Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Young-earth theories
Frog
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 32 (347738)
09-09-2006 3:16 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by PaulK
09-07-2006 9:40 AM


HI Paulk.
yes you are quite wright. I will be more careful in my research in future.
Thankk you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by PaulK, posted 09-07-2006 9:40 AM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-09-2006 8:51 AM Frog has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 32 of 32 (347759)
09-09-2006 8:51 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Frog
09-09-2006 3:16 AM


Well said, sir, well said.
Some general points.
You write:
I think you will find on both sides of the argument many rates are asumed and estimted and unprovable if they've taken place in the past.
An estimate is not a mere assumption. For example, I might estimate the number of bricks involved in building the (Ming dynasty) Great Wall of China by counting the bricks in an intact section and then multiplying up by the length. The result would not be a baseless assumption; and the fact that I couldn't check my figure by travelling back in time and counting all the bricks one by one would not be regarded as an epistemological problem.
Radiometric dating is base on three unprovable assumptions.
Sorry, got go. in any origins science there is a degree of faith involved.
It was handsome of you to retract this particular claim. In general, scientists base nothing on unprovable assumptions, nor do they require anything to be taken on faith. This is because, dammit, they're scientists. If a scientist says "such-and-such a thing is true", he is obliged to explain to all the other scientists why he thinks this. If he says: "Oh, it's an unprovable assumption, take it on faith", then all the other scientists would point at him and laugh. They'd probably call him hurtful names like "Mr Assumey-Pants". Well, possibly. I don't know. 'Cos this has in fact never happened. 'Cos scientists never behave like that. 'Cos they're not idiots.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Frog, posted 09-09-2006 3:16 AM Frog 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