Creationist problems with radiocarbon dating

Sounds like someone is a little shaken by this complete take-down of RATE - and this is nothing compared to Kirk's original thread over at theologyweb - masterful stuff. Hey, Ichiban, dare you go over to TheologyWeb Campus and see one of your heros (Baumgardner) have his ass handed to him on a plate? And by someone using their real name...

Unfortunately, and no disrespect intended, I think that is because of your lack of experience in reading scientific debate. Baumgardner lost just about all credibility in his first reply, sounding like an undergrad on a usenet sci group. This is followed by his extensive back peddling, selective replies, obsfuscation, and continued ass-hattery. Yes, there is some actual back-and-forth content hidden within the noise, but it is limited. If Baumgardner had conveyed himself in the manner of Bertsche and Morton, he may not have suffered the resulting complete loss of scientific credibility. As it stands, I wouldn't hire him as the liquid nitrogen loader...The (sad?) fact is that just about every creationist I meet on the internet makes me think - idiot - from presentation if not content. This applies to our own EvC Kaichos Man, Ichiban, etc, all the way up to Baumgardner and Humphreys (Humphreys is in my field and his bullshit makes Baumgardner look a complete amateur) That is why I hope (and expect) that neither you nor Slevesque will remain creationists for much longer, as you are ruining my extrapolation of the above observation into a general rule...