Modern YEC is Not An Aberration of Tr...

Modern YEC is Not An Aberration of Traditional Christianity, Part Two [EvolutionBlog]

There are 130 comments on the ScienceBlogs story from Jul 11, 2014, titled Modern YEC is Not An Aberration of Traditional Christianity, Part Two [EvolutionBlog]. In it, ScienceBlogs reports that:

As it happens, the previous post was mostly a digression from what I really wanted to discuss.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at ScienceBlogs.

In Six Days

Preston, UK

#61 Jul 22, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
The question was: how do you fit 1)- 14) into a 6,000 years time frame.
Don't dodge by straw man fallacies (deliberately changing my question to accommodate your ignorance).
NEXT, if you feel that nrs. 1)- 14) were to be wrong, as you did, DECENT debate requires to explain why precisely they are wrong. Well, I am listening.
Learn to debate. Oops, sorry, THAT isn't a thing you learn at the Babble school, isn't it? THERE you only learn to listen and to SHUT UP.
I have still a bunch of questions ongoing you didn't answer.
You are dodging and ducking galore, Embarrassing. But I will rake the fire.
Don't worry, I will be back with those soon.
I'm not going to sit here explains why every piece you crap you cut&pasted is wrong. I picked one, laws of physics & the flood. Deal with it.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#62 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
If you put anything above God you worship it.
More bullshit. You might want to look up the definition of the word "worship" so as to not sound like such a fool.
In Six Days wrote:
Christians who put science before God are as much idolaters if not worse, as atheists.
OK, great. I had no idea that you have been put in charge of who is a proper Christian and who isn't. Did that come to you in a dream, burning bush or what?
In Six Days wrote:
The thinking couldn't be broader.
Whatever in the hell THAT means.
In Six Days

Preston, UK

#63 Jul 22, 2014
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
While attending college, I made beer money by working at Disney (Driving/engineering 100' boats...GREAT weekend job!), and rest assured both Dopey and Dumbo would have a field day with you.
Otherwise, how would the High School dropout ....(er....you DID make it to High School, right?) like to hear from a Christian Geologist about what HE knows?
"Dr. Wiens received a bachelor's degree in Physics from Wheaton College and a PhD from the University of Minnesota, doing research on meteorites and moon rocks. He spent two years at Scripps Institution of Oceanography (La Jolla, CA) where he studied isotopes of helium, neon, argon, and nitrogen in terrestrial rocks. He worked seven years in the Geological and Planetary Sciences Division at Caltech, where he continued the study of meteorites and worked for NASA on the feasibility of a space mission to return solar wind samples to Earth for study. Dr. Wiens wrote the first edition of this paper while in Pasadena. In 1997 he joined the Space and Atmospheric Sciences group at Los Alamos National Laboratory, where he has been in charge of building and flying the payload for the solar-wind mission, as well as developing new instruments for other space missions. He has published over twenty scientific research papers and has also published articles in Christian magazines. Dr. Wiens became a Christian at a young age, and has been a member of Mennonite Brethren, General Conference Baptist, and Conservative Congregational, and Vineyard denominations. He does not see a conflict between science in its ideal form (the study of God's handiwork) and the Bible, or between miracles on the one hand, and an old Earth on the other."
"Radiometric Dating from a Christian Perspective"
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/wiens.html#... 31
It's kind of long, and very few pictures, but even YOU might be able to pick up some real science here...
I'm not going to read that long piece of crap then summarise it fir you. There is no such thing as radiometry from a Christian perspective, there us radiometry, radiometrics cannot in principle tell us how old the earth is for 102 reasons. First, old ages were settled upon long before radioactivity was discovered. It takes fool after that to believe that we know from radioactivity how old the earth is.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#64 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not going to sit here explains why every piece you crap you cut&pasted is wrong. I picked one, laws of physics & the flood. Deal with it.
How about the law of conservation of mass. It would take over 5 miles of water to flood the Earth.

You have already shown yourself to be quite the fool. I want to see how large of one. We know there was no flood because there is no evidence of a flood.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#65 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not going to read that long piece of crap then summarise it fir you. There is no such thing as radiometry from a Christian perspective, there us radiometry, radiometrics cannot in principle tell us how old the earth is for 102 reasons. First, old ages were settled upon long before radioactivity was discovered. It takes fool after that to believe that we know from radioactivity how old the earth is.
Please do not claim that all Christians are idiots. Most Christians accept the theory of evolution and also radiometric dating. Just because you are a fool do not assume that most Christians are fools.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#66 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not going to read that long piece of crap then summarise it fir you. There is no such thing as radiometry from a Christian perspective, there us radiometry, radiometrics cannot in principle tell us how old the earth is for 102 reasons. First, old ages were settled upon long before radioactivity was discovered. It takes fool after that to believe that we know from radioactivity how old the earth is.
...so says the High School (or UK equivalent) who thinks "4+4=6".

