Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age of mankind, dating, and the flood
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 91 of 224 (706413)
09-11-2013 9:53 AM


Bump
Bump for Mindspawn.
I posted some evidence above. Any interest in refuting it, or presenting your evidence against radiocarbon dating?

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by NoNukes, posted 09-11-2013 10:26 AM Coyote has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 224 (706417)
09-11-2013 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Coyote
09-11-2013 9:53 AM


Re: Bump
He's busy getting his head handed to him on the topics of genetics and how to feed carnivores without losing herbivores. I'm sure he'll join you later.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Coyote, posted 09-11-2013 9:53 AM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by saab93f, posted 10-11-2013 1:29 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 93 of 224 (708476)
10-10-2013 2:04 PM


Bump for Mindspawn
Bump for Mindspawn.

  
saab93f
Member (Idle past 1394 days)
Posts: 265
From: Finland
Joined: 12-17-2009


(1)
Message 94 of 224 (708543)
10-11-2013 1:29 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by NoNukes
09-11-2013 10:26 AM


Re: Bump
I am quite convinced that minds and faiths resident deity made it clear to the carnivores that they just have got to wait at least some months before the herbivore populations were large enough to sustain losing some
I just cannot comprehend the arrogance that can be associated to basically every cretin - they know science way better than people who do it for living...
There is also absolutely no limits of deceiving or distorting when it comes to proving the Scriptures right. If that is not dishonesty, I do not know what is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by NoNukes, posted 09-11-2013 10:26 AM NoNukes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Diomedes, posted 10-11-2013 4:00 PM saab93f has not replied
 Message 105 by mindspawn, posted 10-22-2013 3:14 AM saab93f has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


(1)
Message 95 of 224 (708648)
10-11-2013 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by saab93f
10-11-2013 1:29 AM


Re: Bump
I am quite convinced that minds and faiths resident deity made it clear to the carnivores that they just have got to wait at least some months before the herbivore populations were large enough to sustain losing some
At the same time, the resident deity would have also have had to tell the herbivores not to eat any plants until they had regrown post-flood.
And I guess he also told the plants to hold their breath and disregard their need for sunlight while the water levels rose.
It's all SO obvious! :-)

"Our future lies not in our dogmatic past, but in our enlightened present"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by saab93f, posted 10-11-2013 1:29 AM saab93f has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 96 of 224 (708661)
10-11-2013 10:51 PM


Summary to date
This thread was created to allow Mindspan and other creationists to post their scientific evidence refuting radiocarbon and other forms of radiometric dating.
So far, Mindspawn has 15 posts:
Of these, eight are irrelevant or off topic.
One was simply a useless and unevidenced what-if that meant nothing.
Three were demands for proof that were either not pertinent, or "proof" that his whimsical speculations were wrong ("Oh, yeah? Prove that the sun rises in the east!"). If he holds true to form, no amount of "proof" or evidence would make the slightest difference in his beliefs, and
Only three contain realistic objections that have been easily explained and refuted.
That's about par for the course. Creationists are all up in arms against evolution and any field of science that they perceive as supporting evolution, but when it comes to providing actual evidence against those fields of science, or in support of their claims, they are generally quite lacking.
So let's resume this thread with substantive claims by creationists, with actual evidence that modern dating techniques are incorrect.
And again, no P-T boundary, Cambrian explosion, evolution, or any other off-topic rabbit holes.
If you have evidence pertaining to modern dating methods, let's have it.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by NoNukes, posted 10-12-2013 11:09 AM Coyote has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 97 of 224 (708681)
10-12-2013 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Coyote
10-11-2013 10:51 PM


You cannot catch fish with stinky bait.
How often does the tactic of starting a thread for the purpose of opening a can of whoop ass on a creationist actually work?
Regardless of his beliefs, mindspawn understands that he knows next to nothing about dating methods except that they all must be wrong. You've seen his laughable attempts at discussing C-14 calibration. Why should he (or Faith, or Big Al) be in any hurry to show up here for a ten on one beat down?
Let's face it. Every single one of the active creationist posters here are rank amateurs in the subjects necessary to hold up their end of these discussions. And unlike the case for their opposition, they cannot help each other because they are making this stuff up as they go.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Coyote, posted 10-11-2013 10:51 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by greentwiga, posted 10-12-2013 11:42 AM NoNukes has replied
 Message 100 by Coyote, posted 10-12-2013 4:23 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 3427 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


(1)
Message 98 of 224 (708685)
10-12-2013 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by NoNukes
10-12-2013 11:09 AM


Re: You cannot catch fish with stinky bait.
They don't have to make it up. They have 'experts' that they can refer to. Unfortunately, the experts seem to have cherry picked facts that support them. They accept the interpretation the experts promote.
Another problem that they have is they accept the interpretation that was decided on centuries ago. They don't examine the Bible carefully either.
I am a 'creationist' but I have no problem with C14 etc dating techniques, in fact I love them. They don't want to consider whether the Science is right. Many of you don't want to consider whether the Bible is right. It is easy to beat a straw lion. Happy hunting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by NoNukes, posted 10-12-2013 11:09 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by NoNukes, posted 10-12-2013 12:09 PM greentwiga has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 224 (708691)
10-12-2013 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by greentwiga
10-12-2013 11:42 AM


