You're right Gebo, I was extremely wrong in what I said, and I apoligize to Fire and everyone, I mistakenly forgot to reread my post, I was posting without thinking. I was wrong in what I said and I apologize to all those I offended which I have a feeling now that I think about it are a great deal. Hopefully you can accept my apoligize.

------------------
"So there I was completely naked and covered in tartar sauce..."

Well, you aren't the only one insulting, but you're the first I remember for apologizing for it. I dunno how many others would do the same in this context...

I'm still surprised myself. Yeesh.

Charlie... as much as I like reading things that I already wrote, that quote has absolutely nothing to do with the Bible or any point you would make. In fact, I don't even understand what your point is supposed to be.

I've already said that even the Pope - a man who has spent literally his entire life studying the Bible - is willing to consider Genesis as metaphor. So are thousands of other theologians. So are millions of other scientists and engineers. So are hundreds of millions of other believers.

I'm sorry, but the opinions of clerics and the discoveries of professionals are always going to weigh more than a single person's belief.

By the way: Like any other test, there are occasionally invalid answers. This can be caused by many things, including human error and chance. Get tested 20 times for diabetes and one or two of those results are going to worry you.
Carbon dating is based on the decay rate of isotopic carbon. Sometimes there is a disproportionate amount of carbon-14 in a sample and this can give an inaccurate reading. Scientists never use carbon dating by itself.

I'll tell you this, though: The age of the Earth and the Universe was not determined through carbon dating, it was determined by astrophysicists and astronomers. How this was determined is way outside of my area of expertise, and I'm willing to bet that you also don't have a clue about it beyond that little book you like to thump.

I'm not the one challenging evolution. Show me yours.



The rest of your insulting quote aside, you've yet to explain the vast number of Christians who disagree with you.


-Fox

[This message has been edited by Firefox (edited March 08, 2004).]

This monk, i forget his name, but its not really important, counted back the so-and-so was begot by so-and-so's from the birth of christ all the way to adam, and using a number of years to separatte the generations, arrived at 10,000. i wish i could remember his name so i could find a referance but that's how it was done.

------------------
They say only two things in life are certain. Death and taxes. Well, my friend let me tell you....The taxman's dead.

I think you're referring to Bishop Ussher. But the number he derived turned out to be 6,000, not 10,000.

The mystery deepens.


-Fox

It all actually is rather fascinating... You mentioned that the age is determined by astronomy and other sciences that study celestial bodies and well from what I can tell the dating of everything comes from radiometric dating... From what I've read it uses the decay of a radioactive isotope in a rock or similar geo object and calculates the date by the rate of decay... To tell you the truth what I really don't get is how they figure out the decay rate of the rest of the universe... Perhaps through them reaching us here? Perhaps they take the methods that they use for earth and just magnify them to instead of read the decay of something right in front of them instead have them read the decay of a star light years away. But anyway in my study I came across a large amount of links but decided to only post 6 of them. They really are a good read. I will admit tho that I didn't read every word but I feel that I prolly got the better gist of them. Its 2 AM so sue me

These sites describe radiometric dating:
http://gpc.edu/~pgore/geology/geo102/age.htm
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/age.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dating.html
These sites talk about why radiometric dating is probably wrong:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v24/i4/radiometric.asp
http://www.radiometric-dating.com/
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating2.html

------------------
"So there I was completely naked and covered in tartar sauce..."

Where is Run? Wonder what he would say about this section:

http://evolution-facts.org/c07.htm

Personally, I was crying. With laughter. I dunno why.

------------------
http://www.4guys-1dragoon.cjb.net -No porn. We promise*

I'm still waiting on scans of your masters degrees in biology geology quantum mechanics anthropology comparative religion and all the other subejcts you are so adamantly not a Layman like the rest of us ignoraamuses are.. only seems appropriate considering you utterly discount any viewpoints or topics that don't agree obsequiously verbatim with you, unless they manage to have proven credentials that even you will accept as worthy and on a par with your own obviously supremely ultimate education and intellect.

And if theyre really that intellectually bankrupt and generally ignorant of all things scientific, it should be really easy to stab holes all through the points they mention.

I did /not/ by any means bring this up as a haha like take that you stupid evolutionists, explain /this/ eh sorta thing. I figured [probably wrongly] that people might be able to get into an intellectual and informative discussion about it and i might learn something.



Strangely enough Mr Fox, that was the whole point of this thread.. i found a topic i considered intriguing and had never seen a real response to, and posted it here looking to see if people had alternative explanations or whatever.. and it turns into [not surprisingly] completely tangential ad hominem volleys..

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 09, 2004).]

Through modeling of stars and globular clusters (whose age can be determined using H-R diagrams).



You were on the right track using reputable sites for radiometric dating, but fell short when you cited creationist sites.



I don't care for insults, Dormouse, nor do I require such degrees to know BS when I see it.



But you didn't present an alternative theory that explains all the data.


-Fox

Oh for qod's sake Fox.

a: Saying someone has no credentials and thus is unworthy to even address points they /quote from credited texts/, even though you have no real credentials either seems a bit absurd somehow.

b: nothing explains /all/ data.. i was /not/ putting this forward as omg this is the explanation of everything. it was i have 1: never seen this referenced in geological discussions and seems to be just generally ignored for convenience; and 2: if there's a better explanation than geological strata layering not being as canon or even really realistic as everyone is led to believe, you of all people should have lots of sources to rip it to shreds; instead you just sit around and go off on some neo-ronin bull-**** lone besieged champion protector of the intellectual tangeant refusing to engage a discussion that has less honour and prestige than you yourself seem to bear, and instead just throw rocks at its head from a distance to try to prove your superiourity.

I was asking a kakdamn question, not trying to insidiously show that all creationists are right and the silly english kniggit evolutionists are second-hand electric donkey bottom-biters. Though by only quoting the first half of that comment you did a good job of ignoring the relevant part, classic.

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 09, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 09, 2004).]

Well, there you have it. Resistance really is futile.

But seriously, it would seem that -Fear-'s point has been supported beyond almost any shadow of doubt.

Mm, good beer, man!

------------------
Young men make wars, and the virtues of war are the virtues of young men: courage and hope for the future. Then old men make the peace, and the vices of old men are the vices of peace: mistrust and caution. It must be so.

-Laurence of Arabia

Would you take seriously someone's claims that we didn't land on the Moon when they offer idiotic "evidence", and after he has already been debunked?



Evolution explains all the data so far...



What point? He already admitted that he was joking.


-Fox

[This message has been edited by Firefox (edited March 09, 2004).]

...Except for the obvious fact that they don't quote jack. The rambling assertations of an unqualified layman on how the Bible is 100% literal and accurate and how all of the theories of modern biology are wrong and heathenous and heretical neither know what they're talking about nor have any interest in quoting scientific research. The opinion of dedicated theologists and experienced scientists will always outweigh the world views of snake handlers, moreso when they coincide so well.



Yet some people would have us believe that the Bible is the only literal truth! The answer to absolutely everything, from what to wear to how to efficiently feed a starving population.

The problem is, the divine answers don't work in this world. In lieu of magic we mere mortals are forced to devise scientific solutions to problems.

We don't understand fully how the universe or life was created. We didn't understand how God created life when the Bible was written. The more competent theologians understand this fact; the laypeople do not. So, once again, I'm far more inclined to listen to a sane analysis written by a qualified person - on the topics of both science and religion - than I am inclined to listen to the ravings of an overzealous madman who can't be bothered with little things like "facts", "logic" and "the scientific method". (All of which are even used by real theologians, might I add... just not by the armchair ones).

Strange Fox, i must have missed the point where you debunked them. Or for that matter where you addressed anything related to the topic at all..

Jon, where did i say the Bible was right, or to mind the religious persuasion or the articles, or even mention the Bible or God at all..

I find it odd how Fox can debunk things by merely saying that they are obviously BS when he has no real credentials, and them claim that the opinions of anyone else require the very utmost credentials to even be worth reading is all.

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 09, 2004).]

At the very least one of you could have posted this link:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/dave_matson/young-earth/geologic_column /out-of-place.html

Or this one:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-gc.html

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 09, 2004).]

That really doesn't fly with me fire, any evidence I present really should be looked at with the same weight that you judge your own arguments not to mention the fact that if I were to use the same logic as your post then I could just as easily dismiss any site you post as evolutionist propaganda however I am not I am earnestly looking at your info. But you seem to fail to see that. Oh and btw nice boost you gave yourself there about me using sites that you 'liked' for radiometrics but then immeadiately hissed no doubt upon seeing my rebuttal to their arguments... And as far as I'm concerned I still haven't seen an earnest reply to my post so until I see one I don't really care to regard your post with more than a chuckle.

yet you have chosen not to include any data thus far that concludes that the information in the sites that Dor has posted wrong. And if all this data has explained every nuance of every argument put forth against it... Why are we still here debating this topic... If it is so crystal clear that even you can see it... Then this discussion should have ended hundreds of years ago. However the fact remains that it has not answered all of our questions. It has not produced all of our answers and thats why there are still questions... Someday it may become clear that one of our beliefs is wholeheartedly the correct one. That day has not come yet.


