Joined: June 2007
I'm suggesting the racemization data as it stands shows serious systematic errors in C-14 dating.
I've probably missed it, but I haven't seen you quote from any contemporary scientific literature on the issue, so it's hard to see any contact with the literature "as it stands." Rather, you quote (via a secondary source) a sentence from a 33 year old rebutted letter.
I have recently learned of the competing terms "quote mining" and "literature bluffing" to refer to various tactics allegedly used by opponents in this debate.
This example isn't literature bluffing, since it shows no contact with the recent literature. But it's sure quote mining.
I think this is a common rhetorical tactic of creationists: take a sentence, quote it out of context, and then circulate it -- it's a game of "telephone" or what the British sometimes call "Chinese whispers." What it is not is a responsible use of sources.
Again, I'm pointing out something very specific about the rhetoric of this debate.
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB