Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who can be saved? A Christian perspective
Boof
Member (Idle past 246 days)
Posts: 99
From: Australia
Joined: 08-02-2010


Message 435 of 466 (812599)
06-18-2017 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 434 by Faith
06-17-2017 8:20 AM


Re: Salvation is far more than a free pass
True science is useful, but there is nothing whatever about the vaporings about the distant past, either the biological past or the geological past, that is useful at all....
You do realise that the radiometric dating that you so readily hand wave away is widely used in the exploration for mineral deposits? But maybe all that copper in your computer is not useful at all...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 434 by Faith, posted 06-17-2017 8:20 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 437 by Faith, posted 06-18-2017 7:27 AM Boof has replied

  
Boof
Member (Idle past 246 days)
Posts: 99
From: Australia
Joined: 08-02-2010


(1)
Message 449 of 466 (813079)
06-22-2017 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 437 by Faith
06-18-2017 7:27 AM


Re: Side trip on the usefulness of the ToE and OE
As I understand it, practically speaking the discovery of such mineral deposits involves the identification of the relevant rock associated with the relevant time period, which is more about physical identification than time and doesn't really require dating beyond that identification. If it occurs in, say, a rock identified as Triassic, all that's necessary is recognizing the rock called Triassic. I could probably do this myself without having a clue about its age.
So using your super sleuthing geology skills how do you identify which granite intrusions are Mesoproterozoic and which are not?
In parts of southern Australia almost all the large copper deposits are hosted in igneous rocks aged around 1590 Million Years old. Yet there are younger granites and volcanics which are mineralogically, and texturally very similar. These are barren. Which is why major multinational mining companies spend money on radiometric dating, and indeed often keep the results confidential to give themselves a competitive advantage.
So please withdraw your comment about 'true science'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 437 by Faith, posted 06-18-2017 7:27 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 453 by NoNukes, posted 06-23-2017 10:04 PM Boof has not replied
 Message 454 by Faith, posted 06-24-2017 10:01 AM Boof has replied

  
Boof
Member (Idle past 246 days)
Posts: 99
From: Australia
Joined: 08-02-2010


(1)
Message 455 of 466 (813300)
06-25-2017 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 454 by Faith
06-24-2017 10:01 AM


Re: Side trip on the usefulness of the ToE and OE
... but I'm afraid that doesn't do it for me. I don't know what sort of evidence might be mustered in this case, but your statement alone isn't enough.
Well that's easy to answer - no scientific evidence will ever be enough for you Faith. Even when the evidence against your views becomes overwhelming your response is to say that you can't explain why but you know that it's wrong.
But I'm not looking for any 'Eureka moment' from you, I just want you (and other creationists) to stop saying ridiculous things like:
True science is useful, but there is nothing whatever about the vaporings about the distant past, either the biological past or the geological past, that is useful at all....
Seem fair?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 454 by Faith, posted 06-24-2017 10:01 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 456 by Faith, posted 06-26-2017 12:50 AM Boof 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