Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (8963 total)
355 online now:
CosmicChimp, Faith, Hyroglyphx, jar, PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat) (6 members, 349 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume: Total: 870,881 Year: 2,629/23,288 Month: 820/1,809 Week: 252/225 Day: 12/53 Hour: 4/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Creationists' Willful Ignorance?
Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 1109 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 94 of 182 (629158)
08-16-2011 7:27 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by IamJoseph
08-16-2011 2:58 AM


"Popular" arguments
IamJoseph writes:

If Australian aboriginals are 60K years old, their popilation would be at least 5 trillion.

If you base your rejection of 60,000 years on the ridiculousness of the population size of 5 trillion, then you should also reconsider, based on the population if mice, an age of 6000 years for the earth. With a current world population of about 4 billion mice it is obvious that the world could not have been created before August 27, 2009.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 2:58 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 8:10 AM Parasomnium has responded

Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 1109 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 100 of 182 (629167)
08-16-2011 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by IamJoseph
08-16-2011 8:10 AM


Re: "Popular" arguments
IamJoseph writes:

Population is based on the time factor, and 60K years would give a population greater than the world by a ratio of ten with compounding increments.

What I am trying to tell you is that your own argument, when applied to the population of mice, rules out a world older than two years.

What you fail to see is that simplistic calculations can be grossly misleading.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 8:10 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 8:57 AM Parasomnium has responded

Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 1109 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 112 of 182 (629184)
08-16-2011 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by IamJoseph
08-16-2011 8:57 AM


Re: "Popular" arguments
Well, now we're getting somewhere. I show you where your own argument leads you and you come back with "that does not sound like clean math". Indeed, your argument is not based on "clean math", that's what I've been trying to get across.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 8:57 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 11:00 AM Parasomnium has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020