Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lpetrich · 04-12-2003, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth
... Thallus noticed something unusual, and may well have been an eyewitness, as he is writing mid first century. (Goguel) He was impressed enough to try to explain it and certainly takes the existence of Christ for granted.

How did Thallus take the existence of Jesus Christ for granted? If he had done so?

Also, we don't have Thallus's original, detailed words, so it's difficult to tell what he had been talking about.

And that, of course, does not explain why Pliny the Elder had failed to mention that alleged darkness in his Natural History.

lpetrich · 04-12-2003, 04:06 PM

Magus55:
Ah yes, good old radioactive iostopes. Such a useful tool, especially when they date the eruption of Mount St. Helens at 2 million years ago.

Babylon Sister:
Citation please?

Do you have any concept of how a volcano works? I mean, other than the baking soda model from the science fair?

What is likely happening is that some "xenolith" got dated -- a xenolith is a stone that got trapped in some upward-flowing lava. Xenoliths are common in some volcanoes.

And I'd be surprised if Magus55 has serious experience with anything other than his favorite fundie authors. Although I don't object to being proved wrong.

Magus55 · 04-12-2003, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Babylon Sister
Citation please?

Do you have any concept of how a volcano works? I mean, other than the baking soda model from the science fair?

http://www.icr.org/research/sa/sa-r01.htm

And some other articles on the errors of radiometric dating.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1141.asp

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home...te-dilemma.asp

And there are quite a bit more errors in dating that i can get, but I'm sure you all will just dismiss the evidence as invalid, like you usually do when it comes to disproving the age of the Earth and fossils.

lpetrich · 04-12-2003, 09:00 PM

Magus55 will undoubtedly enjoy these talk.origins article on the age of the Earth, as well as many of these "No Answers in Genesis" articles.

He will especially enjoy these articles on the split personality of a certain Dr. Andrew Snelling.

Babylon Sister · 04-13-2003, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
http://www.icr.org/research/sa/sa-r01.htm

And some other articles on the errors of radiometric dating.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1141.asp

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home...te-dilemma.asp

And there are quite a bit more errors in dating that i can get, but I'm sure you all will just dismiss the evidence as invalid, like you usually do when it comes to disproving the age of the Earth and fossils.

icr and aig. yeah that'll work...

Babylon Sister · 04-13-2003, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lpetrich
Magus55:
Ah yes, good old radioactive iostopes. Such a useful tool, especially when they date the eruption of Mount St. Helens at 2 million years ago.

Babylon Sister:
Citation please?

Do you have any concept of how a volcano works? I mean, other than the baking soda model from the science fair?

What is likely happening is that some "xenolith" got dated -- a xenolith is a stone that got trapped in some upward-flowing lava. Xenoliths are common in some volcanoes.

And I'd be surprised if Magus55 has serious experience with anything other than his favorite fundie authors. Although I don't object to being proved wrong.

I know that and you know that, but I don't think Magus55 nows that. Or cares for that matter.

Magus55 · 04-13-2003, 06:38 AM

So you concede that its wrong just because of the site its hosted on?....

Babylon Sister · 04-13-2003, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
So you concede that its wrong just because of the site its hosted on?....

I concede that it's wrong because it's wrong .

Magus55 · 04-13-2003, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Babylon Sister
I concede that it's wrong because it's wrong .

Great logic. I concede talkorigins is wrong because its wrong.

Babylon Sister · 04-13-2003, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
Great logic. I concede talkorigins is wrong because its wrong.

kissy, kissy

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

04-12-2003, 04:06 PM	#82
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Magus55: Ah yes, good old radioactive iostopes. Such a useful tool, especially when they date the eruption of Mount St. Helens at 2 million years ago. Babylon Sister: Citation please? Do you have any concept of how a volcano works? I mean, other than the baking soda model from the science fair? What is likely happening is that some "xenolith" got dated -- a xenolith is a stone that got trapped in some upward-flowing lava. Xenoliths are common in some volcanoes. And I'd be surprised if Magus55 has serious experience with anything other than his favorite fundie authors. Although I don't object to being proved wrong.

04-12-2003, 09:00 PM	#84
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Magus55 will undoubtedly enjoy these talk.origins article on the age of the Earth, as well as many of these "No Answers in Genesis" articles. He will especially enjoy these articles on the split personality of a certain Dr. Andrew Snelling.

04-13-2003, 06:38 AM	#87
Magus55 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: USA Posts: 7,204	So you concede that its wrong just because of the site its hosted on?....

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.