Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Terry at the Talk Origins board
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 62 of 157 (19273)
10-07-2002 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Percy
10-07-2002 9:21 AM


Percy:
quote:
It is the only unmoderated forum at this site.
I view the "Free For All" forum as a place to go totally of any creation/evolution topic (of course, the "Coffee House" forum is for such also). It is also a place to trade insults, etc.
I put this topic in this forum, because I expected that there would be some shots taken at Terry's character. Things have been pretty friendly, and I would hope that they stay that way.
I know that, if things turned ugly in this topic, as topic starter I would request that the topic be closed. And since I have Adminnemooseus under my thumb (I can take away his use of the computer), I am confident that it would be closed.
Moose
------------------
BS degree, geology, '83; Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U; Old Earth evolution - Yes; Godly creation - Maybe
My big page of Creation/Evolution Links
[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 10-07-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Percy, posted 10-07-2002 9:21 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Percy, posted 10-08-2002 10:21 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 66 of 157 (19403)
10-09-2002 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by wj
10-09-2002 1:22 AM


I sent an e-mail to Robert H. Webb (USGS), who is listed in the "contact information" box at the University of Arizona page. Maybe, if I'm lucky, they'll post some supplimental information.
As I see it, my primary problem with Terry, is that the various pages telling of the "new information" use titles such as "Is the Grand Canyon a Geologic Infant?". Such titles do strongly imply that the "new information" is relevent to age considerations of the entire Grand Canyon. My assertion, or course, is that it is not; The "new information" makes no comment on the "entire Grand Canyon" age.
This is my new message to Terry:
quote:
Terry, two questions:
1) What does the direct from the new information quotation "Some scientists now believe that a third of the canyon’s depth may have been cut in the blink of a geologic eye - perhaps during the past 600,000 to 700,000 years" mean to you?
2) Because of the new information, what time span are you assigning to the erosion of the entire Grand Canyon?
My bottom line, at that Talk Origins board topic, is that I'm not going to permit Terry to have the final message (unless he bans me, in order to get it). Maybe I'll just end up repeatedly posting the above two questions.
Moose
------------------
BS degree, geology, '83; Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U; Old Earth evolution - Yes; Godly creation - Maybe
My big page of Creation/Evolution Links

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by wj, posted 10-09-2002 1:22 AM wj has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by mark24, posted 10-09-2002 11:19 AM Minnemooseus has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 68 of 157 (19419)
10-09-2002 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by mark24
10-09-2002 11:19 AM


quote:
I have signed up for Terryland, but probably won't bother posting,...
The old "annoy him by signing up for his message board, and then not say anything trick"?
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by mark24, posted 10-09-2002 11:19 AM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by mark24, posted 10-09-2002 2:01 PM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 70 by wj, posted 10-09-2002 8:12 PM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 99 by wj, posted 10-16-2002 8:59 PM Minnemooseus has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 71 of 157 (19475)
10-10-2002 2:12 AM


I think I may have succeeded in striking a blow at Terry's thought process, at the Grand Canyon topic at the Talk Origins board.
See message 50, here.
He still has some wriggle room, but I already have a response lined up, for what I anticipate he might say next.
Moose

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Mammuthus, posted 10-10-2002 5:59 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 73 of 157 (19648)
10-11-2002 2:21 PM


I've now brought "Morton's Demon" to Terry's site.
Terry's intitial response included:
quote:
This post you have placed here is one of the milder ones from the talk.origins ilk, so I will leave it - with the warning that this is exactly the type of debate method this group was formed to avoid.
I will probably also bring Kenneth Miller' conversation with Henry Morris over there, somewhere along the line.
Moose
------------------
BS degree, geology, '83; Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U; Old Earth evolution - Yes; Godly creation - Maybe
My big page of Creation/Evolution Links

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 75 of 157 (19674)
10-11-2002 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Randy
10-11-2002 6:15 PM