Submit your theory to a scientific peer-reviewed panel, then take a shower, dress and await your phone call for the Nobel Prize ceremony.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#67 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not going to read that long piece of crap then summarise it fir you. There is no such thing as radiometry from a Christian perspective, there us radiometry, radiometrics cannot in principle tell us how old the earth is for 102 reasons. First, old ages were settled upon long before radioactivity was discovered. It takes fool after that to believe that we know from radioactivity how old the earth is.
Radiometry concerns itself with measuring electromagnetic radiation. I assume you were trying to refer to radiometric dating. It would help if you got your terminology correct. So as not to come across as a fool - as I said earlier.
In Six Days

Preston, UK

#68 Jul 22, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Radiometry concerns itself with measuring electromagnetic radiation. I assume you were trying to refer to radiometric dating. It would help if you got your terminology correct. So as not to come across as a fool - as I said earlier.
Radiometric dating. It was still discovered after the long ages were decided upon so they never were based on it.
In Six Days

Preston, UK

#69 Jul 22, 2014
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
...so says the High School (or UK equivalent) who thinks "4+4=6".
Submit your theory to a scientific peer-reviewed panel, then take a shower, dress and await your phone call for the Nobel Prize ceremony.
Common core teaches that 4+4=6 or 9 or whatever peer-review says it. Peer review told us that 99% of DNA was junk now they say it's not junk. I know where they can get off.
In Six Days

Preston, UK

#70 Jul 22, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Please do not claim that all Christians are idiots. Most Christians accept the theory of evolution and also radiometric dating. Just because you are a fool do not assume that most Christians are fools.
I did not claim that. Most Christians and atheists do not have the scientific skills or time to scientifically evaluate the theory of education or radiometric dating. I have.

I say evolution is nonsense and radiometric dating incapable of giving us the age of the earth. Both are used to prop up false ideas about origins, I call them out.
In Six Days

Preston, UK

#71 Jul 22, 2014
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
How about the law of conservation of mass. It would take over 5 miles of water to flood the Earth.
You have already shown yourself to be quite the fool. I want to see how large of one. We know there was no flood because there is no evidence of a flood.
5 mikes of water? Just like that eh. Show the calculations.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#72 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
Radiometric dating. It was still discovered after the long ages were decided upon so they never were based on it.
Incorrect. The 19th century pre-radiometric dating was in the range of 20 - 400 million years. Radiometric dating did not confirm those dates It was well into the 20th century when it became clear that the earth was billion and not millions of years old.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#73 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
Common core teaches that 4+4=6 or 9 or whatever peer-review says it. Peer review told us that 99% of DNA was junk now they say it's not junk. I know where they can get off.
Blah, blah, blah. You say a lot of stuff but never seem to back it up. Why is that? For instance, where does common core say that 2+2=6?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#74 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not claim that. Most Christians and atheists do not have the scientific skills or time to scientifically evaluate the theory of education or radiometric dating. I have.
Sure you do.
In Six Days wrote:
I say evolution is nonsense and radiometric dating incapable of giving us the age of the earth. Both are used to prop up false ideas about origins, I call them out.
BFD. Who cares what you say?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#75 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
5 mikes of water? Just like that eh. Show the calculations.
How high is Mount Everest?
In Six Days

Preston, UK

#76 Jul 22, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
How high is Mount Everest?
You assume it existed as it is today before the flood.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#77 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not claim that. Most Christians and atheists do not have the scientific skills or time to scientifically evaluate the theory of education or radiometric dating. I have.
I say evolution is nonsense and radiometric dating incapable of giving us the age of the earth. Both are used to prop up false ideas about origins, I call them out.
By the way, speaking of calling someone out, why is it you failed to provide an answer to a very simple question?
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I see. Then can you explain why all the evidence your creator left indicates otherwise?
In Six Days

Blackpool, UK

#78 Jul 22, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, speaking of calling someone out, why is it you failed to provide an answer to a very simple question?
<quoted text>
Your question or someone else's? If you got a question for me please fire away & if I missed one of yours earlier I apologise.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#79 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
Your question or someone else's? If you got a question for me please fire away & if I missed one of yours earlier I apologise.
It was my question and I just reposed it as a quoted post. Is there some reason why you can't see it? Or answer it?

“I can never convince the ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

stupid that they are stupid.

#80 Jul 22, 2014
In Six Days wrote:
<quoted text>
Keep eating, I can relax my sphincter enough.
I bet you can. While I have no doubt about your love of all things scatological, I don't share it and will decline your invitation out of common decency. I am sure one of your regulars will be more than happy to join after prayer meeting.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Definition of a Creationist Scientist 57 min Dogen 102
Beware of Kamikaze Snakes. They Are Evolving in... 5 hr Chimney1 75
What Motives Created Social Darwinism? 5 hr Chimney1 91
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 6 hr Chimney1 143,899
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 8 hr DanFromSmithville 173,361
Darwinism: Science or Philosophy? 8 hr Zog Has-fallen 55
Is the Evolutionary theory mathematically prove... 15 hr Chimney1 134
More from around the web