RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (202) < ... 197 198 199 200 201 [202] >   
  Topic: AF Dave's UPDATED Creator God Hypothesis, Creation/Evolution Debate< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,08:02   

Quote (jeannot @ Sep. 22 2006,13:19)
Quote
I am sorry that you don't like "my" Jesus.  You will bow before Him someday whether you like Him or not.

How do you know that?

Because he's an arrogant assclown.

It's such a shame that when afdave's body bites the dust, his mind won't be around to realize that he's squandered his one shot at existence by living a lie.

He thinks that when we die we'll learn the Truth. I think he will never learn the truth.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,08:08   

Quote (jeannot @ Sep. 22 2006,12:19)
 
Quote
I am sorry that you don't like "my" Jesus.  You will bow before Him someday whether you like Him or not.

How do you know that?

'Cuz everyone's been telling him that all his life.

 
Quote

It's worth noting that near the beginning of this thread AFDave claimed that he wasn't so much out to bring in new evidence as a new way of thinking.  The trouble was that denial is not a new way of thinking.


No, it's a very old way of not thinking.

Quote

And you laugh at my chart!!!!


You mean the chart where you made up all the data and claimed it supported a Young Earth™?

Yeah, we actually had a VERY good laugh at that! I meant to thank you.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,08:08   

Wow, Dave.

Your arguments get absolutely blasted down to the bedrock, over and over and over again, but you keep coming back for more! And more than that, you keep think you're winning!

If there was a Nobel Prize given out for self-delusion, I think you'd be a multiple prize-winner.

By the way, Dave: you'll notice that JonF answered each one of your questions, and rebutted every single last one of your claims. He's done this again and again and again, over and over with every claim about radiometric dating you've ever made.

In the meantime, the five-month anniversary of this thread is coming up, which seems an appropriate time to post the list of questions on radiometric dating and other topics (including, you know, your "UPDATED Creator God Hypothesis"—remember that one?) that you have never been able to answer. I've compiled a nice list, organized by topic, and it will be going up in a few days.

Now that you know how to use permalinks, I can't wait for you to show us how you actually have answered all those questions. It's like waiting for Oscars night!

And JonF: I know this is verging on damning with faint praise, but congrats for your utter evisceration of all of Dave's claims wrt to isochrons and other topics. Stellar work, and I can only hope that all of Dave's YEC friends stop by to watch the slayage.

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,08:26   

Quote (jeannot @ Sep. 22 2006,12:19)
Quote
I am sorry that you don't like "my" Jesus.  You will bow before Him someday whether you like Him or not.

How do you know that?

just like he knows the earth is 6000 years old.
And, just to remind everybody, Dave thinks the sun is 6000 years old. His default position is that everything is 6000 years old. Kinda rules out life on other planets then eh?

So, it dont matter what the subject is, or how conclusive the evidence is, it's wrong by default if it indicates an age greater then 6000 years old. So stars thousands of light years away (6000+) are also less then 6000 years old. Logic plays no part here. If gawd really wanted us to believe in an ancient earth then he's doing a damm good job of proving it. Big old liar in the sky?

Dave, you say you believe in 90-95% of science. Well, part of that belief should come with the idea that you can look at what the evidence says and then draw a conclusion based on that. Not the other way round!

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Mike PSS



Posts: 428
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,08:30   

AFDave,
I was going to put a lengthy explanation of how crystal structure selection and formation was related to the limiting element in the melt front.  And if the limiting element was depleted then the structure of the crystal would change in that area.

However, as I walk up and see JonF's response this is what I find:

{EDIT: First Image didn't load properly. Link to first image is http://www.tellmewhereonearth.com/Images6/Nelson-plane_crash.jpg}
Not much left there for me to pick-apart.  Good Job JonF.

AND AFDave said
   
Quote
Hey, Jon ... what would I get if I plotted this on a "normal" graph?

Pretty near a horizontal line, my friend!  See what the range is?  

0.0057 !!!!!!!!!!!
Is an order of magnitude greater than what JonF said
   
Quote
The range of Snelling's 87Sr/86Sr values is 0.000507.  

See what you get when you miss the decimal place.

Mike PSS

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,08:41   

Quote (Mike PSS @ Sep. 22 2006,13:30)
AND AFDave said
       
Quote
Hey, Jon ... what would I get if I plotted this on a "normal" graph?

Pretty near a horizontal line, my friend!  See what the range is?  

0.0057 !!!!!!!!!!!
Is an order of magnitude greater than what JonF said
       
Quote
The range of Snelling's 87Sr/86Sr values is 0.000507.  

See what you get when you miss the decimal place.

Mike PSS

An order of magnitude? Dave's (and the various Bible-apologists) underestimate the age of the earth by  six orders of magnitude.

Not quite as bad as the cosmological constant fiasco, but then it's not like Dave couldn't get the correct value pretty easily just by looking at actual evidence, rather than consulting his one book that even he knows is far from inerrant.

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,08:45   

So Dave, I know you're having fun with the isochrons now but...

I understand that according to you, at any time any of us would be able to have a change of heart, accept your Jesus, and be taken in, and spend the rest of eternity in the light with your God.

I also understand that you believe that this is still possible right up to the very end, no matter what kind of evil, Jesus-rejecting life we've led. This is your beloved Death Bed Scenario.

Now, here's what I don't understand. Imagine for a minute that someone were to miss out on that last chance for salvation during life here, on purpose. I thought that that was supposed to send a person straight to [Hades]. Instead, what I think you're saying is that Jesus calls you up and makes you bow before him whether you want to or not. What does he do, have an angel poke you with a stick? Or is he just impossible to resist against? At what point do you lose free will? Do you get another chance to accept him then and there and possibly change your fate?

  
Henry J



Posts: 4045
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,08:48   

Resistance is futile! You will be assimilated!

(to borrow a phrase  :p )

  
JonF



Posts: 571
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,10:07   

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 22 2006,13:32)
Hee hee hee hee ... says JonF ... he's laughing so hard at his wiley ways of tripping me up that he fails to notice that his own champion, Dalrymple himself, tries to prove meteorites are 4.6 BYO with a very similar graph ...



Figure 3: Rb-Sr isochron for the meteorite Juvinas. The points represent analyses on glass, tridymite and quartz, pyroxene, total rock, and plagioclase. After Faure (49). Data from Allegre and others (3).

Hey, Jon ... what would I get if I plotted this on a "normal" graph?

Pretty near a horizontal line, my friend!  See what the range is?  

0.0057 !!!!!!!!!!!


Yup. A mere order of magnitude greater than Snelling's range.  Davie-dip, you're just proving my point, that yuor graph of Snelling's data is meaningless 'cause you used irrational axis scale choices.

But, Davie-doodles, you've tripped yourself up again.  The appropriate scale prtly depends on the data and partly depends on the overall real-world values. Dalrymple's data is fine, accurate and well above the threshold of the instrumentation.  So is Snelling's.  The range just happens to vary a lot, but both the X and Y ranges vary.

Notice the range on the X-axis too.

In Moorbath's data, approximately 20.

In Snelling's data, approximately 1.5.  (That's why it made sense for me to plot Snelling's data with 10% of the Y-range of Moorbath; Snelling's X and Y ranges are about 10% of Moorbath's, so the X axis was scaled OK already.)

In Dalrymple's data,  approximately 0.1.

So, when you calculate slopes (which is how you get ages), dividing delta Y by delta X, you get a significantly positive slope on Moorbath's plot, a significantly positive slope on Dalrymple's plot, and a significantly horizontal line on Snelling's plot.  Calculate what the rocks that Snelling sampled will be in a bilion years.

To make it even clearer, let's scale the data linearly (which won't affect the slope, but it'll mess up the intercept) so we can see all three sets on a comparable scale; for Moorbath, divide  X and Y by 10 and add 0.625 to Y, leaving the slope the same; for Dalrymple, multiply X and Y by 10 and subtract 6.29 from Y leaving the slope the same; and for Snelling, leave X and Y alone.  I'll just do the extreme points for Dalrymple and Moorbath, it's a pain trying to read them from the graph:


{ABE: I just swapped the picture; the original version had Dalrymple's data labeled as Moorbath's and vice versa.  Wonder if Davie would have noticed that my graph had Isua older than Juivenas?}

It's clear, Davie-doodles; Snelling's data clearly shows a horizontal whole-rock isochron, insignificant variation in 87Sr/86Sr, and significant variation in 87Rb/86Sr.  Who was saying that's impossible?
   
Quote
Incidentally, what I showed with my graph is ...

a) WR Isochrons are useless (plotted on a fine scale, they are all over the map) ... hence useless.
b) WR Isochrons are useless (plotted on a "normal" scale they are a horizontal line) ... again useless.

