Summations Only

So the paradigm problem is that geologists see what is there, not what you want them to see. And they don’t try to force everything into preconceived ideas about a Young Earth and a worldwide Flood.That seems a pretty clear indication of who has the problem, and who has it all wrong

Palaeontology has it all wrong about fossils
Biology has it all wrong about evolution
Molecular biology has it all wrong about evolution
Physics has it all wrong about radiometric dating
Dendrochronology has it all wrong about tree rings
Archaeology has it all wrong about civilisations
Cosmology has it all wrong about, well, everythingYet you have no education or training in any of these disciplines. You've never touched a fossil or looked at a rock. You've never written a research paper or have any understanding of the scientific process. You sit at you computer making shit up and claiming 'paradigms'.After 10 years you've learned nothing except how to ignore and pollute hard won knowledge inorder to preserve a primitive believe system. I've no idea why you're here and neither have you. Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

It occurred to me today that I had read an article in BYTE about this. It's an AI experiment called "travesty" (AKA "parody generator"):

quote:

---

Parody generators are computer programs which generate text that is syntactically correct, but usually meaningless, often in the style of a technical paper or a particular writer. They are also called travesty generators and random text generators.

---

Faith has to be a POE who's been using a parody generator in order to prank us all these long years. I mean, nobody could really be that stubbornly and terminally clueless.Edited by dwise1, : "... POE who's been using a parody generator in order to prank us..."

I didn't come here to learn the interpretations of conventional Geology, except insofar as it helps to further the YEC paradigm, and that I have done. I came here to hone the YEC arguments, and that I have done. Conventional Old Earth Geology is false, ridiculously false, why would I want to learn it beyond its usefulness to YEC?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No, they don't "see what is there," they INTERPRET what is there and apparently don't know the difference.

quote:

---

No, they don't "see what is there," they INTERPRET what is there and apparently don't know the difference.

---

The presence of evaporites, for instance, is observation. The presence of features like the monadnocks of Shinumo quartzite and the valleys in the Redwall is observation.

A while back you were telling us of your prowess in critical thinking. Your methodology - such that it is - is the exact opposite of objective analysis. You ignore facts that contradict you and invent facts that you prefer. You don't read source material or study the subject matter in any depth and you don't understand the things you pontificate on.If all you're doing is trying - and really horribly failing - to 'hone the YEC arguments' you're home is EFT not here. Here you'll be continually show to be a religiously motivated ignoramous that's avoiding observed fact for deluded reasons.But then you admit to that so there's nothing new to say.

So much verbiage to so little purpose. The FACTS, the EVIDENCE, show the Flood, nothing else.

quote:

---

The FACTS, the EVIDENCE, show the Flood, nothing else.

---

No. They don’t. If you haven’t realised that by now you shouldn’t be accusing others of paradigm blindness.That is WHY science abandoned YEC ideas.

If that were true, if either of the Biblical Flood myths had actually happened, then you or someone in your Cult would have been able to provide the model, method, mechanism, process or procedure that would allow yoour Flud to create what exists in reality.The truth though is that it is impossible for a flood to create what exists in reality and so for over 200 years YECists and Floodists and anti-evolutionists have simply failed just as you have failed.YEC & The Biblical Flood and denial of evolution are simply stupid ideas only existing among the utterly dishonest and willfully ignorant.

Yep, I called it perfectly. You have no reason for rejecting our examples of layers being created today. Other than your peculiar fallible interpretation of the Bible, of course. No reference to the real world or evidence whatsoever.Fill in the blanks:I say that the examples are in the wrong location because____________________I say that the examples are in the wrong time because____________________I say that the examples are the wrong shape because____________________I say that the examples are the wrong scale because____________________

