Potential Evidence for a Global Flood

Hi Jzyehoshua How does one reason without a base level knowledge to get you off the starting block?When you say things like the following: ...all you demonstrate is appalling lack of basic scientific knowledge. If you seriously have no idea why radioactive decay must be constant - it's one of the 4 fundamental forces of matter - then you have nothing to reason out things about.Here's a quick test for you: Can you here and now, without looking up in any way name the other 3 fundamental forces of matter? If you can't then really you shouldn't be talking about such things. And how you can try to 'reason things out' without the basics to get you going beats the hell out of me!!You're right in something though: Pastors and politicians won't educate you in subjects that are investigated properly and thoroughly by the province of science. I suggest you read up some proper scientific papers done by those in the field who have toiled by study and field work for decades - then you'll appreciate why 'armchair reasoning' is worth what it is...

Hi JUC I'm no expert myself I have to say. Got the three sciences at ‘A’ level and a degree in Botany and Zoology back in 1983 but since then haven't worked at all in science.There's no issue with presenting opinions or arguments from reason and common sense - that's what these debate boards are about.....The problem for me is that when guys who have studied these subjects as professionals for years (Coyote in archaeology, Cavediver in theoretical physics, Wounded King in genetics etc) take the time and trouble to initiate laypeople into their worlds it is often thrown back at them in ignorance....crap from creationist websites peddled and endlessly regurgitated - some of it so old that Darwin himself refuted it successfully (development of the human eye via natural selection)These characters wouldn't argue with the formula for the latest rocket launch to Saturn, or with a doctor about what invasive entry technique to make in a difficult operation. Why is that? Is it because they realise they are dealing with professionals in their field? Why the hell don't they realise people like Coyote, Cavediver, Wounded King et al are in that same professional league? And why the hell do these 'armchair scientists' pontificate about things they really know zilch about?Frankly I find it embarrassing to read the arguments often put over on this (and other) forums. Sometimes the level of basic factual knowledge is so low that my daughters in primary school (5 years ago since they were there though) knew more than they did! I often wonder if some of them ever have done even basic science....certainly a lot of them show total contempt for the subject....Back to the subject matter here.....no problem in bringing ideas to the table - but if you are an amateur you must be prepared to listen and learn from the guys who have worked decades in the field ....or it's just a waste of everyone's time.One last thought for those that disagree....you all have skills in the work area you are engaged in. What would you say if I argued from a total amateur in your work areas, getting every fact wrong or twisted and refused to listen to what you were trying to tell me? Would you think I was a tosser......you'd have every right to think so!

Hi Coyote: Great stuff!....I laughed out loud! Do you suppose he was gearing up for a "heated" argument?Then I read Subbie's reply ("Do you think he thought it didn't fit the fax?") and was creased up! ....you know I like the humour and wit on here every bit as much as the actual discussions.....interestingly I have to say about 95% of all the wit and humour on here that I've seen, comes from the evilutionist side. The creationists seem to be a humourless lot by comparison - I wonder why?.....Could be an interesting thread in the coffee house maybe....Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.