Terry seems unable to concede that he has made any sort of a mistake. He could possibly retract the point I think I caught him on, without totally destroying his (flawed) arguement.
I shall give him some more time, then I will state that I must assume that the opinion of his previous message still stands. I'll then refute it one last time (also with a bit of new data), and declare a victory.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Randy, posted 10-11-2002 6:15 PM Randy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by wj, posted 10-11-2002 6:46 PM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 77 by Mister Pamboli, posted 10-11-2002 8:50 PM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 78 by Percy, posted 10-13-2002 10:50 AM Minnemooseus has replied
 Message 89 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-14-2002 5:31 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 80 of 157 (19778)
10-13-2002 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Percy
10-13-2002 10:50 AM


Terry and Salty are having a disagreement right now, in the anthropology "Closer and Closer" topic.
This is part of Terry's message 19:
quote:
Of course, neither you nor I have to agree with the DATES given by accepting such evidences at face value, but we certainly should not discount the evidence itself simply because it does not fit our preconceived notions of where man should and should not be found in the geologic record.
He is referring to the "preconceived notions" of mainstream science.
Moose
A ps to the big Admin guy: I've discovered that one must not put the "http colon slash slash" into the UBB code for links such as the above. The UBB code provides the "http colon slash slash" itself. If the poster also supplies it, it gets there twice, and the link is bad. I'm surprised that I've (Admin mode) only encountered, and fixed this problem once. I don't think the UBB code help page is clear on this situation. Perhaps it needs a bit more detail?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Percy, posted 10-13-2002 10:50 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Admin, posted 10-13-2002 2:04 PM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 10-13-2002 2:09 PM Minnemooseus has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 84 of 157 (19804)
10-13-2002 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Percy
10-13-2002 2:09 PM


First a further comment about Terry's "preconceived notions" comment, that was aimed at mainstream science. He seems to do such a lot. I found it highly ironic, coming from one having a "preconceived notion" of the magnitude of being a "young earther". The quote wasn't intended as any comment on the Terry/Salty relationship.
I'm not sure, but it seems that Salty is an "old earther"?
As for Salty's "tiresome" comment - I think, to a degree, I may have had it coming. I had very badly stated a question (including using some wrong numbers), that ended up coming out as being of a "Have you quit beating your wife?" nature. It took two follow up messages from Terry, for me to realize my error, for which I subsequently apologized.
Terry's way of operating in both the "young earth" and "old earth" mode sure does tend to get one fouled up.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 10-13-2002 2:09 PM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by wj, posted 10-13-2002 11:07 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 88 of 157 (19872)
10-14-2002 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Percy
10-13-2002 10:50 AM


quote:
Keep hanging in there, DQ!
DQ? What's DQ?
DM (Da Moose)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Percy, posted 10-13-2002 10:50 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Percy, posted 10-14-2002 7:10 PM Minnemooseus has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 89 of 157 (19875)
10-14-2002 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Minnemooseus
10-11-2002 6:27 PM


Quoting myself:
quote:
Terry seems unable to concede that he has made any sort of a mistake.
Scavenger hunt time. Can anyone find a example, at the Talk Origins board, of Terry owning up to having made an erroneous statement, a bad conclusion, etc. etc. etc. Has he ever admitted to being wrong?
Moose
------------------
BS degree, geology, '83; Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U; Old Earth evolution - Yes; Godly creation - Maybe
My big page of Creation/Evolution Links

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-11-2002 6:27 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 91 of 157 (19886)
10-14-2002 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Percy
10-14-2002 7:10 PM


Oh, Richard Strauss, Op. 35.
Are you referring to me or Terry (or both of us)?
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Percy, posted 10-14-2002 7:10 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Percy, posted 10-14-2002 9:15 PM Minnemooseus has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 94 of 157 (19937)
10-15-2002 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Percy
10-14-2002 9:15 PM


