Oh how you now me so well. Astonishing.
Time to switch to decaf, TW. The point is that we have seen many 'reasonable' YECs come through here and found them to show their true colors after just a few posts. Really, there isn't much new in YECdom.
In fact, I am in the process of developing upon an alternative theory for the popular view of the formation of the Grand Canyon and many other Uniformitarian riddled geological structures.
Yep, heard it all before.
You'd rather poison the well than actually engage in a productive discussion; a discussion where you don't use so many logical fallacies.
By your attitude, it is pretty clear that the well is alread poisoned. It's really hard to hide these things, TW.
Is this a joke? I don't care whose bed catholicism climbs in with, but please refrain from using such outright ignorant arguments. Catholicism is a long way off from Biblical Creation. Pathetic attempt at persuasion.
Still drinking from at that same well, eh?
No shock there, define evolution in the broadest most general way so that evolutionism can get away with stating that evolution is a fact and that the theory explains this fact. Bah!
Heh, heh...
Clever, attack and retreat. You misrepresented so much of what I said, you think I was just going to ignore it? You try to poison the well with remarks like, "Rants against evolution, with silly assertions about the way science functions," that is a complete misrepresentation of anything that I typed. Your sentiments are ludicrous.
Unlike you, eh?
quote:
No, uniformitarianism is still in you would just like to misrepresent reality...again.
Actually, I agree with you uniformitarianism is in. The way we look at it now is called actualism. In other words, some of the processes have changed because we recognize that some of the conditions have changed.
Actualism - Wikipedia this has nothing to do with Geology. Because you can't just start re-defining things as counter arguments come against your beliefs. The only argument you can muster is one from semantics. Avoid the controversy by putting up semantical speed bumps.
Actually, this is not the geological definition of actualism. It is more like my description above.
quote:
Uniformitarianism is the term that refers to Lyell’s idea that geological processes have not changed throughout Earth’s history.
WEll, then you'll have to debate the guys from before the 20th century. Most of us do not agree with this literal reading. The processes have changed. The physical laws regarding the processes are the same, however.
Which ultimately is an idea forced upon an idea of an old earth. The two have become inseparable, unless you enforce semantical speed bumps to confound opposition.
Well, then you need to refute uniformitarianism. Not the old Lyellian version, but the modern version. If you refuse to do that, you are wasting our time.
™ Version 4.2
