PRATT Party and Free for All

On another thread, hawkes nightmare wrote the following: Since discussion of these points would be off topic in the original thread, I propose a thread wherein a full-blown free for all and food fight can ensue, during which these points can be beaten to death once again.--------(A PRATT is a Point Refuted a Thousand Times.)

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Thread copied here from the PRATT Party and Free for All thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

HN, I trust that you already know that our planet is nearly 5,000,000 kilometers closer to the Sun today, the 27th of January, than it will be on the Fourth of July?Oh, you didn't know that? You could look it up...Welcome to EvC, HN. Sorry, but you may have to support statements you make around here.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

You concluded from that mish-mash of nonsense that the flood obviously happened?Wow! The logical leaps there would do a gazelle proud!Let's try just one bit of evidence against the claim of a worldwide flood.Biblical scholars place the global flood somewhere close to 4,350 years ago (a few years one way or the other makes no difference here).One of the first things I learned in archaeology class was "if you want to find 10,000 year old sites, look for 10,000 year old dirt."So, all we have to do is find dirt that is about 4,350 years old and see what the evidence shows, simple, eh? Fortunately dirt that age is common, and probably exists in most back yards unless there has been a lot of grading during construction. Archaeologists deal with deposits of that approximate age on a daily basis, and have for over a hundred years.And guess what? No evidence of a global flood has been found in those deposits.What we see instead is continuity. Continuity of soil deposits and stratigraphy, continuity of human cultures, and continuity of fauna and flora. One of the most telling problems for flood proponents is the continuity of local human DNA types. If there was indeed a flood at the appointed time, those DNA types would have ceased, to be replaced by DNA from Noah and his kin. Instead, pretty much worldwide, we see continuity of DNA from before to after the appointed time for the flood.So there is one bit of evidence that shows the global flood could not have happened at the time the biblical scholars claim it did.If you want to dispute this you have to show that the flood happened at some other time (proving, for a start, that the biblical scholars are wrong)--but to do this you will also have to demonstrate, using empirical evidence, that various branches of science are wrong, starting with all sciences dealing with dating.Feel up to it?

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

He's doing this stuff everywhere. Message 79
Something "happened" before time. And it happened "suddenly". Guess it would have had to, wouldn't it. Message 388
Gravity as a "force" in ancient times. Gravity, period, in ancient times. The idea of being attracted by a plane. The idea of being attracted. Gravity. In ancient times. Gravity as a "force". It would "stand to reason". In ancient times. Pretty sure this guy thinks gravity is a "force".

I'd like to give this guy the benefit of the doubt and say he's just any old creationist whack-job regurgitating AIG crap. But his post just seems to scream, "TROLL!!!" to me.Am I giving him too much credit?Maybe...

---

"My own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. J.B.S Haldane 1892-1964

Oh, and I looked it up: we're 11,000 miles further from the sun today than we were at this time yesterday. Does that mean we froze today, or did we die of heatstroke yesterday?

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Due to a lack of gravity, Message 52 I don't think he will be able to support anything. Well at least he did the math! So a day was 252.2222 hours faster than 24 hours....huh??? Talk about whip-lash!This guy has got to be spoofing us. No one could really believe the gibberish he is spouting.

---

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty PythonYou can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley

Without gravity things don't need supporting.

---

You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.

that means that 24hrs + 252.2222hrs =34hrs? Must be some kind of new math. Oh and what does this have to do with either evolution or a supposed global flood? PRATTs for sale?

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

Slaps forehead...I knew I was missing something.

---

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty PythonYou can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley

No, No, No.....that's 24hrs - 252.2222hrs = 10 minutes (he used a calculator)

---

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty PythonYou can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley

Still doesn't compute. I think his calculator needs new batteries.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

I'm pretty sure it's 24 hours divided by 252.2etc. And I'm pretty sure he has forgotten that an hour has 60 minutes rather than a hundred. And, I'm pretty sure he rounded up.

I have never sen either of his arguments on AIG.It's looks more like Kent Hovind shizzles to me ...