Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Hex · 07-12-2007, 09:58 AM

I can't help but wonder ...

Does it seem to anyone else that AFDave's slowing down around here?

I wonder if he'll run out of steam before he actually gets around to having to avoid talking about the synchronization of the metrics ... :Cheeky:

Occam's Aftershave · 07-12-2007, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hex

I can't help but wonder ...

Does it seem to anyone else that AFDave's slowing down around here?

I wonder if he'll run out of steam before he actually gets around to having to avoid talking about the synchronization of the metrics ... :Cheeky:

I think he's flummoxed because the Mods won't let him get away with his usual 'Gish gallop' distraction/evasion tactics.

Being forced to stay on topic is really making life hard for Dave, because it ruthlessly exposes his ignorance of said topics.

Steviepinhead · 07-12-2007, 11:53 AM

I suspect that all that is true, but remember he's supposedly in Mexico for the next week as well.

BWE · 07-12-2007, 04:34 PM

His armor cracked. The patch jobs get more and more expensive.

Calilasseia · 07-13-2007, 07:34 AM

A holiday in Mexico is certainly an expensive repair job ...

shirley knott · 07-13-2007, 08:29 AM

Note that afDave has emitted another steaming pile of effluent in the Debate just now.
So, I correct that he hadn't left yet when many were suggesting that's why he hadn't posted. And now we now have [yet more] real evidence that he has been avoiding all the things we were pretty sure he was avoiding.
The howler in the post may be his reference to Dr. Humphreys, the demonstrated and demonstrable fraud, as reputable and reliable. Even funnier is that he contrasts this with Hovind (or was it Ham, they all smell the same to me...).

hugs,
Shirley Knott

The Evil One · 07-13-2007, 08:42 AM

So constant Mews said:

Quote:

Dave's refusal to deal with my direct question, "Explain the correspondence and synchronization of the metrics used to date the varves at Lake Suigetsu", appears to be a violation of the rules of this debate. Certainly his silence does nothing to counter my argument.

and in response afdave said

Quote:

absolutely bloody nothing relating to this question

So what have we got...

Quote:

[more on C14... more on zircons...]We have examined one of the supposed correlating metrics in this debate, Lake Siugetsu and found it wanting. I have already referred to a debate I am having on another metric, Dendrochronology (See reference 18 above, previous post), and it is sorely wanting as well.

Still no hint of an explanation as to why varves, radio-dating, dendrochronology etc etc all produce the same results if they're all so badly flawed.

Still the pathetic attempt to argue that demonstrating that the Genesis timescale is off by several orders of magnitude is insufficent to show that it is "historically false".

The only new stuff is more from RATE, who were shredded as a source of any integrity quite a while ago.

Consilience, Dave. CONSILIENCE!! you have to address the consilience.

improvius · 07-13-2007, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by afdave

Dr. Mews goes on and on with other objections and rehashes which I will not bother to address because they are so weak.

Brilliant.

ericmurphy · 07-13-2007, 09:21 AM

Interesting that Dave would cite "evidence" that coal is 50,000 years old to prove that the earth is 6,000 years old.

Did someone mention "consilience"?

Mike PSS · 07-13-2007, 10:40 AM

What a load of bunk that Dave posts.

Baumgardner is a fraud, a cheap whore in a white lab coat. When Dave posted this reference from Radiocarbon magazine...

Quote:

32) Nadeau, M.-J., Grootes, P.M., Voelker, A., Bruhn, F., Duhr, A., and Oriwall, A., Carbonate 14C Background: Does It Have Multiple Personalities?, Radiocarbon, 43:2A(2001), pp. 169-176. Click this link to access all the Radiocarbon journal archives. http://radiocarbon.library.arizona.edu/radiocarbon/

I knew I had to check this out. So from the conclusions I found that a quick search of the sample "blanks" that this paper used (Carrara marble and Icelandic double spar) led me to a 1992 paper in Radiocarbon about the exact same topic.
http://radiocarbon.library.arizona.e...pplication/pdf
The paper concludes the following.

