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:   Peanut Gallery for Great debate: radiocarbon dating, Mindspawn and Coyote/RAZD
Atheos canadensis
Member (Idle past 2997 days)
Posts: 141
Joined: 11-12-2013


(2)
Message 106 of 305 (711536)
11-19-2013 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by NoNukes
11-19-2013 11:34 PM


Re: Focus may be the key
You aren't wrong about what would make a better presentation. I'd like to see what you suggest too.
Thanks to RAZD's hard work, it's all there already. I just think he should try breaking up the points into individual, hard to ignore posts. Make a post challenging Mindie to address the fact that the Lake Suigetsu varves are demonstrably not precipitation-sensitive. Make a post challenging Mindie to answer why various purportedly inaccurate dating methods all accurately date known events like the year without a summer. That sort of thing. Like I say, RAZD has already done the heavy lifting, he just needs to make it more difficult for Mindie to ignore his excellent points. This may be wishful thinking. We'll see what happens if RAZD chooses to take my suggestion. Probably more of the same, but you never know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by NoNukes, posted 11-19-2013 11:34 PM NoNukes has not replied

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


Message 107 of 305 (711541)
11-20-2013 2:56 AM


No offence, but this was funny
Sorry guys, but this one was very funny ( his post number 35). I shouldn’t laugh, but I really, really can’t help it.
mindspawn writes:
In post 27 I also posted evidence of Europe undergoing dryer spells during the Holocene which would affect German/Irish chronologies.
Does mindspawn even know that we currently live in the Holocene? Wet spells, dry spells, everything inbetween happensand I'm sure that those hundreds of thousands of specialist scientists are aware of it. You don't even have to be a specialist to know it.

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by NoNukes, posted 11-20-2013 7:54 AM Pressie has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 108 of 305 (711546)
11-20-2013 7:54 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Pressie
11-20-2013 2:56 AM


Re: No offence, but this was funny
Does mindspawn even know that we currently live in the Holocene? Wet spells, dry spells, everything inbetween happens
You are allowed to laugh. Because the debate is over.
Given that U-Th dating overlaps with the mid and upper end of C-14 dating, it is simply not possible that 11-12 years worth of tree rings were accumulated in each year. Until he deals with that, mindspawn is spitting into the wind.
And then there are the varves.
Yes, you do have to handle more than one topic at a time.

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 107 by Pressie, posted 11-20-2013 2:56 AM Pressie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by vimesey, posted 11-20-2013 8:31 AM NoNukes has replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(2)
Message 109 of 305 (711548)
11-20-2013 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by NoNukes
11-20-2013 7:54 AM


Re: No offence, but this was funny
Sadly, though, I don't think we're mindspawn's target audience.
The guy is bright and eloquent. I'm sure he knows that his hand waving doesn't persuade anyone who is rational - but his eloquence and superficial reading of the material enables him to come up with a never ending series of what-ifs, that use pertinent scientific terminology.
No matter there is never a single iota of evidence for the what-ifs. No matter that they are no more valid than me saying "what if leprechauns pinch the milk off my doorstep every morning and replace it with indistinguishable fairy milk".
The fact is that mindspawn's posts will be received as the insights of a genius and true believer, by the credulous fundies who are desperate for anything which is supportive of their beliefs and sounds all sciencey.
I fear we are being used to hone his skills and fill his quiver.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by NoNukes, posted 11-20-2013 7:54 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by NoNukes, posted 11-20-2013 11:20 AM vimesey has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 110 of 305 (711551)
11-20-2013 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Atheos canadensis
11-19-2013 10:35 PM


Re: Focus may be the key
I tried focus and precision with mindspawn but it had no effect.
Biblical Christianity and Creationism are founded on lies, willful ignorance and dishonesty and so focus has no effect. Look at the utter joke called "Focus on the Family".
Even very simple and bible based arguments mean nothing to those who claim to be Biblical Christians.
See No genetic bottleneck proves no global flood for the very simple argument.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Atheos canadensis, posted 11-19-2013 10:35 PM Atheos canadensis has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 305 (711564)
11-20-2013 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by vimesey
11-20-2013 8:31 AM


