Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Questions Creationists Never Answer
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 78 of 141 (258164)
11-09-2005 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Evopeach
11-09-2005 2:29 PM


Re: Different Radiometric techniques
Kind has absolutely NOTHING to do with either your discussion with RazD or the sub-topic of your message.
You are supposed to be addressing techniques of radiometric dating right now.
If you want to return to the issue of Kind we can address that part, but first try to complete the discussion on radiometric dating.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Evopeach, posted 11-09-2005 2:29 PM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Evopeach, posted 11-09-2005 3:33 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 80 of 141 (258188)
11-09-2005 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Evopeach
11-09-2005 3:33 PM


Re: Different Radiometric techniques
actually I did read back to your post where you tried to define Kind. However, the discussion continuing from there on related to trying to correct your misunderstandings of radiometric dating. Before addressing your definition of kind, I think it's important to resolve the isue of radiometric dating. You have not yet completed the discussion with RAZD on the radiometric dating issue. One of the things we often see with Creationistas is that when they need to address one topic, they simply change direction and walk off as though something has been resolved.
Can you follow up on your discussion of radiometric dating with RAZD so that issue, at least gets resolved? There is no requirement to do so, you're free of course to simply change subjects. I'm perfectly sure there are many here who will be happy to discuss your definition of Kind.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Evopeach, posted 11-09-2005 3:33 PM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Evopeach, posted 11-09-2005 5:11 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 82 of 141 (258204)
11-09-2005 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Evopeach
11-09-2005 5:11 PM


Re: Different Radiometric techniques
Nothing was dismissed simply because it is religious based. Many of us, myself included, are very religious. Classic Creationism is dismissed because it is simply wrong. All the evidence shows it's wrong. That's why no major Church supports it.
RATE is dismissed because their science is lousy. RAZD even provided you all the links to the evidence supporting his position. If you wish to remain in a state of willfull ignorance, that's fine. Simply say that you are not going to believe the evidence and everyone will let you go on your merry way.
But we are over in the science side of the house. Here you are expected to back up your assertions. Or, as I said above, you can simply say that regardless of the evidence, you are going to stick to your beliefs. No one will object to that.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Evopeach, posted 11-09-2005 5:11 PM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Evopeach, posted 11-09-2005 5:32 PM jar 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