What else did you expect? Blood from a turnip? More than a decade worth of debates about geology, biology, and a host of non-Creationist topics, with 99 percent of her participation in those debates reading much as her posts do here.Faith is the least introspective Christian I have ever encountered. (Read about Peter or Paul if you want examples of what kind of self examination Christians should be doing). In this thread, not only does Faith reject science out of hand, Faith also runs a big yellow bus back and forth over the bodies of fellow Creationists who have looked at the evidence over the past two hundred years up until now, and who have made attempts to explain that evidence as being consistent with the Bible. Essentially nobody on earth is right about this stuff except Faith, if you let her tell the tale. Because this a debate site and such arguments are the subject matter of this thread? Because this particular thread is in the science forums and not the theological discussion forums? Because ignorance is not bliss? Because it is uncomfortable to continually demonstrate yourself as the hind end of every discussion?I've noticed that non-Creationist don't take the position that Creation Science is not worth expending effort. At least the ones participating here do take time out to explore what Creationists think about astronomy, biology, paleontology, and geology. Many of them probably know more about what Creationist say on those subject than they know about real geology. That is because knowing the arguments and evidence from the other side is the minimum necessary for meaningful discussion.

Responding to a number of your messages:Replying to your general reply in Message 2138: You don't have a scientific paradigm. If you have a paradigm at all it's a religious one, the Genesis Flood Paradigm taken straight out of the first 9 chapters of Genesis. To make the transition to a scientific paradigm you need to do a few things:

• Explain radiometric dates of millions and billions of years.
• Explain how the flood sorted material by radiometric age not only vertically but also laterally, for example, that the Tapeats gets older not only from top to bottom but also from east to west.
• Explain radiocarbon dates up to 50,000 years.
• Explain archeological sites dating back thousands and tens of thousands of years.
• Explain civilizations spanning the flood period with no interruption.
• Explain fossil sorting.
• Understand that the Grand Canyon is not the geological model for the entire world.
• Understand how sedimentation works.
• Understand how Walther's Law works.
• Understand how floods work.
• Recognize that flat and straight is common throughout the world, particularly abyssal plains.
• Just generally fit your views into the framework of science.
• Keep your focus on the science instead of making meta comments about paradigms and illusions and semantics and how explaining your views is impossible for you and how unfairly you're treated.
• Stop citing God and Bible.

Anyone who reads your old posts from say 2005 will see you had the same misunderstandings then that you do today. In all your time here you've managed to learn almost nothing of significance. You lost the debate well over a decade ago but continue on like a zombi.

---

Replying to your Message 2145 to Edge: But all you ever do is reassert your views, never presenting any evidence supporting them. Floods do not behave the way you describe - if they did then you could point to examples. The sedimentary layers of all the stratigraphic columns around the world reflect the same sedimentary processes we observe in the world today, but you can't even accept that sedimentation is still adding to these stratigraphic columns.You have some strange and enduring delusion that flat and straight strata say "flood", but flat and straight is the eventual endpoint of the processes of erosion, transport and sedimentation. What starts out like this:

Rocky Mountains

Ends up like this:

Northern Ohio

---

Replying to your Message 2149 to Tangle: And you've done a remarkably fine job of maintaining your ignorance. YEC is synonymous with the Genesis Flood. If you have any paradigm at all it is the religious and Biblical Genesis Flood Paradigm that has no relation to science. But you haven't mustered let alone honed any scientific arguments for YEC. You haven't even honed any religious arguments for YEC, since your arguments are a mash of meaningless pseudoscientific jargon. All I can say is that you've done a much better job of maintaining your ignorance of geology and evolution than we have about the supposed Genesis Flood.

---

Replying to your Message 2150 to PaulK: You're playing word games again. In essence you're declaring geology wrong while not making any arguments nor offering any evidence. Your posts continue to be either off-topic or content free.

---

Replying to your Message 2153 to Tangle: Another content-free message declaring yourself right while describing no facts, no evidence, and making no arguments.--Percy

No I've done more than reassert, I've given the evidence. I'm reduced these days to countering the most extreme absurdities and misrepresentations, no reason to exert myself beyond that in this atmosphere.Long as you keep on refusing to acknowledge anything of my point of view why should I pay any attention to you?

Hint: You're not going to convince real geologists to abandon what they're learned and practiced throughout their entire lives. You're probably not going to convince interested laymen with a modicum of knowledge either. Your target audience is the ignorant, the religious fanatic, the conspiracy theorist, etc. In light of that, acting like an arrogant know-it-all may actually be your best strategy.