Um, Davie-doodles, WR isochrons for young rocks ...  "plotted on a "normal" scale they are a horizontal line" ... are far from useless ... 'cause when they age they aren't horizontal any more. Your graph demonstratges how useful WR isochrons are.
   
Quote
(But thanks for the zip file ... you're a good man anyway!;)

And you're not, Davie, 'cause you're cutting and running from the discussions you promised.

  
JonF



Posts: 571
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,10:12   

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 22 2006,13:46)
Oops ... your zip file didn't work ...

(sort of like your logic, possibly?)

The board f**ked up the link; the link was correct (but when I go to edit the post it presents the link in HTML rather than in UBB), and Steve's version of it works.

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,10:14   

Looks like the methodology described on TO wins again:

Quote
A horizontal line represents "zero age."


--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,10:27   

Quote (Mike PSS @ Sep. 22 2006,13:30)

AFDave,
I was going to put a lengthy explanation of how crystal structure selection and formation was related to the limiting element in the melt front.  And if the limiting element was depleted then the structure of the crystal would change in that area.

However, as I walk up and see JonF's response this is what I find:


Not much left there for me to pick-apart.  Good Job JonF.


Obnviously AFDave was piloting it!  He must have mistaken his IQ for his altitude.

Quote (Mike PSS @ Sep. 22 2006,13:30)

AND AFDave said
     
Quote
Hey, Jon ... what would I get if I plotted this on a "normal" graph?

Pretty near a horizontal line, my friend!  See what the range is?  

0.0057 !!!!!!!!!!!
Is an order of magnitude greater than what JonF said
     
Quote
The range of Snelling's 87Sr/86Sr values is 0.000507.  

See what you get when you miss the decimal place.

Mike PSS


And the x axis is another two orders of magnitude!  :p

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
Henry J



Posts: 4045
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,10:32   

The bad link had http://www.antievolution.org/ stuck in front of the intended address. I think the BB does that if a url doesn't have the http:// in front of it, or something like that.

Henry

  
Mike PSS



Posts: 428
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,10:50   

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 22 2006,16:27)
And the x axis is another two orders of magnitude!  :p

Your right Tracy.  In that case, we'll find AFDave's plane here.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4045
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,11:07   

De plane! De plane!

  
afdave



Posts: 1619
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,12:17   

Whoah!  Whoah! Whoah!  Whoah!

Did I read that right?  I never noticed this before!  I was laughing so hard that John was griping about my miniscule range of Y-values being only slightly more miniscule than Dalrymples that I didn't even notice the X-axis values!

This is great!!  I wish I had noticed this before!!  Thank you for pointing this out to me!!

Look at those X-values!  Talk about MINISCULE!!

So you mean to tell me that you think this meteorite is 4.6 GYO because they measured these infinitesmally miniscule values and they plot on a nice line with a slope?  Wow!

Hmmm ... I guess I should be more understanding.  I came to this discussion with absolutely no illusions that radiometric "dating" could tell us anything about the real age of rocks.  But I forget that you all DO believe in that sort of thing, and yes, you are correct about your slope comparisons.  I suppose I should be more considerate and at least give you a fair chance to explain why it makes sense, even though it makes no sense to me.

And mind you, I do understand why positive slopes LOOK like old age, but I just keep hearing Dalrymple's statements ringing in my ears ...  
Quote
The K-Ar method is probably the most widely used radiometric dating technique available to geologists.
and ...  
Quote
Unlike argon, which escapes easily and entirely from most molten rocks,
... and migrates IN also, JonF, as we have seen.

And the famous Cherry Picking statement ...  
Quote
One of the principal tasks of the geochronologist is to select the type of material used for a dating analysis. A great deal of effort goes into the sample selection


But alas, you don't care about any one this ...

*****************************

Alright, so, you're convinced the earth is old ... I'm not ... what did I expect?

But ... as in all our other discussions, I have come away from this one with a really nice view of ...

THE SKELETONS IN THE CLOSET OF WHOLE ROCK iSOCHRON DATING

And tomorrow ... Mineral Isochrons!

(Oh BTW ... did anyone notice that the chart we just discussed with the miniscule range of values was primarily a MINERAL isochron chart? I think there may be something to discuss there ... we shall see!;)

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
stevestory



Posts: 8877
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2006,13:14   

A bug has slowly infiltrated this thread. The discussion continues here.

   
  6047 replies since May 01 2006,03:19 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (202) < ... 197 198 199 200 201 [202] >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]