Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clouseau · 06-16-2007, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericmurphy

No possible interpretation of genesis allows an estimate of as much as a million years. Therefore, the Genesis account is false.

The Genesis account as history is false. But there is plentiful indication that the Genesis creation accounts were never intended to be understood as history. The remarkable thing is that they were ever taken literally. Even a child knows that snakes don't talk.

Pappy Jack · 06-16-2007, 04:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fronkey

.........there's no hope in making a dent in anyone who can say this with a straight face:

"If man has been on earth for 200,000 years, we should have historical records going back much farther than 5000 years." AFDave

Hi Fronkey,

Wonder if AFD will reference cave paintings at all?

Cheers.

Fronkey · 06-16-2007, 04:23 AM

Don't worry, Pappy, I know which page of the 420 page monster my Cave Painting post is on, so it's 'to hand' shall we say.

I love the fact that there are so many new members registered here for June 2007.

The lure of AFDave!!

Pappy Jack · 06-16-2007, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fronkey

.........I love the fact that there are so many new members registered here for June 2007.

The lure of AFDave!!

Yah just can't resist it! :Cheeky:

ninewands · 06-16-2007, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notapadawan

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninewands

Well, lying for Jesus IS a long and honored tradition in Christianity ...

You do realize Josephus' citation is not a forgery?

This was attested by Mark Hopkins in the 1800's. I suggest you read about it. Quite interesting.

I realize that almost no serious Biblical scholar who is currently living claims that the TF, in the Greek, is genuine. Call it a "forgery," call it an "interpolation," call it whatever you want, but don't try to call it the genuine writing of Flavius Josephus.

Sven · 06-16-2007, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someotherguy

Ah, but the evidence is already in. AFDave has left a metaphorical heap of wreckage behind him at every site he has participated in. There is an enormous written record of the kinds of "arguments" he makes (see here for what may be the biggest creationism train wreck the internet has ever known) [...]

Only 4989 replies? I give you 5506 replies!

ninewands · 06-16-2007, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pappy Jack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fronkey

.........I love the fact that there are so many new members registered here for June 2007.

The lure of AFDave!!

Yah just can't resist it! :Cheeky:

Yah ... sorta like a scab that just DEMANDS you pick at it. You know better but you do it anyway.

Sven · 06-16-2007, 06:48 AM

Form Dave in his first statement (well, the age of the Earth is one of my favourites, so I'll just address this):

Quote:

RADIOMETRIC DATING AND THE AGE OF THE EARTH
Constant Mews has brought up the Age of the Earth and the Age of the Universe. The belief that the earth is 4.6 byo and that the universe is 13.7 byo are based on extremely questionable assumptions including the initial amounts of radioactive daughter products and the "closed system" nature of the rocks being dated.

Ridiculously wrong. I'm just reading "The Age of the Earth" and as it turns our, almost all of the dates showing the solar system to be about 4.5 Ga old were arrived at with Rb-Sr isochrons which not only don't need these "assumptions" but actually show it if these assumptions were wrong for a sample!

Apart from this, the evidenc for the universe being 13.7 Ga old is not from radiometric dating at all, but from the

Microwave_background_radiation. Red herring, anyone?

Quote:

Not only is radiometric dating based upon faulty assumptions, but there are many, many physical indicators that the earth is <10,000 years old, including the fact that written human history only spans about the last 6000 years (why didn't modern humans write any history for the preceding 194,000 years if they existed?)

Why should they have invented writing? There are many primitive tribes on Earth even today who still have not invented it. Non sequitur, anyone?

Quote:

, intact DNA recovered from Neandertal bones and dinosaur fossils (DNA should degrade in <10,000 years)

IIRC, the DNA from Neanderthals was only some bits and pieces, entirely consistent with it having degraded, and the claim about dinosaur DNA apparently comes straight from "Jurassic park", it's not based in reality.

Quote:

too much helium in zircon and other minerals, comets disintegrate too quickly, etc.(2)

Gish gallop, anyone?
The zircon claims are addressed by Kevin Henke at talkorigins in detail. Saying that they are fraudelent is even generous.

Comets desintegrating? Ever heard about Oort's cloud?

Quote:

More detais on this later. And by the way ... science will progress just fine even if radiometric dating is wrong.

Science will be dealt a masive blow if it's wrong, because much technology and other science is based on quantum physics being correct.

ck1 · 06-16-2007, 09:24 AM

Dave's footnote 1 is a list of papers meant to support his statement that the origin of form and function in living things is a miracle. But the link is to a book by Meyer. I have the Muller/Newman paper, but would like to read the others. I hope Dave can post complete citations somewhere.

Wolfhound · 06-16-2007, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fronkey

I love the fact that there are so many new members registered here for June 2007.

The lure of AFDave!!

I want to see if this trainwreck is going to be as oh-my-god-it's-terrible-but-I-just-can't-avert-my-eyes as the ones on RD. C'mon, everybody loves a trained monkey, right?

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

06-16-2007, 04:23 AM	#63
Fronkey Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: The Frozen North (of England) Posts: 27	Don't worry, Pappy, I know which page of the 420 page monster my Cave Painting post is on, so it's 'to hand' shall we say. I love the fact that there are so many new members registered here for June 2007. The lure of AFDave!!

06-16-2007, 09:24 AM	#69
ck1 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: US East Coast Posts: 1,093	Dave's footnote 1 is a list of papers meant to support his statement that the origin of form and function in living things is a miracle. But the link is to a book by Meyer. I have the Muller/Newman paper, but would like to read the others. I hope Dave can post complete citations somewhere.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.