I've now got an ally at the active Grand Canyon topic, at the Talk Origins board.
My newest message there, is number 63.
I think my next message at that site may be my last. It may be:
MORTON'S DEMON!
MORTON'S DEMON!
MORTON'S DEMON!
Added by edit: The Glenn Morton "Morton's Demon" message can be found at : http://EvC Forum: Ignorance and Arrogance -->EvC Forum: Ignorance and Arrogance
I first mentioned "Morton's Demon", in this topic, at http://EvC Forum: What happened at talk origins? -->EvC Forum: What happened at talk origins?
Moose
[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 10-15-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Percy, posted 10-14-2002 9:15 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by frank, posted 10-15-2002 2:35 PM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 97 by Percy, posted 10-15-2002 9:58 PM Minnemooseus has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 98 of 157 (19988)
10-16-2002 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by Percy
10-15-2002 9:58 PM


quote:
Havasu Canyon is almost at the other end of the canyon. Terry is pointing out that younger dates aren't just at the top end of the canyon, but also at the bottom end, and by implication probably lots of other places too.
The information presented for Havasu Canyon is also that the part of the canyon under consideration, is the deepest part, not the entire depth. But the information is presented in a rather fuzzy manner, so I didn't choose to pursue it.
Instead, I have chosen to primarily focus in on this statement, from the "new information". I have quoted it to Terry repeatidly, in red text with bold highlighting.
quote:
Growing numbers of geologists now believe that Marble Canyon and the Inner Gorge may be no more than 700,000 years old veritable infants on the geologic time scale, and much younger than the earlier 3-million- to 5-million—year-old estimates. Some scientists now believe that a third of the canyon’s depth may have been cut in the blink of a geologic eye perhaps during the past 600,000 to 700,000 years.
This explicitly states that it is the bottom third of the canyon, that was erroded in the last 700,000 years. The last 700,000 years doesn't cover the top two-thirds of the Grand Canyons depth.
I would think that this in itself should be plenty to shoot down Terry's arguement that the entire Grand Canyon, rim to river, was erroded in the most recent 700,000 years. But, alas, Morton's demon seems to be powerful enough to filter the "a third of" right out of the sentence. Terry persists on reading it as "Some scientists now believe that the canyon’s depth may have been cut in the blink of a geologic eye perhaps during the past 600,000 to 700,000 years.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Percy, posted 10-15-2002 9:58 PM Percy has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 100 of 157 (20128)
10-17-2002 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by wj
10-16-2002 8:59 PM


Functioning in the Admin mode, I did a save and print out of the complete topics list. The file ran 1,034 KB, took 31 pages to print out, and numbered 665 topics (including a number of damaged topics).
Anyhow, very deep in the list, I discovered an old Talk Origins / Terry topic. It's at http://EvC Forum: What happened at talk origins? -->EvC Forum: What happened at talk origins? .
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by wj, posted 10-16-2002 8:59 PM wj has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 102 of 157 (20195)
10-18-2002 2:42 PM


My most recent message at the canyon topic, at the Talk Origins board:
quote:
OK Terry, here comes the H-bomb:
I had e-mailed Robert Webb, the researcher behind the "new information", concerning the first cited article in message 1. I have just received a reply from him. I hope he doesn't mind me passing the message on.
Robert Webb said, and I quote:
I had a real problem with the people that wrote that article. We tried to restrict it to our work (1) on lava dams, which indicate that volcanism occurred much more recently than previously thought and (2) offset rates on the Hurricane and Toroweap faults, which could explain why eastern Grand Canyon downcutting rates may be more rapid than those in western Grand Canyon. We said absolutely nothing about the overall age of Grand Canyon, which remains at about 5-6 million years. Instead, we have been trying to focus on very specific issues within the inner gorge of Grand Canyon, which might be much younger than previously thought. Others are focusing on Glen Canyon, which some now think is younger than 500,000 years. So as you perceived, there is a perception problem here that originally caused the delay of that press release by 4 months and now I wish I had cancelled it altogether.
Bob
------
Robert H. Webb
U.S. Geological Survey
520 N. Park Avenue
Tucson, AZ 85719
520-670-6671 ext 238
rhwebb@usgs.gov
CASE CLOSED?
Moose
Moose
ps: I've been posting ban provoking comments at TE. I should be gone from there soon.
Morton's Demon has Terry's head in a vice.

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Percy, posted 10-18-2002 3:15 PM Minnemooseus has replied
 Message 106 by wj, posted 10-19-2002 1:53 AM Minnemooseus 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