Quote:

CONCLUSIONS
Background materials for conventional 14C measurements are normally not contaminated to a level that seriously affects dates on interstadial samples. However, we recommend fresh preparation of well-stored (dry, sealed) material.
AMS-sized carbonate samples are more vulnerable to contamination processes, probably related to the crystal structure of the actual material. Storage conditions are critical, especially for highly porous materials. The same may be true for wood of interglacial age.
Although background components contribute in different proportions for GPC and AMS dating, we have obtained good agreement for dates on interstadial bone and wood material.

Quote:

TABLE 2. Measurements on Different Background Materials - AMS Technique
Sample material TUa* no. pMC {±} age(yr BP)
CO2 from natural gas -200 0.17 {0.03} 51,200
Icelandic double spar -201 0.18 {0.03**} 50,800
Marble (Fauske, Norway) -202 0.51 {0.08**} 42,400
Marble (Carrara, IAEA-C1) -108 0.54 {0.07} 41,900
Mollusk shell (Froya, Norway) -203 0.57 {0.06} 41,500
Foraminifera (North Sea) -174 0.32 {0.06} 46,100
Interglacial wood (Astbrua, Norway) -76 0.16 {0.03} 51,800
Whale bone (Beaufort Sea, Alaska) -121 0.18 {0.03} 50,800
Interglacial wood (Hensmoen, Norway) -204 0.38 {0.02**} 44,800
*Samples graphitized in Trondheim (T) and measured in Uppsala (Ua)
**The standard error of 514C measurements; other errors quoted are based on counting statistics of two measurements.

Please refer to the above link to review Table 1 to find a similar pMC distribution using the GPC method.

Now, from a simple technique I learned back in preschool called "OBSERVATION" combined with another trick I picked up in kindergarten called "COMPARISON" it seems that I can look at Dave's table of samples and the above table of samples and state the following.

"ALL SAMPLES OF CARBONACIOUS MATERIAL, WHETHER MINERAL OR BIOLOGIC, WILL RESULT IN A SMALL C14 READING ON THE MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT. REGARDLESS IF THIS IS THE AMS OR GPC METHOD OF MEASUREMENT."

Dave is thus left with the FACT that his coal samples and diamond samples and shell samples, and whatever other samples he wants to put into an AMS or GPC machine, will come up with a reading of 0.10 to 0.50 pMC.

This STILL doesn't counter the FACT that a biologic article that is dendro- dated to 11,500±400 ybp and cross-correlated with a C14 measurement (uncorrected) of 13,000 ybp which is (corrected) 11,800±250 ybp DISPROVES AN EARTH LESS THAN 6000 YEARS OLD.

And just to pique the mods by pointing out another thread on another forum, I've been trying for a month to discuss C14 measurement equipment with Dave at RD.net. He hasn't taken me up on this discussion and probably never will.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-12-2007, 09:58 AM	#261
Hex Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: www.rationalpagans.com Posts: 445	I can't help but wonder ... Does it seem to anyone else that AFDave's slowing down around here? I wonder if he'll run out of steam before he actually gets around to having to avoid talking about the synchronization of the metrics ... :Cheeky:

07-12-2007, 11:53 AM	#263
Steviepinhead Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,642	I suspect that all that is true, but remember he's supposedly in Mexico for the next week as well.

07-12-2007, 04:34 PM	#264
BWE Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 624	His armor cracked. The patch jobs get more and more expensive.

07-13-2007, 07:34 AM	#265
Calilasseia Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Liverpool, UK Posts: 1,072	A holiday in Mexico is certainly an expensive repair job ...

07-13-2007, 08:29 AM	#266
shirley knott Regular Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 416	Note that afDave has emitted another steaming pile of effluent in the Debate just now. So, I correct that he hadn't left yet when many were suggesting that's why he hadn't posted. And now we now have [yet more] real evidence that he has been avoiding all the things we were pretty sure he was avoiding. The howler in the post may be his reference to Dr. Humphreys, the demonstrated and demonstrable fraud, as reputable and reliable. Even funnier is that he contrasts this with Hovind (or was it Ham, they all smell the same to me...). hugs, Shirley Knott

07-13-2007, 09:21 AM	#269
ericmurphy Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 3,027	Interesting that Dave would cite "evidence" that coal is 50,000 years old to prove that the earth is 6,000 years old. Did someone mention "consilience"?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.