Aliens and evolution

Jun 19, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Washington Times

DENTON, Texas, June 19, 2012 - Aliens are ingrained in our cultural psyche. They abound in books, movies, radio, and a thousand theories about the extra-terrestrial, little green men, UFO sightings, abductions, Area 51, and Roswell.

Comments
4,061 - 4,080 of 6,103 Comments Last updated May 20, 2013
Andre

Uvongo, South Africa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4118
Nov 7, 2012
 
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
*Facepalm*
1) Andrew Snelling is a known Creationist. Just google his name
2) The RATE studies are thoroughly rubbished by accredited scientists. Their results were not published for any peer review procedure, and the 'scientists' performing the tests were inexperienced hacks.
h
Larry Vardiman, PhD Atmospheric Science
Russell Humphreys, PhD Physics
Eugene Chaffin, PhD Physics
John Baumgardner, PhD Geophysics
Donald DeYoung, PhD Physics
Steven Austin, PhD Geology
Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology
Steven Boyd, PhD Hebraic and Cognate Studies

“There's a feeling I get...”

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4119
Nov 7, 2012
 
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>
Larry Vardiman, PhD Atmospheric Science
Russell Humphreys, PhD Physics
Eugene Chaffin, PhD Physics
John Baumgardner, PhD Geophysics
Donald DeYoung, PhD Physics
Steven Austin, PhD Geology
Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology
Steven Boyd, PhD Hebraic and Cognate Studies
That's nice and all, but they are noobs in the field of geochronology:

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_geophys...

****
The scientific community points to numerous flaws in these experiments, to the fact that their results have not been accepted for publication by any peer-reviewed scientific journal, and to the fact that the creationist scientists conducting them were untrained in experimental geochronology.
****

Second time I have posted these links. READ IT.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/helium/zircon...
http://gondwanaresearch.com/rate.htm
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4120
Nov 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Andre wrote:
The last aspect I wish to mention is my concern over the truthfulness of even reported “scientific findings”, evidenced by the history of fraud related to the hoax of evolution.(Piltdown man, Nebraska man, Orce Man, The Yale Hybridization scandal, Haekel’s faked embryonic drawings, Archaeoraptor hoax, Cardiff Man, Peppered Moth, and I am sure lots more)
Makes you think, doesn't it?
OH HAI! I notice you've just contradicted yourself. You've just told us that evolution was wrong because evolution is true. This of course contradicts everything else you posted beforehand that I cut out for space. So could you elaborate on the explanation for your remarkable inconsistency? And perchance could you tell us if evolution is wrong then what scientific alternative do you propose that does a better job of explaining the evidence?

Thanks in advance.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4121
Nov 7, 2012
 
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>
Larry Vardiman, PhD Atmospheric Science
Russell Humphreys, PhD Physics
Eugene Chaffin, PhD Physics
John Baumgardner, PhD Geophysics
Donald DeYoung, PhD Physics
Steven Austin, PhD Geology
Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology
Steven Boyd, PhD Hebraic and Cognate Studies
Baumgardner? Ain't that the guy who doesn't even use his real name?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4122
Nov 7, 2012
 
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Nuggin's post was articulate, measured and thoughtful.
Why don't you share with us what's wrong with Nuggin's post instead of getting mouthy?
Because he's Skippy the "Skeptic". Fundies GET mouthy.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4123
Nov 7, 2012
 
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>I am sorry to say, but an issue is yet again stated as fact although objective analysis of data would suggest that this is an incorrect assessment of all available data.
The reason for this is that there is evidence that radiometric dating is not reliable.
You may also be familiar with problems associated with radiometric dating and the various assumptions on which it relies. So again, far from “disproving” the claim, it can merely question it based on its own QUESTIONABLE CREDIBILITY.
<quoted text>“Had these parallel layers been deposited slowly over thousands of years, erosion would have cut many channels in the topmost layers” should give you a fair idea.
<quoted text>
Thank you for this question. It allowed me to gain some wonderful insight and especially in respect of recent discoveries. The data indicates that is was most likely the ocean floors. You may find these articles quite interesting: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/...
(emphasis mine)

Then after talking about "credibility" you go an post this:

http://www.kjvbible.org/geysers.html

So.

Andre.

I now have the "scientific alternative" that I asked for. So you're telling us that not just biology but ALL science is wrong cuz GODDIDIT WITH MAGIC?

Do you not see the BLATANT hypocrisy of your ludicrous position? Or are you just another one of those typical fundie liars for Jesus who oft frequent these forums?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4124
Nov 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
If all animals were vegetarian in the past, why did they have fangs? And why did they change to eating meat? Surely, a peaceful loving god would not condemn the gazelle to a horrible death in the jaws of a lion if there is plenty of grass for both to eat.
And how the heck did all these animals continue to breathe in an atmosphere with 50% oxygen? I guess we chalk it up to Goddidit with magic again?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4125
Nov 7, 2012
 
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
ignorant rambling troll who doesn't know jack sh*t about the burden of proof,
Well done Skip! You're making NO attempt to deconstruct Andre and you're insulting Nuggin for arguing AGAINST creationism and providing scientific information. Not to mention you did the same thing to me on the atheism forum when it was just me, you, and one creationist spammer.

Is it any wonder why he calls you a creationist?

