By “topic” are we limited to, in this thread, “Age Correlations and An Old Earth”, or are we allowed the sub-threads like presently Message 1450, Message 1451 as the latest example and other sub-topics that periodically spring from the emergent properties of topic creep?
1) Message should somehow touch on the age dating science.
2) At the minimum, message should at least touch on scientific methodology.
3) Message should not be irrelevant snark.
1450 and 1451 BARELY qualifies as meeting (2), but it would be nice if it had any real connection to (1).
Your new 1467 qualifies as being (3).
Better yet, it might be instructive if you could give us some examples of offending messages.
Might you find the most recent message in this topic, that actually does (1)? The recent quality of topic sure seems quite dismal to me.
dad is pretty much (understatement?) blathering nonsense. I think other members should post something of (1) or not respond at all. dad makes Faith look like a towering master of scientific reason. Is dad being successful at dragging the sciece side down to his level of discourse?