Peanut Gallery - What variety of creationist is Buzsaw? (Minnemooseus and Buzsaw)

There is nothing naive about Buz's acceptance of this PRATT. Not only is the circular fossil/layer aging accusation a stupid PRATT, it's one that Buz has seen debunked here any number of times.Buz has also been asked any number of times to point to a mechanism that would allow reduced cosmic or solar radiation due to a water canopy or any other pre-Flood condition to affect radiometric dating (other than C14 dating) in the direction Buz wants the dating to be wrong. To date Buz has yet to provide even a handwaving explanation.As one poster once put it, no scientists don't assume that radioactive decay rates increase when it becomes hot and humid outside. We know from experiment decay rates aren't significantly affected by heat and pressure.I can't understand why anyone would want to debate with Buzsaw about anything.

No I don't. I assume the man is debating in the best fashion he can manage.What I expect is that most reasonably honest participants in debates here will tell the truth about what has and hasn't been said when they know that it is written down for anyone to review. I expect people to give up on failed arguments even if they never change their mind about the ultimate truth of their position.Maybe Reagan really did forget about forget the details of that arms sale to Iran.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

quote:

---

We're not debating the Exodus perse presently. Nevertheless, NoNukes and PaulK are going at me in Message 10 about dishonesty, implying that I was ignoring the fact that the Exodus crossing is too deep presently for such a crossing.

---

In fact, I said nothing at all about the Exodus crossing or about anything that Buz might have posted about the crossing.

I guess I'm the one trick pony here, but this is yet another illustration of some of the reasons I won't engage in debates with Buzsaw.The exact point at issue in "Dating Walls" was discussed in a thread started by Buzsaw himself just a few months ago. See Dating Question For Members. While Buz did make noises about understanding the discussion, it was evident that he had learned absolutely nothing.And here he is barely six months later insisting that Moose respond to his ridiculous reused bricks analogy as if that previous discussion had never happened. Grrrr!!!Of course if he ever finally gets it, he's going to pretend that he always understood, and that we just hadn't considered the tsunami. (Now would be the time to go for that jeer button, Mr. Saw)Buzsaw knows that dating methods cannot be right because of the Architect Principle (i.e. if something disagrees with the Bible, it is wrong). But Buzsaw's understanding of science together with your finger tip would barely fill a thimble. So you get threads like this one every time dating (or any other scientific methodology) is at issue.I fully believe that Buzsaw should be reinstated into the Science forums, but his posts in that Great Debate illustrate why he was booted in the first place.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : with apologizes for spelling Moose incorrectly

Yes. Exactly as Coyote, Malcolm, Moose, and others have already explained more than once, and exactly as was explained directly to Buzsaw in one of the last few scientific threads he was allowed to start. Buz doesn't seem to disagree with what he's been told, he just doesn't let facts get in the way of his opinions.Meanwhile, the great debate proceeds at glacial speed. No matter what points Moose makes, it's as though he were arguing with a man with no short term memory. Is there anyone here other than Buz that doesn't understand the problems with the old brick analogy?Not to say that the discussion is pointless. If anyone doesn't know what variety of creationist Buzsaw is, the Great Debate thread is classic Buz. Chock-a-block full of "sig" material.