------------------
"So there I was completely naked and covered in tartar sauce..."

.....People aren't always talking about you, Dormouse.

"Evolutionist propaganda"? What propaganda? Why do you believe that evolution is wrong?



Show some examples.



How about this site?


-Fox

Sorry Jon, considering it was on the thread i had started, i thought it had some relevance to the topic or something i had said. On second glance though it was not. I am not quite that egocentric.

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

This really wasn't intended to have anything to do with evolution really.

It was more a geological wtf.. which turned unsurprisingly into cve tangents. I couldn't care less as it stands about ie fossil distribution as something to prove or disprove evolution, i was all just-- wait aren't strata kinda supposed to be consistent and in order, why is this never included in things i have seen or heard about geology and epochs, what gives. But i have more reading to do now thanks to infidels and talkorigins.

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 09, 2004).]

Given the propensity for creationists to tie *everything*, from astronomy to geology, to biological evolution, it doesn't surprise me. Even the site you originally mentioned does this.


-Fox

Which is why i was so conspicuous abuot wanting to avoid any sort of religious clash or whatever about it. I wanted relevant information about geology, not omg God created the world in 6 24h days take that ye heathenous infidel..

I am somewhat disappointed in you that it took 2pp for you to post a link to talkorigins, you used to be much faster on the draw

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 09, 2004).]

... The site you used for your topic is a creationist website. Don't be surprised. It's your thread, after all.



I'll remember that next time.


-Fox



[This message has been edited by Firefox (edited March 09, 2004).]

Well yes of course it was.. there don't seem to be a lot of evolutionist websites presenting potential problems and issues with evolution. Of /course/ a creationist website is going to use examples to try to prove their point, that's the whole basis of backing up a viewpoint or whatever. Tough that is not to say i agree totally with their content or motivation by any means.

How many times to we have to go over the fact that unbiased information sources are chimeric, if someone has any sort of opinion about something [which obviously they do if they are talking about it or researching it or whatever], that /is/ going to influence their work and writings. Which of course is why there is scientific review boards and so forth. Though being human they are of course fallible as well. Though i am by no means saying creationist papers are any better reviewed or unbiased by any means.

And there are always caveats like:


Edit: found here: http://www.ooblick.com/text/evoquotes.html
Currently looking for the actual website of the institute to check though.

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 09, 2004).]

Because there are no problems with evolution. I don't know how many times I'm going to encounter this lie.



Which uses out-of-context quotes. Keep digging.


-Fox

Shrug, how in-context do things need to be, the whole paragraph, the whole page, the whole chapter? *curious*

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

I'm pretty sure an assertion such as this is quite premature as of yet.

------------------
Young men make wars, and the virtues of war are the virtues of young men: courage and hope for the future. Then old men make the peace, and the vices of old men are the vices of peace: mistrust and caution. It must be so.

-Laurence of Arabia

That "evolution quotations" page is a very obvious joke. The link to it from the main page is titled "Quotations that Creationists would love to see".

None of the referenced books are real, there is no Austin Institute of Genetics or Conference on Comparative Volcanic Stratigraphy, and the above quotation is a slight modification of Answers in Genesis' Statement of Faith:



[This message has been edited by Argath (edited March 10, 2004).]

------------------
--------------------------------------
Fear is here, where's the beer?

That explains so much Argath. It was a little peculiar that page being on that site [which i have looked around previously]. I feel a wee bit foolish now and shall go say some hail mary's and crawl under a rock.

Consider my quotations from that site rescinded.

[though in my defense i did spent an hour or two trying to find that quote in its original context, ie on the institute of austin website, but finding anything on uni websites is tantamount to futility..]

------------------
[Blue Mink Bifocals !] [fsck -Rf /world/usr/] [<!-- kalimonster -->] [Capite Terram]
"You'll have to face it, the endings are the same however you slice it. Don't be deluded by any other endings, they're all fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not by downright sentimentality. The only authentic ending is the one provided here: John and Mary die. John and Mary die. John and Mary die." -Happy Endings [Margeret Atwood]
NPC.Interact::PressButton($'Submit');

[This message has been edited by Dormouse (edited March 11, 2004).]

Why? Why is it *premature* to say that creationists are lying, when that is what they are doing?



Thanks, Argath. I rest my case.

-Fox

[This message has been edited by Firefox (edited March 11, 2004).]