Seriously, I hope this point isn't lost on any of the mooks who jumped in to defend Skippy in the past.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4126
Nov 7, 2012
 
Andre wrote:
It would seem from the Bible that vegetation may not have been so badly affected (dove with olive leaf Gen 8:11). They would have had ample to eat. Quite nutritious as well as it seems that somehow hyperbaric conditions existed at some time in the past – with about 50% higher oxygen levels.
How could there be nutrition when you've just fried all plants and animals to their component elements?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4127
Nov 7, 2012
 
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Double Fine decided to stop aging at 30
I wish I had thought of that.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4128
Nov 7, 2012
 
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Yo.
You have not cited ONE peer-reviewed publication.
Do you know what peer review is?
Do you want to know what we think of sources that are NOT peer reviewed?
You noticed that too, huh? Lots of assertions but no verifiable research to back it up.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4130
Nov 7, 2012
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
You noticed that too, huh? Lots of assertions but no verifiable research to back it up.
He is a South African, too.

Reflects badly on us :P

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4131
Nov 7, 2012
 
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
He is a South African, too.
Reflects badly on us :P
I live in Florida so I can feel your pain.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4132
Nov 7, 2012
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I live in Florida so I can feel your pain.
How's the wimmin' that side? Or are they hotter in California?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4133
Nov 7, 2012
 
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
How's the wimmin' that side? Or are they hotter in California?
Pretty damn close. It's all the beaches, you know?

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4134
Nov 7, 2012
 
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Skeptic is a YEC, you can't take anything he says seriously
Cheers! YECs are definitely not to be taken seriously.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Since: Jun 11

Lagrangian L2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4135
Nov 7, 2012
 
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>Your claim is inaccurate and not relevant to the issue at stake which is the recorded variance, inconsistency in results obtained and underlying assumptions.
But let us consider a few issues with radiometric dating:
It was discovered that coal specimens obtained from U.S. Department of Energy Coal Sample Bank and dated by carbon dating as between millions to hundreds of millions years old, based on standard evolutionary time estimates, would at the extreme be 100000 years – as the half-life of Carbon 14 is approximately 5730 years and thus no measurable amount of C14 should have been present in samples older than 100000 years.
Then there is the problem of equilibrium in C12,14 – which should have been reached after an estimated 30000 years. It is still not in equilibrium, suggesting that the earth is much much younger than evolutionists would want us to believe.
In fact, carbon 14 is strongly in favour of a young earth.
(You may read on for instance the effects of the earth’s magnetic field on production of C14.) It is claimed that Earth’s magnetic field is fading. Today it is claimed about 10 percent weaker than it was when German mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss started keeping tabs on it in 1845 ( J. Roach, National Geographic News, September 9, 2004)
<quoted text>This does not agree with verifiable facts. The example of the wood buried in a basalt lava flow in Australia proves that. Carbon dating calculated the age at 45thousand years, The basalt was dated using K-Ar techniques at 45 million. Only a 1000 times more. Negligible, I agree …..hehehehe
Then there is the well known case of Mt. St. Helens – the age of rocks calculated using the K-Ag technique, at +-.35 million years, although formed in 1986. Of course they offer “explanations”/rationalization s but for one thing it shows the fact that there are huge differences in calculated and actual age.
Yet another:
“Plagioclase separated from the Devils Postpile basalt gave a K-Ar 'age' of 0.94 ± 0.16 million years. The basalt has been reassigned recently an age of less than 100,000 years based on new geologic mapping and detailed stratigraphic study”
Of course there is also the possibility of “selection” evidenced by the following extract
” Australopithecus ramidus fossils. Most samples of basalt closest to the fossil-bearing strata gave dates of about 23 Ma (Mega annum, million years) by the argon-argon method. The authors decided that was ‘too old’, according to their beliefs about the place of the fossils in the evolutionary grand scheme of things. So they looked at some basalt further removed from the fossils and selected 17 of 26 samples to get an acceptable maximum age of 4.4 Ma. The other nine samples again gave much older dates but the authors decided they must be contaminated, and discarded them”
So from an objective analysis it would seem that your confidence in radiometric dating methods is either naïve or brainwashed (or both) or not totally honest. But at least you are wrong in your claims – proved by factual and verifiable cases.
The last aspect I wish to mention is my concern over the truthfulness of even reported “scientific findings”, evidenced by the history of fraud related to the hoax of evolution.(Piltdown man, Nebraska man, Orce Man, The Yale Hybridization scandal, Haekel’s faked embryonic drawings, Archaeoraptor hoax, Cardiff Man, Peppered Moth, and I am sure lots more)
Makes you think, doesn't it?
And of course no other human activity ever has anyone fake things.

Am I right?

I do believe that in all cases it was science itself who exposed the wrong-doers. Science is self correcting...some times not as fast as it should, but it will correct.

And of course the Jesus people NEVER fake things. But, wait, where did that phrase 'Liars for Jesus' come from??

C-14 dating and especially AMS C-14 dating is very accurate...your creationist bullsh!t notwithstanding.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Since: Jun 11

Lagrangian L2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4136
Nov 7, 2012
 
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>
The last aspect I wish to mention is my concern over the truthfulness of even reported “scientific findings”, evidenced by the history of fraud related to the hoax of evolution.(Piltdown man, Nebraska man, Orce Man, The Yale Hybridization scandal, Haekel’s faked embryonic drawings, Archaeoraptor hoax, Cardiff Man, Peppered Moth, and I am sure lots more)
Makes you think, doesn't it?
And of course no other human activity ever has anyone fake things.

I do believe that in all cases it was science itself who exposed the wrong-doers. Science is self correcting...some times not as fast as it should, but it will correct.

And of course the Jesus people NEVER fake things. But, wait, where did that phrase 'Liars for Jesus' come from??

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Since: Jun 11

Lagrangian L2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4137
Nov 7, 2012
 
What the heck happened?? Sorry for the almost double post admin

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4138
Nov 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Hey, Khatru! I think you will appreciate this:

http://www.wimp.com/solobass/

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••