RE: Statler Waldorf introduction.
October 14, 2010 at 6:29 pm
(This post was last modified: October 14, 2010 at 6:32 pm by orogenicman.)
Quote:Haha, this right here shows your lack of knowledge on the subject. It is impossible to prove the age of something you never observed. Hence why nobody has gotten the nobel prize for proving the Earth was any age. Hence why the age of the Earth keeps changing. Someone who claims emperical proof in the Historical Sciences is committing a serious category error and should go back and take some basic Science courses at a Junior College somewhere near them.
Wow, that just takes my breath away. First of all, Marie and Pierre Curie were awarded Nobel prizes for their discovery of radioactivity and the creation of the theory of radioactivity. That theory was later used by Ernest Rutherford to elaborate on the concept of isotopic decay, work which lead to the measurement the age of the Earth. But you are essentially correct that no one received a Nobel for proving the age of the Earth. But then, no one has ever received a Nobel for simply compiling data. Now, I don't know to what "historical science" you are referring, but physics is not one of them.
Quote:Haha, well that's not the only argument Creationists make. According to whom is that by default an invalid argument? You? Methodolgocial Naturalism is not the only valid Science my friend, anyone who believes this needs to brush up on Science.
"God did it" is NEVER a valid scientific argumeent. EVER. I challenge you to prove otherwise. Good luck with that.
'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
