Pappy Jack

Cali, I kind of assumed that biblethumping's post was intended as satire. On the other hand, if it's not then now we maybe know where one of Dave's votes in the Flud debate came from!

Faid

<edit>...in case he's the real thing, I have to congratulate him: Unlike dave, he had the guts to state his true opinion on the consillience between dating methods.

Dave still cowers away and avoids the issue, pretending he doesn't get it and talking about how every method "might" be inaccurate, and how he "bets" he can find flaws in all the other ones... But nothing on the REAL issue, the one of consillience. Nicht. Nada.

He's trying desperately to project this rational "scientific journalist" image, and he's afraid of what revealing his true beliefs would do to it, I guess. Oh well.

Biblethumping, on the other hand, was both sincere enough to acknowledge the real problem, and bold enough to clearly state his opinion on it:

That all the different dating methods agree in their wrong date results, because it's the deceiving handiwork of the devil and his lyin' servants, the scientists.

Good for you, biblethumping. Follow his example, dave: Tell the truth. The truth will set you free.

d0t

Check his other post: derailing a thread with incoherent rambling. I think he's for real.

Pappy Jack

Hmmmm, yes, I see what you mean......

rfmwinnie

I have never read a debate before and this has been so enlightening. If I were a Christian Mews' view would have seriously questioning a YE viewpoint. As I am not a Christian the science highlighted is simply overwhelming.

One thing I've always wondered: If YEC have such great faith --YECs in general -- why the need to try and prove an event (or several events) that clearly are outside the bounds of "normal" earthly events? I really don't see how any bibleist can say that Genesis is demonstrably historically true. It just doesn't make sense. I don't think Dave is convincing anyone who may have been on the fence. Only those who hold his view already will think he is winning this arguement I'd think.

One last thing to all of you professional scientists: I appreciate you posting lengthy responses here. It was kind of like getting a college class for free

JonF

Partly because they want it taught as science alongside or instead of real science, and partly because the imprimatur of science is important in modern society.

Worldtraveller

I don't want to discourage our new friend, but I want to make very clear that because we do have many professional scientists who do post here, specific accusations of fraud are taken very seriously by the administration of this board.

Otherwise, proceed with the dissection.

Cheers,
Lane

Agenda07

Judging by his profile I'd guess satire, but it's hard to tell:

Location:
Bible Belt
Interests:
thumping the bible
Basic Beliefs:
faith in thumping

Occam's Aftershave

Where's AFDave-O??

ck1

Good question.

It seems Dave has revised his "modus operandi". From what he has said on RD.net, he plans to post in his debate threads (some day, soon), but he has clearly lost interest in the regular discussion threads.