Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
20 online now:
dwise1, jar, kjsimons, nwr, PaulK, ringo, Tanypteryx (7 members, 13 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,254 Year: 4,366/6,534 Month: 580/900 Week: 104/182 Day: 11/27 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   archeaology
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 39 (21422)
11-02-2002 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by NimLore
11-02-2002 6:26 PM


"but the evidence I see so far boldy states that something is up on the side of conspiracy, as to the tampering of evidence of fossils..."
--Not really, you have shown that you show little knowledge of the fossil record in your assertions. And seeing that you have accepted Hovinds sophistry, I don't think its going to be all too good for you to continue to parrot his misrepresentations and misunderstandings. His credibility is simply not in good standing with any of our initiatives here.

------------------

[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 11-02-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by NimLore, posted 11-02-2002 6:26 PM NimLore has taken no action

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 39 (21427)
11-02-2002 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by gene90
11-02-2002 5:32 PM


Originally posted by gene90:

Foul.

Turkey?

So you're attacking science now?

Don't be silly even then most "scientists" knew the truth, they just don't want to get burned at the stake.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by gene90, posted 11-02-2002 5:32 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by gene90, posted 11-02-2002 9:57 PM nos482 has replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 39 (21428)
11-02-2002 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by NimLore
11-02-2002 5:56 PM


quote:
Originally posted by NimLore:
THink of the money that is in the evolutionary world.. would you tell me that all those textbooks going into schools is not a multi billion dollar industry..... The devil is a crafty one..LOL

There is no money in education if the state of American science education is any indication. BTW, those textbooks are paid for with tax dollars, there is no profit at all.

There is lots of money in religion, though.

[This message has been edited by nos482, 11-02-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by NimLore, posted 11-02-2002 5:56 PM NimLore has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Itzpapalotl, posted 11-02-2002 7:44 PM nos482 has replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 39 (21429)
11-02-2002 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by TrueCreation
11-02-2002 6:13 PM


Originally posted by TrueCreation:

Get a life, TrueCretin.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by TrueCreation, posted 11-02-2002 6:13 PM TrueCreation has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by gene90, posted 11-02-2002 9:58 PM nos482 has replied

  
Itzpapalotl
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 39 (21432)
11-02-2002 7:44 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by nos482
11-02-2002 7:16 PM


quote:
There is lots of money in religion, though.

Indeed Ken Ham (head of answers in Genesis) made $170,634 in 2001, plus a contribution towards his benefits of $13,296! (10-26-2002 the kentucky post http://www.kypost.com/2002/10/26/genes102602.html). compare this to Eugenie Scott who runs the National Center for Science Education. She makes $70,000 plus $6958 in benefits, if you are only after money creationism not science is the way to go.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by nos482, posted 11-02-2002 7:16 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by nos482, posted 11-02-2002 8:11 PM Itzpapalotl has taken no action

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 39 (21433)
11-02-2002 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Itzpapalotl
11-02-2002 7:44 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Itzpapalotl:
quote:
There is lots of money in religion, though.

Indeed Ken Ham (head of answers in Genesis) made $170,634 in 2001, plus a contribution towards his benefits of $13,296! (10-26-2002 the kentucky post http://www.kypost.com/2002/10/26/genes102602.html). compare this to Eugenie Scott who runs the National Center for Science Education. She makes $70,000 plus $6958 in benefits, if you are only after money creationism not science is the way to go.


That is because there is a sucker born (again) every minute.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Itzpapalotl, posted 11-02-2002 7:44 PM Itzpapalotl has taken no action

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3060 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 22 of 39 (21437)
11-02-2002 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by nos482
11-02-2002 7:14 PM


[QUOTE][B]Don't be silly even then most "scientists" knew the truth, they just don't want to get burned at the stake[/QUOTE]

[/B]

My point was that you were devaluing the value of observation, an essential tenet of science. For most of history the observation that the sun apparently revolved around the Earth was a solid foundation for "scientific" geocentrism, as it was at the time. *Later* observations, and a lot of math, eventually demonstrated that the obvious solution was not the correct one.

