|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: One liners, or how to make the PRATTS fall | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
And which they will likely refuse to understand when you explain further.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined: |
Layering of fossils is of course an immense problem for YEC.
Diatoms and Radiolarians are microscopic critters similar in size and composition so should be mixed. But Radiolarians are found all the way down to the Cambrian, Diatoms only Jurassic and above.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
herebedragons writes:
quote: Answer: Potato chips in a bag. When they look at you quizzically, point out that in a bag of potato chips, all the biggest chips are on the top and all the crumbs are on the bottom. That's what we should see if there were hyrdological sorting: The little bits fall through the gaps that the big bits leave as they clump together and settle at the bottom. If the fossil record were hydrologically sorted, all the whale fossils should be on top. But they're not. So they weren't. You might consider pulling out your Lewis Carroll for that last: If it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't.Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 313 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
When they look at you quizzically, point out that in a bag of potato chips, all the biggest chips are on the top and all the crumbs are on the bottom. That's what we should see if there were hyrdological sorting: The little bits fall through the gaps that the big bits leave as they clump together and settle at the bottom. Actually that's not how it works. What you're describing is not hydraulic sorting (N.B: only creationists call it hydrological sorting, because they took a vow to be wrong about everything). what you're talking about is the Brazil Nut Effect, which is different. Hydraulic sorting requires water, and in h.s. the finest particles of sediment settle last, because their small size makes them behave like dust-motes in air, they don't plummet straight down, but swirl about. (I think I read somewhere that a coccolith takes about a year to "fall" from the surface of the sea to the ocean bed. A chip of gravel would obviously go much faster.) Another difference is that the B.N.E. requires a prolonged period of shaking for the small nuts to settle down to the bottom, whereas with h.s. if you give a jar of earth and water one good shake and then leave it alone, it'll settle as I've described --- with the B.N.E. the shaking is the cause of the sorting, whereas with h.s. the shaking is just the cause of the sediment being distributed through the fluid, and it would happen if there was some other cause of the original mixture. However, your point as amended is a good one --- if the sediment had been hydraulically sorted, then the sediment would be hydraulically sorted. This kind of logic will always remain out of the grasp of the average creationist, because of its immense and baffling complexity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes: But, but, Dr Adequate, only the fossils were hydraulically sorted, the sediments were not for some reason...gravity is "just a theory", remember! All in the same flood, but it only applies to fossils, not to sediments. Magic! However, your point as amended is a good one --- if the sediment had been hydraulically sorted, then the sediment would be hydraulically sorted. Dr Adequate writes: I think it's because they don't want to accept reality. That's the only reason. This kind of logic will always remain out of the grasp of the average creationist, because of its immense and baffling complexity. Edited by Pressie, : Added sentence
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Q. But I see order and design everywhere. Order and design requires a designer, it can't happen by chance can it?
A. Here, read this. (The Blind Watchmaker) I really don't have a pithy answer that works for this one.Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 313 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Q. But I see order and design everywhere. Order and design requires a designer, it can't happen by chance can it? A. That's exactly why no-one has ever said that it did.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Sloppy of me, try this:
Q. But I see order and design everywhere. Order and design requires a designer doesn't it?Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 313 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Sloppy of me, try this: Q. But I see order and design everywhere. Order and design requires a designer doesn't it? But you do not see design everywhere. You see order; you infer design. But this inference is not necessarily correct --- if you see the order in a snowflake, you would be wrong to infer design by Jack Frost; we know that this order is produced by natural processes. That's not as pithy as one would wish, but there's two mistakes packed into the same question.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
...which begs the next question
Q. but snowflakes show design, even if the process of forming them is natural, something had to create the process that forms them naturally. And so on until you get to 'something can't come from nothing'Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 313 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Q. but snowflakes show design, even if the process of forming them is natural, something had to create the process that forms them naturally. A1. Assertion is not evidence; it is not even argument. A2. So you're a deist now, or what? If you will admit that the process of forming the various kinds of organisms was completely natural, then since I was arguing for evolution, rather than against deism, I win. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
A1. Assertion is not evidence; it is not even argument. Oh yes it is. (just saying....)
A2. So you're a deist now, or what? If you will admit that the process of forming the various kinds of organisms was completely natural, then since I was arguing for evolution, rather than against deism, I win. I doubt that 1 in 10 fundies know what a Deist or a Theist is. Certainly you'd have to explain painfully that you can't make the logic leap from believing that some sort of god created the universe to 'and he loves you and cares for you, answers your prayers and is called Allah etc etc'. And anyway, I believe that everything we see around us was created, not evolved and your bloody snow flake or crystal or whatever just shows that he's got an eye for detail and is damn good at it. Obviously design needs a designer. Not rational you see.....Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DWIII Member (Idle past 1781 days) Posts: 72 From: United States Joined:
|
herebedragons writes:
It would be nice to have some simple rebuttals to arguments like hydro-logic sorting.
"Tornado in a junkyard!". errr... would you believe aerodynamic sorting? DWIII
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 865 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
But this inference is not necessarily correct --- if you see the order in a snowflake, you would be wrong to infer design by Jack Frost; we know that this order is produced by natural processes. Oh yeah, can you prove Jack Frost doesn't exist?Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis Bacon
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Pratt list from Talk Origins
An Index to Creationist Claims For instance:
quote: Which is why it goes through a high point of the ridge. Enjoy.by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024