Quote:"You are good at assertions, bad at argumentation. I thought you were supposed to be a Scientist, no wonder you don't work in your actual field.
Anytime you want proof of my expertise in geology, my offer to hold a day in the field to study the geology surrounding the Creationist Musem still stands.
Quote:I called them "my" claims because Sam called them my claims.
And yet, you didn't correct him, and so left the forum with the impression that they are your claims. You did say that they were your claims. At the least, it was dishonest.
Quote:I know why he said that quote, he was talking about naturalism and how the super-natural explainations relate to ti. Not "God did it".
There is no such thing as "super-natural". The very word itself is meaningless. If it is natural, then it fits the definition of natural. "Supernatural" doesn't fit any definition of natural.
Quote:You are the one who is arguing using bad logic (I have pointed out numerous fallacies you have used) and evolutionary arguments that Creationists either agree with or have refuted over and over again.
You make that statement and then claim that creationists don't lie? I rest my case.
Quote:I already addressed your OOPArt argument and why using the logic, "well this would mean dinosaurs lived along side man so it must be a fake" is bad Sciense.
No sir, you haven't. You haven't made one mention of oopart outside of the post above,. which was a response to my previous post. I brought it up because of your lie that certain artwark on an Asian temple represents a "recent" stegosaur. That artwork, in no way, represents a stegosaur. You see what you want to see, dude. Oopart. Misplaced objects/fraud. Good God, Statler. You've truly gone fishing, dude.
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
