with a response would be gratefulyl appreciated, here's their last post to me:

THEM:
@Paul what have you noticed then through 'observable science' then? Because you sure haven't observed any 'evolution' excluding 'micro evo' in your observations. Why are there still comets 'in your observations', what about galaxies why are they here, they shouldn't even exist in your world view, what about the moon, the moon is moving away from the earths gravitational pull at 2inchs a year do some maths and work out how many years back it would go before it would have destroyed the earth?
Let me know what you find I look forward to your response Smile GB

ME
Law of large numbers: If it can happen, given enough opportunity, it will happen.
Parsimony: All of this is satisfactorily explained without a "god-thing."
Inverted thinking/Circular reasoning: It didn't come about for us, we came about adapting to it. (It only proves god if we presume humanity was a goal, which needs a god to have the goal. Oh no! Circular dizzy!)
Reductio ad absurdum: So, god made kitchens for cockroaches, then?
Philosophical/Psychological: If god is about faith, why are you so interested in proof?

THEM:
I'm out and only giving quick responses, there is no evidence for homo genus it's all been made up ie Nebraska man, the neanderthal man etc also how do you explain oopas (out of place artifacts)
How are they measuring millions of years?
We have proof of God in the world around Romans 1:20 "for since the beginning Gods invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made even his eternal Godhead and power so that all are without excuse"
If you look closer there is intelligent design all around, beauty throughout the world, if we have evolved how do you account for our concept of beauty and conscience
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2012, 09:40 AM
RE: help with a debate please
There is no point in trying to rationalize with the irrational. You can quote and cite the millions of books that would disprove any existence of any deity to no avail. Their book is the word of god and no matter how much the evidence stacks against it to them it will always be THE truth. The majority of them will not bother to look, learn and use that inquiring mind that humans have evolved to seek truths, to overcome problems and to question everything. Thus they will continue to live in the dark ages, living in fear of judgement day and the possibilty that they will burn for eternity.
You are living in the age of enlightenment where the truth can be accepted without fear of divine retribution.... Peace my friend
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2012, 10:13 AM
RE: help with a debate please
Starlight is the great equalizer to YECs.

But the burden of proof on them to explain traveling starlight... and not with YEC broscience... but with legitimate science.

Also, ask them to explained radiometric dating... if they throw the "carbon dating isn't accurate" failsafe on you, just say "I'm not talking about carbon dating, but radio metric dating. Radioactive isotopes have a half life that is extremely accurate and a property of radioactive decay."

Again, ask them to explain these without using YEC broscience.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2012, 10:14 AM
RE: help with a debate please
(11-12-2012 10:13 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Starlight is the great equalizer to YECs.

But the burden of proof on them to explain traveling starlight... and not with YEC broscience... but with legitimate science.

Also, ask them to explained radiometric dating... if they throw the "carbon dating isn't accurate" failsafe on you, just say "I'm not talking about carbon dating, but radio metric dating. Radioactive isotopes have a half life that is extremely accurate and a property of radioactive decay."

Again, ask them to explain these without using YEC broscience.


Carbon dating is radiometric dating. One of many.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2012, 10:17 AM
RE: help with a debate please
(11-12-2012 10:13 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Starlight is the great equalizer to YECs.

But the burden of proof on them to explain traveling starlight... and not with YEC broscience... but with legitimate science.

Also, ask them to explained radiometric dating... if they throw the "carbon dating isn't accurate" failsafe on you, just say "I'm not talking about carbon dating, but radio metric dating. Radioactive isotopes have a half life that is extremely accurate and a property of radioactive decay."

Again, ask them to explain these without using YEC broscience.
It's all basically just Last Thursdayism. And since Last Thursdayism is unfalsifiable, it is, by definition, not scientific.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2012, 10:21 AM
RE: help with a debate please
(11-12-2012 10:14 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-12-2012 10:13 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Starlight is the great equalizer to YECs.

But the burden of proof on them to explain traveling starlight... and not with YEC broscience... but with legitimate science.

Also, ask them to explained radiometric dating... if they throw the "carbon dating isn't accurate" failsafe on you, just say "I'm not talking about carbon dating, but radio metric dating. Radioactive isotopes have a half life that is extremely accurate and a property of radioactive decay."

Again, ask them to explain these without using YEC broscience.


Carbon dating is radiometric dating. One of many.
I know. Carbon dating isn't as accurate as others, though. I was being as layman as possible.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2012, 10:58 AM
RE: help with a debate please
(11-12-2012 10:17 AM)pianodwarf Wrote:  
(11-12-2012 10:13 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Starlight is the great equalizer to YECs.

But the burden of proof on them to explain traveling starlight... and not with YEC broscience... but with legitimate science.

Also, ask them to explained radiometric dating... if they throw the "carbon dating isn't accurate" failsafe on you, just say "I'm not talking about carbon dating, but radio metric dating. Radioactive isotopes have a half life that is extremely accurate and a property of radioactive decay."

Again, ask them to explain these without using YEC broscience.
It's all basically just Last Thursdayism. And since Last Thursdayism is unfalsifiable, it is, by definition, not scientific.
Which is bunk according to scripture.

1 Cor 14:33
33 for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

Titus 1:2
2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago


So, OP, if they throw a Last Thursdayism at you, quote those verses.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2012, 11:41 AM
RE: help with a debate please
(11-12-2012 07:53 AM)paulhe Wrote:  @Paul what have you noticed then through 'observable science' then? Because you sure haven't observed any 'evolution' excluding 'micro evo' in your observations. Why are there still comets 'in your observations', what about galaxies why are they here, they shouldn't even exist in your world view, what about the moon, the moon is moving away from the earths gravitational pull at 2inchs a year do some maths and work out how many years back it would go before it would have destroyed the earth?
Let me know what you find I look forward to your response Smile GB

What? Dodgy I don't like to make fun of the ignorant.... but insular dolts are fair game.

There are various theories about how the Moon came to be but recent evidence indicates it formed when a huge collision tore a chunk of the Earth away. The giant impact knocked off the raw ingredients for the moon off the primitive molten Earth and into orbit. Scientists have suggested the impactor was roughly 10 percent the mass of Earth, about the size of Mars.
Here's a nice video about that encounter.

Your facebook "friend" is a dumb shit. I would advise "unfriending" but you might want to keep these kind around... they just might learn something.

***
Consider This is interesting... I have noticed that people who use "science" (fake stats and all) in this bass-akward way, always seem to use it to describe shit from the past. Why don't they use it to describe probabilities, the way scientists do? Maybe it's because they can't face the idea that the planet will one day lose it's atmosphere and will cease to provide life. I guess it makes them see the futility of their god. Undecided

Maybe they dwell in the bronze age because they have no forward vision... that is the shit that got them kicked out of Paradise, don't they get that? Once again; I have to question the reading comprehension of the religiously inclined. Maybe they should take a class or something. Undecided

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: