RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (202) < ... 181 182 183 184 185 [186] 187 188 189 190 191 ... >   
  Topic: AF Dave's UPDATED Creator God Hypothesis, Creation/Evolution Debate< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:25   

Quote (Steverino @ Sep. 11 2006,10:55)
To the contrary, if you step away from the koolaid and read any number of books (authors) who researched the men and their beliefs, you would find that they did not intend this country or the governmnet to be "Christian or Bible promoting".

We've been through this before.  Dave has found all he needs with David Barton and really has no interest in investigating anything that might point to contrary conclusions.  I pointed him to Gregg Frazer, a literal six-day creationist who comes to a conclusion quite different than Barton's, but I am willing to bet he hasn't sought out Frazer's writings.  Although, in fairness, between alot of business travel and slogging through H.W. Brands biography of Andrew Jackson, neither have I.
 
Quote
The Faiths of the Founding Fathers (Hardcover)
by David L. Holmes

Or "American Gospel" by Jon Meacham.  I haven't read it yet, but it is in line behind "America's Constitution" by Akhil Reed Amar.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:30   

Quote
if you step away from the koolaid

Has anyone noticed that I have never yet characterized evolution supporters as "evilutionists" or "conspirators" in any way, yet I am constantly characterized as some kind of cultist?  What's up with that?  Are you so insecure in your belief system that you have to try and portray people with differing views as monsters?

--------------
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

  
argystokes



Posts: 766
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:34   

Quote
Has anyone noticed that I have never yet characterized evolution supporters as "evilutionists" or "conspirators" in any way,


Yeah, just people who constantly falsify data and produce fraudulent papers, and never call each other on it, even though the Truth is plain to see.  But not conspirators, no!

--------------
"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" -Calvin

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:34   

Quote (BWE @ Sep. 11 2006,10:59)
Jefferson, Hamilton, Franklin, Paine, -Not Fundies. Don't know about the rest because those are the only ones I have read works by. But I can go with John Locke or Adam Smith. Not Fundies.


To add a few:

Washington was nominally Anglican, but never took communion. Adams was a unitarian.  Madison was also Anglican, but was the most strident and eloquent of the FF about keeping religion and government apart. Jay was solidly Protestant, but virulently anti Catholic (likely due to his French Hugenuot ancestry).  Gouverneur Morris was not particularly religious and was, frankly, quite the rake.

The Founders saw religion as a means to building good citizens, but bad government.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Steverino



Posts: 411
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:47   

Dave,

Quick google on Barton:

http://candst.tripod.com/boston1.htm

This is a good one....Sounds like he is full of $hit too!

--------------
- Born right the first time.
- Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers.
- It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

   
BWE



Posts: 1898
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:50   

Here is his own admission with an excuse that looks suspiciously similar to one you might write.

Link

And the beauty is he still twists the truth when he appologizes.

Quote
2. It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible. -- George Washington (unconfirmed)


Followed by this, hoping to try to equate the two most dissimilar things:
Quote
There is a very real possibility that the quotation has its origin in an 1835 biography by James K. Paulding. In a description of Washington's character, with supporting quotations, Paulding declares Washington to have said:

   It is impossible to account for the creation of the universe without the agency of a Supreme Being. It is impossible to govern the universe without the aid of a Supreme Being.9


Quote
George Washington, the first president of the United States, never declared himself a Christian according to contemporary reports or in any of his voluminous correspondence. Washington Championed the cause of freedom from religious intolerance and compulsion. When John Murray (a universalist who denied the existence of ####) was invited to become an army chaplain, the other chaplains petitioned Washington for his dismissal. Instead, Washington gave him the appointment. On his deathbed, Washinton uttered no words of a religious nature and did not call for a clergyman to be in attendance.
From:
George Washington and Religion by Paul F. Boller Jr., pp. 16, 87, 88, 108, 113, 121, 127 (1963, Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, TX)
See I can cite a source that I know nothing about also!

I especially liked this one:
Quote
3. Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise. In this sense and to this extent, our civilizations and our institutions are emphatically Christian. --Holy Trinity v. U. S. (Supreme Court) (inaccurate)

This appears to be a classic example of a cut-and-paste typographical error. These words are not found in the Holy Trinity case. However, these same thoughts are found throughout the case and in other state and federal court rulings, primarily in the early years. After offering a general survey of America's Christian history, and speaking out against the practice of polygamy, the Holy Trinity court stated:

   These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.10


I'm still trying to figure oput how it jibes with this little beauty:
Quote
ARTICLE 11.

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

from the Treaty of Peace and Friendship, signed at Tripoli November 4, 1796 (3 Ramada I, A. H. 1211), and at Algiers January 3, 1797 (4 Rajab, A. H. 1211). Original in Arabic. Submitted to the Senate May 29, 1797. (Message of May 26, 1797.) Resolution of advice and consent June 7, 1797. Ratified by the United States June 10, 1797. As to the ratification generally, see the notes. Proclaimed Jane 10, 1797.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/barbary/bar1796t.htm

And Dorky Lie for Jesus guy says this, which, if you read it twice says something a little different than he might mean.
Quote
4. We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves . . . according to the Ten Commandments of God. -- James Madison (unconfirmed)

While these words have been the most controversial of all unconfirmed quotes, they are consistent with Madison's thoughts on religion and government. They are consistent because the key idea being communicated is self-government, not religious laws or establishments. Our future rests upon the ability of all to govern themselves according to a Biblical standard. Madison could have easily offered the thought.

Concerning a republican form of government, he spoke in the Federalist #39 of "that honourable determination which animates every votary of freedom, to rest all our political experiments on the capacity of mankind for self-government." (emphasis added)13 Here we see an interesting similarity to the quote's wording, which may have led to a paraphrase that was erroneously attributed to Madison.

Speaking against direct religious taxation in his Memorial and Remonstrance, Madison wrote:

   While we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess, and to observe, the Religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to them whose minds have not yielded to the evidence which has convinced us.14

The religion of divine origin was obviously Christianity, of which Madison said he was convinced. Therefore, it would be appropriate for Madison to refer to the Ten Commandments as a foundation for self-government. Granted, he fought to abolish religious establishments much of his life, but that is not the issue. The issue is whether Madison could have made such a statement. He could have; the questionable quote is not out of character.

In the context of America's attitude toward religious establishments (which was a State's right withheld from federal cognizance), Madison responded to an essay/sermon by Reverend Jasper Adams with these words:

   Waiving the rights of conscience, not included in the surrender implied by the social state, & more or less invaded by all Religious establishments, the simple question to be decided, is whether a support of the best & purest religion, the Christian religion itself ought not, so far at least as pecuniary means are involved, to be provided for by the Government, rather than be left to the voluntary provisions of those who profess it. 15 [emphasis added]


So I dug up another one of those little quotes which are equally as good:

Quote
James Madison, fourth president and father of the Constitution, was not religious in any conventional sense. "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
From:
The Madisons by Virginia Moore, P. 43 (1979, McGraw-Hill Co. New York, NY) quoting a letter by JM to William Bradford April 1, 1774, and James Madison, A Biography in his Own Words, edited by Joseph Gardner, p. 93, (1974, Newsweek, New York, NY) Quoting Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments by JM, June 1785.


Quote
6. Whosoever shall introduce into public affairs the principles of primitive Christianity will change the face of the world. --Benjamin Franklin (unconfirmed)

Franklin knew quite well the value of Christianity to society. In the context of teaching history to the youth of Philadelphia, he said:

   History will also afford the frequent opportunities of showing the necessity of a public religion, from its usefulness to the public; the advantage of a religious character among private persons; the mischiefs of superstition, &c. and the excellency of the Christian religion above all others, ancient or modern. 18

This is not to say that Franklin was a Christian; he did not believe in the divinity of Christ. This is easily documented. However, he was well aware of the utility of religion in general and Christianity specifically. In a letter to his daughter, Franklin stated:
This one is just amazing.

I might go on but it takes too much time.

You're a Liar, an idiot, and a sucker. What a combo.

Now, about those core samples....

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:53   

Quote
Yeah, just people who constantly falsify data and produce fraudulent papers, and never call each other on it, even though the Truth is plain to see.  But not conspirators, no!
Nope.  Never said anything like that.  I have consistently said they are simply mistaken.  That's a big difference.  I never have said, and I never will say they are defrauding anyone intentionally.  They are sincere ... they actually believe what they are publishing.

Quote
The Founders saw religion as a means to building good citizens, but bad government.
You are almost correct ... the first part of the statement is right on.  The second, almost.  You are correct that they detested the authoritarian control of European style church hierarchies (both Protestant and Catholic) controlling the government.  But the revisionist portrayal that they wanted all vestiges of religion expunged from the government is absurd.  This is one of the Great Modern Myths of Our Time.  Prior to about 50 years ago, Christian practices were widespread through state and local governments and public schools at all manner of official functions.  David Barton sells a reprint of a Bible course they used to teach in the Dallas Public School system.  Go to Washington, DC and you will see Christianity and Biblical references  carved in stone everywhere you look.  Moses is the central figure in the U.S. House Chamber -- see my post on my blog

http://airdave.blogspot.com/

etc, etc, etc ...

--------------
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

  
argystokes



Posts: 766
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:59   

Quote
Nope.  Never said anything like that.


You have repeatedly accused scientists of throwing out discordant dates in order to make the various dating methods correlate.  That's fraud, and every scientist knows it.

--------------
"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" -Calvin

  
Steverino



Posts: 411
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,06:59   

And becuase it is fun to prove you wrong and then see you ignore it...

"Jefferson specifically denied that Christianity is the basis of the common law and regarded efforts to declare it so as anti-separationist propaganda. In an 1824 letter to John Cartwright, Jefferson observed, "The proof...is incontrovertible, to wit, that the common law existed while the Angle- Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never heard the name Christ pronounced, or knew that such a character existed. What a conspiracy this, between Church and State!"

--------------
- Born right the first time.
- Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers.
- It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

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

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 11 2006,11:53)
Quote
 Go to Washington, DC and you will see Christianity and Biblical references  carved in stone everywhere you look.  Moses is the central figure in the U.S. House Chamber -- see my post on my blog

Been there.  I actually took a not-available-to-the-public tour of the Supreme Court. Hammurabi can be found recieving his code from the Babylonian Sun God on the south freize of the Courtroom.  Furthermore, Mohammed can be found holding the Koran on the north frieze.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,07:12   

GREAT HEROES OF AMERICAN HISTORY WHO PROMOTED THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION

(AND MADE IT A PART OF GOVERNMENT)


FRANCIS SCOTT KEY, AUTHOR OF THE AMERICAN NATIONAL ANTHEM


Everyone knows the first verse of the American National Anthem, but how many know the 4th verse?

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the Heaven-rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: “In God is our trust.”
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!


http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Star-Spangled_Banner




Proclamation by George Washington Issued on October 3, 1789
     
Quote
"Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor . . . Now, therefore, I do recommend . . . that we may all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection . . . And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions . . . to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue."

Washington, Writings (1838) Vol. XII, pp. 119-120, October 3, 1789. See also James D. Richardson, A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789-1897 (Published by the Authority of Congress, 1899), VOl. I, p. 64, October 3, 1789. OI-115.


Thomas Jefferson
     
Quote
"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever."

Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virgina (Philadelphia: Matthew Carey, 1794), Query XVIII, p. 237. MS-176.


Benjamin Franklin
     
Quote
"In the beginning of the contest with Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room for the Divine protection. Our prayers, sir were heard, and they were graciously answered . . . I therefore beg leave to move--that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business."

James Madison, The Papers of James Madison, Henry D. Gilpin, editor (Washington: Langtree & O’Sullivan, 1840), Vol. II, p. 984-986, June 28, 1787.

"We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel."

James Madison, The Papers of James Madison, Henry D. Gilpin, editor (Washington: Langtree & O’Sullivan, 1840), Vol. II, p. 985, June 28, 1787.



John Jay -- First Chief Justice of the United States
     
Quote
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation, to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."

William Jay, The Life of John Jay (New York: J. & J. Harper, 1833), Vol. II, p.376, to John Murray, Jr. on October 12, 1816. OI-334.

"Only one adequate plan has ever appeared in the world, and that is the Christian dispensation."

John Jay, The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1893), Vol. IV, p.52, to Lindley Murray on August 22, 1794. OI-168.


--------------
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

  
BWE



Posts: 1898
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,07:19   

Oh DaveyDH, I'm getting turned on. We should move this topic to a more intimate place. I just put it on the Portuguese thread. I thought it would be an appropriate place for this topic.

You game big boy?

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
JonF



Posts: 632
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,07:23   

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 11 2006,10:18)
JonF wants to make a big deal out of xenoliths ... fine ... make a big deal out of them ...

Fine, Davie-doodles.  Admit that Snelling committed fraud.  Your pathetic attempts to excuse him have all failed miserably.
   
Quote
It is interesting to note the increase in popularity of the method beginning in the 50's and continuing to the present from the Google Scholar searches below.  I suppose this confirms Snelling's statement that continues to remain the most popular dating method. [RATE Book 1, p.37] Why?  Because it's cheap I guess.  I think JonF says Snelling is wrong about this too, but I'm not seeing that, Jon.  From the data below, I see 2600 search returns for K-Ar vs. 391, 299, and 1150 for Rb-Sr, Sm-Nd, and Pb-Pb respectively.  Maybe you could back up your statements with data?
       
Quote
Results 1 - 10 of about 45 for potassium argon dates 1941-1950
Results 1 - 10 of about 164 for potassium argon dates 1951-1960
Results 1 - 10 of about 578 for potassium argon dates 1961-1970
Results 1 - 10 of about 840 for potassium argon dates 1971-1980
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,260 for potassium argon dates 1981-1990
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,600 for potassium argon dates 1991-2000
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,930 for potassium argon dates 2001-2006

Results 1 - 10 of about 391 for rubidium strontium dates 1991-2000
Results 1 - 10 of about 299 for samarium neodymium dates 1991-2000
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,150 for Pb-Pb dates 1991-2000

Those aren't counts of dating studies performed, Davie-doodles, they're counts of mentions of a dating technique {ABE: including references}. And they're terifically biased by the facts that the older stuff isn't all indexed on the Web, you picked a particular set of keywords (Hint:  Pb-Pb dating is not U-Pb concordia-discordia dating, ignoramus), and you quite probably picked up a lot of Ar-Ar dates. I give you Ludwig, K.E., personal communication, March 3, 2003:

"... for a review of an article a few months ago I did a quick literature search of articles presenting new geochronology (excluding rocks of Pleistocene age. for which methods such as radiocarbon, uranium series, optical luminescence.... are important) in a variety of different journals (Geology, Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull., Canadian Jour. Earth Sci., Contrib. Mineralogy & Petrology) for the past 5 years. Of the 164 articles I selected at random, more than 80% were done by either U-Pb (54%) or Ar-Ar/ K-Ar (30%). with less than 5% each were done by Rb-Sr or Sm -Nd."



   
Quote
Then of course, we have Mr. Bird-in-the-Cage man himself throwing out 60 published K-Ar dates in the western Grand Canyon [Dalrymple and Hamblin, 1998].  JonF waves his hands wildly and says "Look!  He excluded xenoliths!"  OK. Great.  What's your point?

Several points, already explicitly made, but I'll repeat them:

  • Honest geologists do not test samples with xenoliths:  they take "as much care as possible ... during sample preparation to avoid incorporating [xenoliths] into the sample analyzed".  Doing otherwise, as Snelling did, is F R A U D, Davie-moron.
  • Real geologists do not, as you claimed they do, seize upon any radiometric date that meets their preconceptions and discard others.
  • Real geologists do not, as you claimed they do, sweep discordant results under the rug; they publish them and expose any problems (of which there aren't many) for the world to see.

   
Quote
So he excluded xenoliths and threw out 60 dates anyway.

Nope, Davie-moron.  First you claimed that "most" of the dates were "in error", now you claim he "threw out 60".  Both bovine excrement. Here's the reality.  Of 13 formations tested:

  • Six gave repeatable and consistent results and were considered reliable.
  • Two gave scattered and inconsistent results and were considered unreliable because of that. (For one formation, another researcher had reported a result consistent with Dalrymple's, but Dalrymple didn't consider that sufficient for claiming reliability).
  • Two were single-sample age determinations, and were not considered reliable because of insufficient replication on differnt flows (they didn't have the opportunity).
  • Three were un-datable by the K-Ar method and no result was obtained.

Of 63 total age tests, slightly less than half fell into the "not reliable" or "single-sample" categories; the rest fell into the "reliable" category.  Of the slightly less than half that fell into those first two categories, 14 were on one of the formations that produced scattered results and 11 were for the other (and both were more tests than were run on any other formation).  That's 40% of all the tests, Davie-dork.  Obviously they ran extra tests on the problematic formations in an attempt to figure out where the problem was.

The bottom line is that at least 60% (and maybe more) of the date-able formations were reliably dated, 20% of the date-able formations yielded excessive scatter, and the reliability is unknown for 20% of the formations.  This study contradicts every claim you have made about radiometric dating!

I know there's no chance you'll understand or acknowledge the above, but it's just one more demonstration of your ignorance and dishonesty, and maybe someone else will learn something interesting.
 
Quote
Then the question arises ... "How do we determine if a particluar Argon "date" is "right?"

Asked and answered already, Davie-dork.  The main point that you are trying to ignore is:

  • We know that all K-Ar dates contradict a young Earth.
  • We know that some those K-Ar dates are correct.
  • Therefore, a young Earth is falsified even if we don't know which K-Ar dates are correct.

   
Quote
Don't think they throw out dates they don't like?

Nope.
   
Quote
 Well you are mistaken as I have now shown you on the KBS Tuff and the example of Dalrymple and Hamblin [1998].  I'm sure I could spend a great deal of time and show you many, many more.

You haven't shown any such thing, Dave-pootles; all you've shown is:
 

  • Geologists doing something you said they never do: publishing discordant dates.
  • Geologists doing another thing you said they never do: not accepting dates until they are verifiable, replicable, and cross-checked.
  • Geologists doing another thing you said they never do: discarding only dates that are proven to be wrong by multiple independent objective evaluations.
       
    Quote
    So, my friends, I have now done a thorough job of giving you a glimpse into the "rest of the story" about Argon dating.

    Are you intending to break your promise to discuss why you think zircons don't refute Snelling's "By implication, the radioisotopic ratios in ancient lavas found throughout the geologic record are likely fundamental characteristics of their geochemistry. They therefore probably only reflect the magmatic origin of the lavas from mantle and crustal sources, and any history of mixing or contamination in their petrogenesis, rather than any valid age information."

    And I did ask nicely that you post your evidence that mixing affects K-Ar dating; I really need a good laugh.  I hope you don't disappoint me.

    Oh, and Davie-poopie, I'm an MIT graduate.

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,07:27   

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 11 2006,11:12)
Eric...    
Quote
Have at it, Dave. Sometime this century, please. Or, to save time, you could just admit you have not the faintest notion of how one would date the Grand Staircase.
Actually, Eric, NO ONE has the faintest idea of how to date the layers of the Grand Staircase.  It's just that many geologists play a fine game of pretending they do.  More on this soon.

Actually, Dave, lots of people know exactly how to date the Grand Staircase. Virtually all professional geologists know how to do it, and JonF and Deadman right here on our own little thread know how to do it. That you think they're wrong doesn't change matters, since you haven't given anyone else here the slightest reason to think they're wrong.

But even if it were true that no one, including you, has the slightest idea how to date the Grand Staircase, and by implication anything else, then what's your justification for thinking the earth is only 6,000 years old, Dave? That the Bible says so? But how's that for circular reasoning? You say you believe the (or at least a) Bible is inerrant because the evidence points that way. But what do you use for evidence? The Bible itself!

A logical circle doesn't get any tighter than that, Dave. Tight as a noose, I would say.

And by the way, we can take this as an admission that you have no idea how to date the Grand Canyon, and therefore you have no idea how old it is, right? It could be 600 years old, or it could be six trillion years old, and you'd be none the wiser.

Glad we finally got that out of the way.

--------------
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

  
BWE



Posts: 1898
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,07:35   

Oh yeah,

I almost forgot this one.

DaveyDH, How long does it take permafrost to form and why is it an issue in global warming?

how long?


???

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,07:38   

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 11 2006,12:12)
GREAT HEROES OF AMERICAN HISTORY WHO PROMOTED THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION

(AND MADE IT A PART OF GOVERNMENT)

....OR NOT
James Madison
 
Quote
What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.

-James Madison from Memorial and Remonstrance

Thomas Jefferson
 
Quote

Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.

-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

 
Quote

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

 
Quote

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814


And lastly, as member of the New York Provisional Congress, John Jay argued unsuccessfully for a prohibition on Catholics holding office.  For all his contributions to American jurisprudence, Jay isn't they guy you should look to for support.  Even if you are not Catholic.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Seven Popes



Posts: 190
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,08:49   

Quote (Seven Popes @ Sep. 11 2006,10:47)
Quote (Seven Popes @ Sep. 10 2006,11:30)
What you actually wrote:
   
Quote (Seven Popes @ Sep. 08 2006,15:31)
   
Quote (Seven Popes @ July 24 2006,22:16)
     
Quote (Seven Popes @ July 24 2006,07:47)
     
Quote (afdave @ July 22 2006,08:00)
1.  I have not any part of the Bible which anyone has proven to be untrue.  Sometimes a statement appears untrue at first, but upon closer inspection, it proves true after all.
2.  I think the parts that Jesus said were true and the parts He commissioned to be written are the ones we accept as 'Inspired by God.'  Jesus confirmed the inspiration of the OT and he commissioned the apostles to write the NT.  So I take both to be true.
3.  Greek (NT) and Hebrew (OT) if you are highly motivated.  If not, try the New King James or the New American Standard.  I like them both.  Also get a Power Bible CD ROM from www.powerbible.com -- Adam Clarke's commentary and many others contained there are very good.
4.  I don't know of any 'obvious errors' -- we went through one supposed 'error' about Tyre here and it was equivocal at best.  Buy yourself a good book on Bible Difficulties.



How exactly is the Tyre prophecy equivocal?
It stated that Tyre will be bare, and it's not.

Care to explain dave?  How is a populated Tyre a bare rock?  I give you proof positive of a biblical mistake and you sadly call it equivocal?

I caught you in a lie, Mr. Dawkins, And I have been quite polite about it, and you have not been.  I hope you can finally clear this up.


And now this, on page 182.
   
Quote

Oh ... and you wanted to know about Tyre?  I beat that one to death ...oh ... about a hundred pages ago or so.  Not planning on repeating.  Sorry.



Mr. Dawkins, you are clearly lying.  Why?

Well? How was it "beat to death"? :)
A simple honest answer will do, sir.

Still waiting, Mr. Hawkins.
Just a few lines would suffice.

--------------
Cave ab homine unius libri - Beware of anyone who has just one book.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4656
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,08:54   

Re "Been there.  I actually took a not-available-to-the-public tour of the Supreme Court. Hammurabi can be found recieving his code from the Babylonian Sun God on the south freize of the Courtroom.  Furthermore, Mohammed can be found holding the Koran on the north frieze."

Which frieze shows the FSM? ;)

  
BWE



Posts: 1898
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,08:55   

The lunchroom :p

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,09:14   

Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 11 2006,13:54)
Which frieze shows the FSM? ;)

Probably hiding behind that other great heresy, John Marshall. It has all been downhill since Marbury vs. Madison.  ;)

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
JonF



Posts: 632
Joined: Feb. 2005

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

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 11 2006,11:30)
Quote
if you step away from the koolaid

Has anyone noticed that I have never yet characterized evolution supporters as "evilutionists" or "conspirators" in any way, yet I am constantly characterized as some kind of cultist?  What's up with that?  Are you so insecure in your belief system that you have to try and portray people with differing views as monsters?

I haven't portrayed you as a cultist.  Ignorant, yes; dishonest; yes; stupid; yes; seriously deluded, yes; but those are the only possible conclusions from the data.

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,11:59   

And the strange thing is, I don't think AF Dave is actually stupid. Sure, in a fit of pique I've occasionally referred to him as an "idiot" and the like, but even smart people can often behave like idiots.

Which makes matters worse for Dave, not better. If he actually were stupid, i.e., mentally deficient, it would be more understandable that he posts the drivel that he posts. But he's not. Which means his arguments are based on dishonesty, not stupidity. Stupidity is, after all, forgivable. No one asked to be born stupid. But what's the excuse for dishonesty?

But let's get back on topic here. Dave, do you now admit that you have no way of knowing whether the Grand Canyon is 600 years old, or six trillion years old? And if you think you do know how old it is, how do you know that? You can't tell by looking at the Bible, Dave, because the Bible is not self-authenticating. If you can't find independent corroborating evidence, you have no reason (other than faith) for thinking anything the Bible says is true. And besides, you've already said your belief in the Bible's inerrancy is that the evidence supports such a belief. Well, where's the evidence?

--------------
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

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,12:12   

Eric thinks I'm dishonest, but smart ... Steve Story thinks I'm honest, but stupid ... I think JonF agrees ... some think I'm some sort of cultist ... hmmm ... it's kinda fun seeing all the various analyses  ... I'd like to hear Glen Davidson again ... he always had really long winded analyses of me.

Hey 7P ... how many nested quotes do you think you can put in a single post?  Has this ever been tested?

--------------
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

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,12:16   

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 11 2006,17:12)
I'd like to hear Glen Davidson again ... he always had really long winded analyses of me.

I have a better idea, Dave. Why don't you start working through some of the objections to your "hypothesis" that you've never managed to answer? If you've forgotten them, I can repost them for you.

--------------
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

  
Seven Popes



Posts: 190
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,12:22   

Dave, how long can you continue with you lie?  Address it, allready!
the nested quotes establish a timeline.

--------------
Cave ab homine unius libri - Beware of anyone who has just one book.

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,13:28   

Is Tyre the only obstacle to you believing the Bible is the Inerrant Word of the Creator?

--------------
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

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,13:33   

ever heard the expression "House of Cards" before, Dave?

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
BWE



Posts: 1898
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,13:40   

Yes, Tyre is the only thing keeping me from believing the Bible is the Inerrant Word of the Creator.  

Mmmm. except for the sheer, remarkable errancy of the rest of it. And the fact that we know what makes, oh say, seasons, rain, speciation, earthquakes, hurricanes, day and night, fire, lightning, skin color, the grand canyon, limestone, diamonds, coal, oil, velcro, the motion of the planets, sickness and disease, phosphorescence, things fall, how simple rules can lead to very complex systems, how religion is a holdout from a time when we didn't know those things, how your embarrassment of your small penis led you to pursue a life of promoting falsehoods to bolster your self-esteem and many other things too.

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,13:42   

Dave, if you think you might be a cultist you could always take The Cult Test. Actually, lets not put it that way. I'm sorry, I should be nicer.

You could see how much like a cult's your beliefs may be. I'm pretty sure you'll never be involved in a mass suicide, but some of the questions you might score highly on, if you actually considered them, I mean your belief is the only way to heaven, right?

  
stevestory



Posts: 10278
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2006,13:52   

Quote (afdave @ Sep. 11 2006,18:12)
... Steve Story thinks I'm honest, but stupid ...

That's kind of shorthand. What AFDave has is an epistemological commitment to a set of wholly wrong, primitive beliefs. Over the period of the last few hundred years, most people in the christian west transitioned from that set, to a looser set of beliefs which accomodated science. The ones who keep the primitive beliefs, like AFDave, are forced to throw out whole areas of scientific study.

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

Pages: (202) < ... 181 182 183 184 185 [186] 187 188 189 190 191 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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