University fires scientist, July 2014

Whereas Percy letting you back into this forum is perhaps not funny, given the majority of your posts seem to contain one sentence and some sort of epithet within that sentence."Loony" and "stupid" are two epithets you have recently used pertaining to Christians that accept the bible as plainly read.Of course epithets are usually used by genuinely stupid people, because the key to an epithet is that the person just has to use an emotive word rather than having to form some sort of argument.

Goodness, gracious me, Mike, you can write a lot.You do know about mining companies and what they do, don't you?

I know, it's one of my weirdisms. I have peculiar creative bursts, then I shut down. I can write a lot NOW while I have the energy, but tomorrow you won't be able to get one sentence out of me, because the energy will be ZERO.I don't value the claims of the opening post, I would say, in fact I haven't even looked into them. But I have to provide some sort of balance so that the Creation-camp are represented in some manner.Nobody can really treat this type of fragmentary evidence as "conclusive" IMHO. There is a great induction of tenuous geo-chronometers for a young earth and an old earth, and in my opinion it's basically a choice one makes. For example, starlight indicates an old universe, but I would employ Modulous's technicality, that this wouldn't necessarily preclude a young earth. Technically one could have an old universe and a young earth. I myself, in regards to the "age-issue" can only give an honest answer, I CHOOSE to accept the young view by faith. I can't know - of course I can't! Nobody can fully know what happened in the past when it comes to such things. IMHO.

Goodness, gracious me, Mike, you managed to write a lot again.You're still missing the mining companies in my country.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Why can't they know.And Mike, I have not said Creationists are stupid; I have said Creationism is stupid.

Well, I've learned that 'graduates' from Liberty are crazy as bat "sh*t". Don't ever appoint any of them. Ever. They're crazy.Easy.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Unless they claim it. Proposing explanations that are consistent with how the universe works is acceptable, yes. That's not a theistic offering. A theistic offering would be 'a divine being is responsible for the information in organisms', but, to date, without providing evidence that this is the case. Hardly acceptable in the same way as the alternative above. Given his personality, I'd assume he'd be field scientist studying barnacles or worms and we'd never hear about him. Either that or he'd crop up as having discovered some new African or American species every now and then. Well as a general rule we don't find soft tissue, and the only reasoning proposed that it is young is 'I don't know how it could have survived for as long as you say'. There is no law that means this material must be young. Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

What are the proper qualifications?There are no degrees in electron microscope operation. Whatever the depth of this persons academic background, it seems he has managed to obtain the requisite background and experience. He's also published in the field.

That problem would almost certainly not have been the case for Armitage who from all indications was hired as a technician and is well versed in the operation of the equipment he was assigned.What Mr. Armitage isn't is a scientist. But he was not hired to be a scientist.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Why can't we use the characteristics and chemical make-up of the rock to determine its age? Why do you rely on faith when you can follow the evidence?