The Speed of Light, Time, and the Bible

[Tiberius]

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.

Irrelevant as it may be; it isn't grounds for an ad hominem. If it's irrelevant, don't comment on it.

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?

No it wouldn't. At no point does he insinuate that the asserted "intellectual bankruptcy" of Jason Lisle has any affect on the validity of his argument. Instead, he points to the illogical nature of the argument Jason uses.