Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,841 Year: 4,098/9,624 Month: 969/974 Week: 296/286 Day: 17/40 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What's the creationists thought on this?
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5951
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 42 of 136 (618832)
06-06-2011 2:52 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Chuck77
06-06-2011 1:23 AM


Re: Genesis...
If dinosaurs are really only a few thousands of years old, well within the range of carbon-dating, then we should be able to carbon-date them just as we are able to carbon-date other things that are a few thousands of years old.
Yet we cannot. Which would mean that they are too old to be carbon-dated.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Chuck77, posted 06-06-2011 1:23 AM Chuck77 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Chuck77, posted 06-07-2011 1:48 AM dwise1 has not replied

dwise1
Member
Posts: 5951
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 98 of 136 (619975)
06-13-2011 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Crazynutsx
06-13-2011 1:52 PM


Re: hovind
How is the fact that he's in federal prison for flagrant tax fraud being "constantly used as an excuse"? If anything, he's probably using it as an excuse for not being able to respond to the problems with his claims.
Ofcourse it was he had lots of valid points in his arguements
You mean like his totally bogus solar-mass-loss claim? Or like the leap-second "the earth's rotation is slowing down at an incredibly inflated rate" claim? Oh, yeah, you were going to contact the sites that repeat that claim in order to inform them that they're wrong. How's that project progressing?
One mind-boggling claim is his digital watch in a mine analogy, in which he's basically saying that the age of that mine is limited to the youngest feature in it (eg, a digital watch whose battery is still good), thus the age of Niagara Falls or the Mississippi river delta means that the earth itself can be no older than they are. So do you think that's a "valid point"?
About 10 years ago, Answers in Genesis printed an article listing bogus claims that creationists should not use. Hovind wrote an angry rebuttal to that article, because he still used most of those bogus claims, so they had to respond that those claims are indeed bogus and that he should not use them.
The man would regurgitate any and all claims he encountered. His presentations were PowerPoint Gish Gallops. He would repeatedly present himself to his audiences as an expert in science and math, when his actual knowledge in those fields are minimal. One of the greatest difficulties that his debate opponents have with him is that his understanding of science is so substandard that they can't have any kind of intelligent discussion with him.
No, his material wasn't good. And his being in prison now has nothing to do with it. His material is just not any good.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Crazynutsx, posted 06-13-2011 1:52 PM Crazynutsx has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024