Re: No offence, but this was funny
The guy is bright and eloquent. I'm sure he knows that his hand waving doesn't persuade anyone who is rational - but his eloquence and superficial reading of the material enables him to come up with a never ending series of what-ifs, that use pertinent scientific terminology.
If in fact, mindspawn is as smart as you say, and recognizes that he is not being persuasive, then his ignorance and superficial reading is feigned.
I agree that the never ending series of what-ifs is persuasive to his audience, but those what ifs are punctuated by misstatements of science that if deliberate are falsehoods. And being caught in falsehoods does not persuade.
And I continue to believe that his most damaging falsehood are his misstatements (I assume based on ignorance) of the basis for U-Th dating. So why not hammer him with that at least to the point that he has to switch tactics.
The second thing I would suggest would be summarizing the positions that mindspawn has either explicitly or tacitly given up on.
I fear we are being used to hone his skills and fill his quiver.
I don't have concerns about his skills or his quiver. A quick search of the internet will show that Creationists who don't like tree ring dating or C-14 dating are a dime a dozen.

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 109 by vimesey, posted 11-20-2013 8:31 AM vimesey has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Atheos canadensis, posted 11-20-2013 9:10 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 305 (711631)
11-20-2013 9:02 PM


What makes NoNukes testy.
As I do my own looking into dendrochronology I come up with the following question.
I understand that not all tree rings work as accurate calendars. But that seems to be because they don't show growth rings at all or because some climates do not have interrupted growing seasons.
But is there any evidence whatsoever for multiple tree rings over a consistent period of say 10-50 years such that the tree ring data does not correspond within say a small percentage (less than 10%) of 10 to 50 rings?
Because I can find absolutely no evidence of trees putting on multiple rings year after year. Mindspawn claims that scientists are lying cherry pickers, but as best as I can tell, there aren't really any cherries to pick.
So why should talk about cherry picking or 11 rings in a year even be listened to until at least a minimum amount of supposition has been raised? Where is the 10 year old apple tree with 20 non annual growth rings?

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

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Coyote, posted 11-20-2013 9:20 PM NoNukes has replied
 Message 118 by RAZD, posted 11-21-2013 9:41 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Atheos canadensis
Member (Idle past 2997 days)
Posts: 141
Joined: 11-12-2013


Message 113 of 305 (711632)
11-20-2013 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by NoNukes
11-20-2013 11:20 AM


Re: No offence, but this was funny
If in fact, mindspawn is as smart as you say, and recognizes that he is not being persuasive, then his ignorance and superficial reading is feigned
I tend to agree with this, although he may really just not have time to read every source RAZD was posting. Not that this is an excuse; I fully agree with RAZD when he says that Mindie should familiarize himself with the actual science before he declares it invalid. But I like what RAZD did in his most recent posts. He did what I was hoping he would and really focused on one very problematic (for Mindie) issue per post and made a concise citation so Mindie has no excuse (if he bothers to profer one) for not addressing the clear refutation of his objections. If Mindie continues to be evasive it may be necessary to make only one post pointing out one issue and making him respond before moving on to the next refutation. Right now Mindie is using the flurry of posts and different points to avoid substantively addressing any of them.
So why should talk about cherry picking or 11 rings in a year even be listened to until at least a minimum amount of supposition has been raised? Where is the 10 year old apple tree with 20 non annual growth rings?
I agree with this too and I'm glad RAZD confronted Mindie about his science conspiracy theory. The guy keeps demanding evidence for things like the correct identifiaction of the year without a summer (Which RAZD provided in spades in these last posts) while slinging assertions like the scientists are all cherry-picking data.
Edited by Atheos canadensis, : missed a quote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by NoNukes, posted 11-20-2013 11:20 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(3)
Message 114 of 305 (711633)
11-20-2013 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by NoNukes
11-20-2013 9:02 PM


Re: What makes NoNukes testy.
So why should talk about cherry picking or 11 rings in a year even be listened to until at least a minimum amount of supposition has been raised?
That figure, 11 or 12 rings a year, is what is needed for Mindspun to dismiss radiocarbon dating -- in his own mind -- as inaccurate.
He really is not trying to convince us as much as he is trying to convince himself. He has to find some flaw with radiocarbon dating somewhere or his whole world view comes crashing down about his ankles.
And he is willing to settle for a very low threshold of evidence because it is only himself that he is really addressing, and he needs it so much.

