Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Mt. Saint Helens now has it's own topic!
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 68 (17530)
09-16-2002 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by akakscase
09-16-2002 12:46 AM


"You can show me every piece of scientific evidence you want and I will still not think the flood happened in surges. It happened all at once."
--Given this is the case, you are welcome to leave the forum, now that we've realized your intentions here do not at any point or time intersect a scientific dispute.
--[Edit] - Moving along in contradictory assortations and seemingly false attempts at gathering scientific evidence against the ToE does not further your progress in gaining credibility here either.
------------------
[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 09-16-2002]
[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 09-16-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by akakscase, posted 09-16-2002 12:46 AM akakscase has not replied

TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 68 (18895)
10-02-2002 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Minnemooseus
10-02-2002 2:14 AM


"Maybe I can sic TC on him."
--I would have had quite a ball fiddling with his parroted sophistry, though I think Meert took the majority of my words away. If he starts gurgling up something along the line of the BB theory being another load of hog-wash from the observed tilt in the rotational axis of Uranus, then I'll be standing by.
--I am surely hoping that he is a laymen, lest he hinder my positive thoughts on the system of education for UAF..
[Edit] - This is the impression I get from the quote wehappyfew supplied from his post.
------------------
[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-02-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-02-2002 2:14 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 68 (18896)
10-02-2002 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by akakscase
10-01-2002 8:57 PM


"(BTW You can thank Kent Hovind for this theory)"
--Oh shlap! Son..we need to have a talk..
--If you find it interesting, you can read my summary for Flood mechanics over here, I don't need a PH.D to claim that I am more intelligent than Hovind, it just seems to be a special quality of mine...
http://EvC Forum: Creationist only flood topic? / Young Earth vs. Old Earth id's? Posts #3 & #10
------------------
[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-02-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by akakscase, posted 10-01-2002 8:57 PM akakscase has not replied

TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 68 (18898)
10-02-2002 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by akakscase
10-02-2002 6:25 PM


"Next, The "COMPLETE GEOLOGIC COLLUMN" doesn't exist anywhere in this world except text books and imagination."
--It exists in an abundance of places across the world. I'd digest that Hovind jargon and run to the can.
"YOU can take all the strata you want and shuffle it any way you want, but you still won't have a complete geologic collumn. Why?"
--Because your primitive experiment is outrageously pathetic when applied to realistic depositional mechanics.
"Because the strata used for it was pulled from too many places, too far removed from each other to be viable."
--You must not have knowledge when it comes to simple rock cycles, sedimentary transport, weathering/erosion, ground water, not to mention the basics of orogeny.
"Next, for all you who are attacking my Masters. I get the masters for one purpose. A job, and that was a long time ago."
--Much emphasis on the 'logn time ago'.
"Next, about 65% of the "geology" I learned at that time was based on evoloution. So I do not use it. "
--That must be why your screwed. Evolution implies development so your at a great loss, it would have been better for you to pay attention, how in the world did you even pass without such fundamental knowledge?
"Now, I personnaly believe the earth is young (I've never seen irrefutable proof, even in the grand canyon, that it's old)."
--I agree with you that the earth is young, however your not looking for 'proof' but composed models knitted from the gathering of data & evidence.
"There are too many inconsitencies in current science to even try to use current science to proove it's old."
--See above, and it is unfortunately evident that you didn't pay attention in class, shame on you.
"This is my last post."
--Oh come now! We promise to play nice.. wouldn't you like to test the veracity of what Hovind has thrown at you? (I know, lets have a private thread, Creationist to Creationist, Christian to Christian, YEC to YEC)
------------------
[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-02-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by akakscase, posted 10-02-2002 6:25 PM akakscase has not replied

TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 68 (18908)
10-02-2002 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by mark24
10-02-2002 6:52 PM


Exactly Mark
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by mark24, posted 10-02-2002 6:52 PM mark24 has not replied

TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 68 (18934)
10-02-2002 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by wj
10-02-2002 9:33 PM


"Don't go dragging my into your argument Mark. Anyone with a Masters in geology and using Hovind as a source is obviously too well informed to be persuaded by evidence such as Morton's 26 locations having the complete, intact geologic column. "
--Must be! His vocabulary has already astounded & sent me into 'aww', not to mention a droopy little jaw.
------------------
[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-02-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by wj, posted 10-02-2002 9:33 PM wj 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