(January 8, 2012 at 2:37 am)chipan Wrote:

Minimalist Wrote:You are a walking testament to the argument from authority. You'll fall for anything that someone tells you which happens to be what you want to hear.

it's not so easy to write someone out of history.

Yet xtianity does it with great aplomb.

Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:That wasn't what I said at all. You were right about the the basics behind C14 dating. The underlying argument (that it is inaccurate, and the reasons you gave) were wrong. As that's what you based your argument on, I'd have a hard time saying your argument was "mostly right".

no, i'm not saying my argument is mostly right, i'm saying my facts are mostly right. these people are saying i'm stupid and don't know anything but i was mostly right on the process according to you. thank you for giving me some credit and not saying i don't know what i'm talking about and need to go back to science 101 like these other closed mined people.

(January 8, 2012 at 2:42 am)chipan Wrote:

Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:That wasn't what I said at all. You were right about the the basics behind C14 dating. The underlying argument (that it is inaccurate, and the reasons you gave) were wrong. As that's what you based your argument on, I'd have a hard time saying your argument was "mostly right".

no, i'm not saying my argument is mostly right, i'm saying my facts are mostly right. these people are saying i'm stupid and don't know anything but i was mostly right on the process according to you. thank you for giving me some credit and not saying i don't know what i'm talking about and need to go back to science 101 like these other closed mined people.

I think you need to be a bit more selective as to what sources you use (i.e. use ones that are current and reputable).

(January 8, 2012 at 2:42 am)chipan Wrote:

Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:That wasn't what I said at all. You were right about the the basics behind C14 dating. The underlying argument (that it is inaccurate, and the reasons you gave) were wrong. As that's what you based your argument on, I'd have a hard time saying your argument was "mostly right".

no, i'm not saying my argument is mostly right, i'm saying my facts are mostly right. these people are saying i'm stupid and don't know anything but i was mostly right on the process according to you. thank you for giving me some credit and not saying i don't know what i'm talking about and need to go back to science 101 like these other closed mined people.

Obviously you are incapable of reading...which would lead one to suspect you are intellectually challenged or uneducated = stupid. You still need to go back to science 101 should you not wish to continue to appear to be stupid, english might be of help too.

Quote:these people are saying i'm stupid

And your posts are Exhibit A.

That's evidence.

Minimalist Wrote:And your posts are Exhibit A.

sorry, is history channel not good enough for you? i need to upgrade to jesusneverexisted.com?

(January 8, 2012 at 3:04 am)chipan Wrote:

Minimalist Wrote:And your posts are Exhibit A.

sorry, is history channel not good enough for you? i need to upgrade to jesusneverexisted.com?

Not really, no. History Channel is entertainment. Hey, I watch it too, but if what's presented isn't supported by reputable sources, it should be treated as suspect the same as any other source.

Television in general isn't a good source for factual information. It's an entertainment medium intended to sell advertising above all other considerations.

Published peer-reviewed journals, or sources that reference the same are usually good sources (although there are some exceptions). When examining scientific / historical / etc claims, it's also useful to look at critical sources as well.

so in otherwords, Jesusneverexisted.com and nobeliefs.com don't count?

(January 8, 2012 at 3:26 am)chipan Wrote: so in otherwords, Jesusneverexisted.com and nobeliefs.com don't count?

I wouldn't use them (or any other source) unless they cited their sources, and those sources were reputable.

(January 8, 2012 at 3:36 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(January 8, 2012 at 3:26 am)chipan Wrote: so in otherwords, Jesusneverexisted.com and nobeliefs.com don't count?

I wouldn't use them (or any other source) unless they cited their sources, and those sources were reputable.

Which is why they are given to you as a reference starting point...