|
The Argument From Design
|
 (August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: I see our 50,000 years are in agreement, beyond that no dating is reliable. Wrong. Uranium-lead Samarium-neodymium Potassium-argon Rubidium-strontium Uranium-thorium Argon-argon Iodine-xenon Lanthanum-barium Lead-lead Lutetium-hafnium Neon-neon Rhenium-osmium Uranium-lead-helium Uranium-uranium Chlorine-36 Isochron dating method Fission track dating method Luminescence dating methods  (August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: ...at least creationist have stuck to their guns. In ourn world where our body of knowledge is constantly changing and every day something new is discovered, this is not a virtue.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
 (August 9, 2011 at 4:36 pm)FaithNoMore Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: ...at least creationist have stuck to their guns. It’s also why science, which is willing and able to shift paradigms as new data becomes available, beats the shit out the unchanging dogma of religion. Every. Fucking. Time.
Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.
![[Image: JUkLw58.gif]](https://i.imgur.com/JUkLw58.gif)
RE: The Argument From Design
August 9, 2011 at 5:16 pm
(This post was last modified: August 9, 2011 at 5:18 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
In the last 50,000 years 33 genera of large mammals have gone extinct in N.A. alone. Of these 15 were annihilated in a period of approx 1,500 years that coincides with the arrival of the Clovis People. Small mammals were spared; harder to grill. Consequently they've developed into the stunning array of rodents we see before us here in the US, from Deer to doormice.
Cro Magnons appear in Europe around 40,000BCE. Neandertals disappeared around 22,000BCE. You're looking at what, the end of the paleolithic/beginning of the neolithic? Let me just tell you that you picked the absolute worst time period. The Neolithic Revolution saw one of the more interesting explosions of evolution ever seen. Evolution has never had a more productive employee than man. Evolution is just the process by which what is left alive has offspring and what is not does not. Again, evolution is observed fact. Do you have a theory that would explain the mechanism behind the observed fact of evolution? I know what has you hung up. You have absolutely no understanding of Taxonomy. Things don't "change" from species to species, they make significant revisions and are so called new "somethings". You are still a chordate, still a mammal, still a primate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_taxonomy You're also surprisingly uneducated.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
(August 9, 2011 at 4:36 pm)I_Blaspheme Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: I see our 50,000 years are in agreement, beyond that no dating is reliable. But GC’s preacher says nothing is reliable beyond 50,000 years, and he’s a very intelligent ex TVA nuclear engineer. As far as I can tell his theory seems to be that beyond 50,000 years ago god hadn’t decided on a half life for most radioactive elements yet so he kept dicking around with them…
Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.
(August 9, 2011 at 6:03 pm)popeyespappy Wrote: But GC’s preacher says nothing is reliable beyond 50,000 years, and he’s a very intelligent ex TVA nuclear engineer. As far as I can tell his theory seems to be that beyond 50,000 years ago god hadn’t decided on a half life for most radioactive elements yet so he kept dicking around with them… Indeed. Before GC (or someone else) trots out the old chestnut that half-lives can change with their environment I'll say this: If you believe that to be true, you're on some serious drugs.  (August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: ..... at least creationist have stuck to their guns. You don't have guns to stick to. What you are sticking to is thrice mutated shit you conceive to be the bible which you are too timid to scrap off. We, on the other hand, are not too timid to change our mind when additional data arrive to demand it.  RE: The Argument From Design
August 10, 2011 at 2:15 pm
(This post was last modified: August 10, 2011 at 2:46 pm by Godscreated.)
(August 9, 2011 at 4:36 pm)I_Blaspheme Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: I see our 50,000 years are in agreement, beyond that no dating is reliable. You have no material with an actual known age to verify those test past 50,000 years. (August 9, 2011 at 4:36 pm)FaithNoMore Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: ...at least creationist have stuck to their guns. I disagree, truth is a powerful virtue. (August 9, 2011 at 4:50 pm)popeyespappy Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 4:36 pm)FaithNoMore Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: ...at least creationist have stuck to their guns. No it doesn't science is suppose to be about facts and truth, unfortunately that no longer seems to be true for alot of the science fields. To often scientist claim they have the facts about a subject and then later it is confirmed not true, why not say this is what we believe could be but more investigation has to be done. As I said before I like and will accept true science. (August 9, 2011 at 5:16 pm)Rhythm Wrote: In the last 50,000 years 33 genera of large mammals have gone extinct in N.A. alone. Of these 15 were annihilated in a period of approx 1,500 years that coincides with the arrival of the Clovis People. Small mammals were spared; harder to grill. Consequently they've developed into the stunning array of rodents we see before us here in the US, from Deer to doormice. Then tell me which mammal evolved into a deer that was not a deer before it magicly turned into a deer. (August 9, 2011 at 8:30 pm)Chuck Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: ..... at least creationist have stuck to their guns. The Bible is not a book of science or history it's a book of spiritual living, I have not used the Bible as a science book. (August 9, 2011 at 4:20 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:We've not had even the slightest sign of any speices evolving to another speices in the last 50,000 years, A daisy is still a daisy no matter what new name man wants to apply to it, desperation Min, desperation.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
One question GC, how can you claim the bible is not scientific and then ignore all scientific evidence based on what the bible says?
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
(August 10, 2011 at 2:15 pm)Godschild Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 4:36 pm)I_Blaspheme Wrote:(August 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm)Godschild Wrote: I see our 50,000 years are in agreement, beyond that no dating is reliable. Does it mean nothing to you that the various dating methods agree with one another? Does it mean nothing that radioactive decay occurs at a known fixed rate, and that this can be used to determine the age that rocks formed? Does it mean nothing that these methods have been tested, verified, and accepted as reliable by the scientific community? Does it mean nothing that the laboratories that perform these tests determine the error range for each test performed? Of course it doesn't - at least not to the feeble-minded. I seriously doubt you have any understanding whatsoever of how these methods even work, or you would not make such ignorant statements. Enjoy your ignorance. It seems to suit you. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
