RE: The Speed of Light, Time, and the Bible
August 10, 2010 at 12:44 pm
(This post was last modified: August 10, 2010 at 12:57 pm by rjh4 is back.)
(August 10, 2010 at 12:20 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Argumentum ad hominem does not equate to an insult. Argumentum ad hominem is where you attack the person and attempt to link it to the veracity of their argument.
See Common misconceptions about ad hominems.
Even if I was wrong in my characterization, Void's statement that I quoted was still irrelevant to the questions I asked.
(August 10, 2010 at 12:32 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: How can you dismiss astronomical systems of units yet still try to sound remotely credible in relation to physics?
I wasn't dismissing anything in the questions I asked.
(August 10, 2010 at 12:32 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: Robert (Jason Lisle) is a hopelessly intellectually bankrupt individual for stating utter nonsense such as big bang theorists are not allowed to speculate about the origins of the universe because they weren’t around when it happened. He incredulously goes further to dig himself into a deeper hole by asserting our attempts to investigate the cosmos is "beyond the scope of science" since only God was present at its creation. Seriously, by that logic we're also not free to calculate the orbit of Pluto because no one will live to see one rotation – I'm surprised his peers in the American Astronomical Society haven't already laughed him out. I also particularly loved the manner in how he ignores the phenomenon of time dilation whenever it suits his argument to build up a case for the Genesis depiction of events.
Irrelevant to the questions I asked. I wonder, Adrian, would this quote from Welsh Cake qualify as an ad hominum attack?
