Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,839 Year: 4,096/9,624 Month: 967/974 Week: 294/286 Day: 15/40 Hour: 0/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Geology and the Great Flood ⇒

The Flood

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Flood
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2290
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.9

Normal Thread Display
Message 71 of 188 (384668)
02-12-2007 4:35 PM 		Reply to: Message 63 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 9:52 AM

Re: Baumgardner/IRC/Wyatt
I don't believe the heat problem has been soundly refuted since the properties and arragement of the atmosphere in such a canopy preflood model would be unknown.
Since no one has been able to substantiate the "water canopy" garbage, I'd say the flood's heat problem still stands.
​
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 9:52 AM Buzsaw has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 6:58 PM DrJones* has replied
  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2290
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.9

Normal Thread Display
Message 78 of 188 (384706)
02-12-2007 7:14 PM 		Reply to: Message 75 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 6:58 PM

Re: Canopy
Until someone empirically refutes the canopy hypothesis it has not been empirically falsified
Until someone provides evidence to support the canopy hypothesis it remains bullshit.
​
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 6:58 PM Buzsaw has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 7:23 PM DrJones* has replied
  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2290
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.9

Normal Thread Display
Message 80 of 188 (384709)
02-12-2007 7:18 PM 		Reply to: Message 73 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 6:52 PM

Re: Genesis Flood Evidence
science has yet to prove that the amount of water to do the Black Sea thing did not affect the whole planet.
Seeing as there is evidence of only the Black Sea area being flooded and no evidence for a global flood I'd say that you continue to be full of it.
​
Nor has it been empirically proven that those millions of sea life fossils in the high Rockies et al did not get there via Genesis flood tectonics.
Proven? no, but as you have been told multiple times, science doesn't prove anything. We have evidence to support the current geological theories and nothing to support the biblical bullshit.
​
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.
​
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 6:52 PM Buzsaw has not replied
  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2290
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.9

Normal Thread Display
Message 83 of 188 (384715)
02-12-2007 7:25 PM 		Reply to: Message 82 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 7:23 PM

Re: Canopy
The fact remains that it's not empirically refuted.
Seeing as it has yet to be empirically supported it doesn't need to be refuted, it's bullshit until shown otherwise.
​
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 7:23 PM Buzsaw has not replied
  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2290
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.9

Normal Thread Display
Message 88 of 188 (384730)
02-12-2007 8:18 PM 		Reply to: Message 84 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 7:28 PM

Re: Nothing Empirical
I think she did quite a sufficient job regardless of the responses to her which were, again, not empirical refutes.
Faith's posts consisted of the fingers-in-her-ears-head-in-the-sand willfull ignorance so typical of religious fundamentalists. Such gems like:
I just don't accept radiocarbon dating
but no way to know that I can see since radiocarbon dating is as good as wild guessing.
This one is great, she admits she's being willfully ignorant:
I don't accept carbon dating, never have. It proves nothing. I have said, however, that I don't understand it well enough to discuss it and will concede the point when the discussion gets technical.
​
the responses to her which were, again, not empirical refutes
Why would people need to empirically refute her posts? It was her job to refute the evidence given to her with something more substantial than "radiocarbon dating is wrong cause I say so".
​
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.
​
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.
​
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 7:28 PM Buzsaw has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 11:11 PM DrJones* has replied
  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2290
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.9

Normal Thread Display
Message 99 of 188 (384779)
02-13-2007 12:02 AM 		Reply to: Message 94 by Buzsaw
02-12-2007 11:11 PM

Re: Nothing Empirical
She is not being willfully ignorant.
She says that she doesn't beleive it but admits to not knowing anything about it. What do you call that but willfull ignorance?
​
I, Dr Baumgardner and others have for a long time argued that if there were a different pre-Biblical flood atmosphere carbon and nitrogen properties in the atmosphere and in all preflood fossils et al would not be the same as post flood rendering Carbon dating inaccurate. How many times do you people need to be reminded of this?
They can argue all they want but if they dont have evidence its bullshit. We do have evidence about the past atmosphere and it doesnt support their arguements.
​
rendering Carbon dating inaccurate. How many times do you people need to be reminded of this?
Carbon dating is not used to date fossils. How many times do you need to be reminded of this?
​
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.
​
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Buzsaw, posted 02-12-2007 11:11 PM Buzsaw has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by obvious Child, posted 02-13-2007 2:01 AM DrJones* has replied
  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2290
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.9

Normal Thread Display
Message 101 of 188 (384801)
02-13-2007 2:08 AM 		Reply to: Message 100 by obvious Child
02-13-2007 2:01 AM

Re: Nothing Empirical
It doesn't even make sense
Of course not, its the curse of religious fundamentalism.
​
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by obvious Child, posted 02-13-2007 2:01 AM obvious Child has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by obvious Child, posted 02-13-2007 2:30 AM DrJones* has not replied
  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2290
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.9

Normal Thread Display
Message 140 of 188 (385300)
02-15-2007 12:05 AM 		Reply to: Message 139 by kuresu
02-14-2007 11:22 PM

Re: This "dynamic-decay" theory (Evidence of the Flood)
anyhow, try answering my questions instead of invading.
All you'll ever get from charley is gibberish and evasion.
​
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by kuresu, posted 02-14-2007 11:22 PM kuresu has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024