But I don't think you should knock geocentrism because it was sound science a long time ago.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by nos482, posted 11-02-2002 7:14 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by nos482, posted 11-03-2002 7:11 AM gene90 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3060 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 23 of 39 (21438)
11-02-2002 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by nos482
11-02-2002 7:20 PM


[QUOTE][B]Get a life, TrueCretin.[/QUOTE]

[/B]

This guy needs to get banned.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by nos482, posted 11-02-2002 7:20 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by nos482, posted 11-03-2002 7:13 AM gene90 has taken no action
 Message 37 by nator, posted 11-03-2002 10:05 PM gene90 has taken no action

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3060 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 24 of 39 (21439)
11-02-2002 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by NimLore
11-02-2002 6:26 PM


[QUOTE][B]Granted that most scientists are not in it for the money, but rather the passion of it or what ever it is that drives us to do it.. but that still does not negate the fact that time equals money in our society... which to me does not mean we are slaves to money or even serve it.. but the evidence I see so far boldy states that something is up on the side of conspiracy, as to the tampering of evidence of fossils...[/QUOTE]

[/B]

Science isn't about lots of money, it's about middle-class income, at best. If I wanted to get wealthy there are lots of business-related fields I could go into and spend less time in college than with a science track.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by NimLore, posted 11-02-2002 6:26 PM NimLore has taken no action

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3060 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 25 of 39 (21440)
11-02-2002 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by NimLore
11-02-2002 5:56 PM


[QUOTE][B]would you tell me that all those textbooks going into schools is not a multi billion dollar industry.....[/QUOTE]

[/B]

Yes. And scientists, for the most part, aren't even the ones writing those textbooks! At least not until university level, and then the printer gets most of the money. I'm sure there are royalties but an evolutionary textbook is no more profitable than an accounting textbooks or the infamous, Of People and Pandas.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by NimLore, posted 11-02-2002 5:56 PM NimLore has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Andya Primanda, posted 11-03-2002 2:58 AM gene90 has taken no action

  
Andya Primanda
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 39 (21447)
11-03-2002 2:58 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by gene90
11-02-2002 10:03 PM


As a matter of fact, I personally view that creationism is much more marketable than evolution. Just look at the Harun Yahya movement, selling books and videos to unsuspecting Muslims around the world.

Damn it, why do I end up an evolutionist anyway? Should've been a creationist--I might be richer than today!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by gene90, posted 11-02-2002 10:03 PM gene90 has taken no action

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 39 (21449)
11-03-2002 7:11 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by gene90
11-02-2002 9:57 PM


Originally posted by gene90:

My point was that you were devaluing the value of observation, an essential tenet of science. For most of history the observation that the sun apparently revolved around the Earth was a solid foundation for "scientific" geocentrism, as it was at the time. *Later* observations, and a lot of math, eventually demonstrated that the obvious solution was not the correct one.

Observation alone is not proof. There is much more to the process. It's like those who only use logic and word games as their sole evidence. Long after science learned the truth religion stuck to the old inaccurate belief and enforced it.

But I don't think you should knock geocentrism because it was sound science a long time ago.

Science learns from its errors, religion doesn't.

[This message has been edited by nos482, 11-03-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by gene90, posted 11-02-2002 9:57 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by gene90, posted 11-03-2002 2:14 PM nos482 has replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 39 (21450)
11-03-2002 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by gene90
11-02-2002 9:58 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
This guy needs to get banned.

Yes, TC does. He called me an ignoramus.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by gene90, posted 11-02-2002 9:58 PM gene90 has taken no action

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3060 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 29 of 39 (21457)
11-03-2002 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by nos482
11-03-2002 7:11 AM


[QUOTE][B]Observation alone is not proof.[/QUOTE]

[/B]

So if God appeared in your living room you would still be a nontheist?

Also, observation is required in science. Without it, there would be no science. Therefore an attack on observation is necessarily an attack on science.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by nos482, posted 11-03-2002 7:11 AM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by nos482, posted 11-03-2002 2:50 PM gene90 has taken no action

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 39 (21459)
11-03-2002 2:50 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by gene90
11-03-2002 2:14 PM


Originally posted by gene90:

So if God appeared in your living room you would still be a nontheist?

Of course. Seeing that god exists is not the same as worshipping it.

Also, observation is required in science. Without it, there would be no science. Therefore an attack on observation is necessarily an attack on science.

You're not listening, big surprise. Contrary to what you're saying, I didn't do any such thing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by gene90, posted 11-03-2002 2:14 PM gene90 has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by John, posted 11-03-2002 3:19 PM nos482 has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022