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
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by NoNukes, posted 11-20-2013 9:02 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by NoNukes, posted 11-21-2013 9:20 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Atheos canadensis
Member (Idle past 2997 days)
Posts: 141
Joined: 11-12-2013


Message 115 of 305 (711657)
11-21-2013 9:04 AM


On the Road to Victory
RAZD's latest post was an excellent idea and his outline for future posts spells the end for Mindspawn's evasiveness. It's all laid out clearly now, and when RAZD starts making him respond to each section one at a time then he will have nowhere to hide. Of course I'm sure he won't go quietly and will almost certainly never admit defeat, but it will be so obvious to everyone including himself that an explicit admission won't be necessary. I look forward to watching him squirm. Does that make me a sadist?

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by NoNukes, posted 11-21-2013 9:11 AM Atheos canadensis has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 116 of 305 (711660)
11-21-2013 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Atheos canadensis
11-21-2013 9:04 AM


Re: On the Road to Victory
RAZD's latest post was an excellent idea and his outline for future posts spells the end for Mindspawn's evasiveness.
I agree. The outline well organized even if a bit long.
That said, never underestimate the ability of this particular creationist to invent 'facts'.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

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 115 by Atheos canadensis, posted 11-21-2013 9:04 AM Atheos canadensis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Atheos canadensis, posted 11-21-2013 12:15 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 305 (711661)
11-21-2013 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by Coyote
11-20-2013 9:20 PM


Re: What makes NoNukes testy.
That figure, 11 or 12 rings a year, is what is needed for Mindspun to dismiss radiocarbon dating -- in his own mind -- as inaccurate.
Yes, the 11 to 12 factor seems to be critical to his defense of Noah's Flood year as well. The factor is just long enough to get those French and Spanish cave paintings finished after the Flood rather than before. The factor of 12 would make every single C-14 date post Flood.
I believe that factor of 12 was the impetus for his spring tide theory. Mindspawn isn't the first person to make the mistake about the length of the tide cycle.
That figure, 11 or 12 rings a year, is what is needed for Mindspun to dismiss radiocarbon dating -- in his own mind -- as inaccurate.
Yes. It is quite clear that Mindspawn's standard for winning is the presentation of scenarios that he can hold onto by sheer denial. And of course RAZD cannot push a mass spectrometer and some Th230 samples through the internet.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

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 114 by Coyote, posted 11-20-2013 9:20 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 118 of 305 (711665)
11-21-2013 9:41 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by NoNukes
11-20-2013 9:02 PM


Re: What makes NoNukes testy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by NoNukes, posted 11-20-2013 9:02 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
Atheos canadensis
Member (Idle past 2997 days)
Posts: 141
Joined: 11-12-2013


Message 119 of 305 (711697)
11-21-2013 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by NoNukes
11-21-2013 9:11 AM


Re: On the Road to Victory
That said, never underestimate the ability of this particular creationist to invent 'facts'.
I have noticed his proclivity for that practice. But I'm hoping the more focused approach RAZD has outlined will make it difficult for Mindie to introduce more fantasies without first dealing with the robust refutation of the previous ones.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by NoNukes, posted 11-21-2013 9:11 AM NoNukes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by jar, posted 11-21-2013 12:20 PM Atheos canadensis has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 120 of 305 (711700)
11-21-2013 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Atheos canadensis
11-21-2013 12:15 PM


Re: On the Road to Victory
Gish gallop works.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Atheos canadensis, posted 11-21-2013 12:15 PM Atheos canadensis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Atheos canadensis, posted 11-21-2013 1:58 PM jar 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