Re: You cannot catch fish with stinky bait.
Unfortunately, the experts seem to have cherry picked facts that support them. They accept the interpretation the experts promote.
The posters capable of presenting those lines of argument don't seem to be here anymore.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by greentwiga, posted 10-12-2013 11:42 AM greentwiga has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 100 of 224 (708713)
10-12-2013 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by NoNukes
10-12-2013 11:09 AM


Re: You cannot catch fish with stinky bait (but you can catch crabs)
You are correct in what you posted.
But it is annoying when creationists, such as Mindspawn, claim over and over that scientific dating methods are all wrong, sometimes with errors up to > 50,000 times, but then are unable to support those claims.
But we've given them the chance to present their evidence, and the glaring lack of such evidence is very telling.
(And no, the title is not a snide at anyone, that's just how you catch crabs and shrimp.)
Edited by Coyote, : typo

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by NoNukes, posted 10-12-2013 11:09 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 101 of 224 (709095)
10-21-2013 5:36 AM


Another bump for Mindspawn
As someone who's never used C-14 in any project of mine anywhere (I've only used other radiometric methods more applicable to geology); please return, Mindspawn.
Mindspawn, I learned a lot on C-14 dating from very knowledgeable persons on the subject, sharing their expertise as a result of your ridiculous, unevidenced disregard of anyting scientific.
Thanks Coyote, you taught me a lot (free expert knowledge is hard to come by nowadays). I appreciate it!
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 102 of 224 (709140)
10-22-2013 3:05 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Percy
09-05-2013 9:21 AM


Re: Objection unfounded
The relevance to this thread is that we think you're making up your claims, for one example, that spring tides can cause lake varves, which you said was the case with Lake Suigetsu. Do you have any evidence of this? Or for any of the other of your claims that I addressed in Message 77?
Saltwater intrusion into the water table is well known. I am surprised those that studied the varves in Lake Suigetsu did not take this effect into account, or maybe I missed their explanation that negates the water table effect? The Lake is right next to the ocean, and is next to lakes directly affected with saltwater during high tides. Salt water intrusion could have periodically killed the lower freshwater diatoms in Lake Suigetsu.
Saltwater intrusion - Wikipedia
Saltwater intrusion is the movement of saline water into freshwater aquifers, which can lead to contamination of drinking water sources and other consequences. Saltwater intrusion occurs naturally to some degree in most coastal aquifers, owing to the hydraulic connection between groundwater and seawater. Because saltwater has a higher mineral content than freshwater, it is denser and has a higher water pressure. As a result, saltwater can push inland beneath the freshwater.
Its perfectly natural for saltwater to contaminate the water table in tidal cycles:
Just a moment...
We found that (1) recharge to the intertidal saline cell is largely controlled by the high-tide elevation; (2) freshwater discharge is positively correlated to the low-tide elevation, whereas deep saline discharge from below the discharging freshwater is negatively correlated to the low-tide elevation. So, when the low-tide elevation is relatively high, more freshwater discharges and less deep saltwater discharges. In contrast when low tides are very low, less freshwater discharges and more deep salt water discharges; (3) offshore inflow of saline water is largely insensitive to tides and the lunar cycle.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Percy, posted 09-05-2013 9:21 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by PaulK, posted 10-22-2013 3:32 AM mindspawn has replied
 Message 143 by Percy, posted 11-03-2013 9:03 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 103 of 224 (709141)
10-22-2013 3:09 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Theodoric
09-05-2013 9:42 AM


Re: Objection unfounded
This is not a lie, but a vast misrepresentation of the truth. Your utter lack of any attempt to debate honestly is truly stunning. Even for a creo.
You want people suspended for pointing out that you have manipulated and misrepresented everything you have presented as "evidence". You should be ashamed of yourself.
I am not participating in this thread until all unnecessary and distracting remarks stop. If any of this nonsense continues I will only participate in a private debate. I haven't got the time for unnecessary insults, I am really only interested in science and will not put up with this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Theodoric, posted 09-05-2013 9:42 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Theodoric, posted 10-22-2013 9:50 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 104 of 224 (709142)
10-22-2013 3:12 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Percy
09-07-2013 2:08 PM


Re: Objection unfounded
Hello?
MindSpawn?
Are you still here?
You probably think we're trying to give you a hard time, but you keep exhibiting a very real and profound error in logic. You apparently believe that, "It is possible that this could have happened," is valid rebuttal. Usually there are many things that might have happened, so we look for evidence of what actually *did* happen. You need evidence of what actually *did* happen.
If a process is likely and not merely a theoretical possibility, then pointing out the likely process is a valid rebuttal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Percy, posted 09-07-2013 2:08 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by Percy, posted 11-03-2013 11:27 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 105 of 224 (709143)
10-22-2013 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by saab93f
10-11-2013 1:29 AM


Re: Bump
I am quite convinced that minds and faiths resident deity made it clear to the carnivores that they just have got to wait at least some months before the herbivore populations were large enough to sustain losing some
I just cannot comprehend the arrogance that can be associated to basically every cretin - they know science way better than people who do it for living...
There is also absolutely no limits of deceiving or distorting when it comes to proving the Scriptures right. If that is not dishonesty, I do not know what is.
More unnecessary comments, let us all stick to science in this discussion, I will no longer put up with these insults. If admin does not stop this, then I'm gone.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by saab93f, posted 10-11-2013 1:29 AM saab93f has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Theodoric, posted 10-22-2013 9:51 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024