ICR Acts and Facts

[Speedwell]

that is a lie! You will not find any statement from ICR, AIG, or CRS or any other reputable YEC organization that says they reject the scientific method or requires the scientists who associate themseves to reject teh scientific method. quite the opposite in fact.

Slander and defamation demeans you!

We have posted them here in this thread.

 

[Speedwell]

That is your opinion- and it is wrong!

You will not find any statement rejecting the scientific method of discovery. They reject evolution and long ages based on science and research and faith just as you reject YEC based on science and research and faith.

You are just more arrogant in your slander of those who would dare disagree with you!

Well, you certainly have me there. I reject a literal reading of Genesis as the only possible reading consistent with Christian doctrine, and I do so on the basis of my religious faith. I would continue to do so even if the theory of evolution was overturned tomorrow.

 

[Ophiolite]

That is your opinion- and it is wrong!

You will not find any statement rejecting the scientific method of discovery. They reject evolution and long ages based on science and research and faith just as you reject YEC based on science and research and faith.

You are just more arrogant in your slander of those who would dare disagree with you!

There requirements and agenda are on record. No opinion is involved. Faith and Scripture take precedence for the YEC over science. That, automatically, means they cannot perform unbiased science.

 

[46AND2]

That is not what the reports I read said. YEC geologists know the difference between new lava and xenoliths. Though you see conspiracy around every YEC corner!

I don't believe you.

That would be incorrect. If you are saying there is C-14 in the machjine and sample preps then all samples are subject to contamination and how can you trust any reading.

Have you ever zeroed a scale before?

I find it amusing that you are so vastly ignorant of the process that you don't even know that there resides residual C-14 in the machine, yet have the hubris to tell me I'm incorrect.

 

[Jimmy D]

that is a lie! You will not find any statement from ICR, AIG, or CRS or any other reputable YEC organization that says they reject the scientific method or requires the scientists who associate themseves to reject teh scientific method. quite the opposite in fact.

The statements have been posted several times, I personally posted a snippet cut directly from their site.

It’s right there in black and white.

If you can’t even bring yourself to accept this simple and obvious fact I hold little hope that there is anything to be gained from any discussion with you.

It’s still amusing though I suppose.

 

[46AND2]

Google decay constants and look at all the papers written saying nothing can alter decay constants! Then pick and choose which evolutionary physicists you wish to write to

Still waiting for you to support your claim that decay constants are garbage. Here is my last post on the topic, which you ignored.

 

[Astrophile]

Can you give a link to the report you read? Not the ICR interpretation of it - the actual source?

In case it helps, the original paper is 'Radiogenic helium and argon in ultramafic inclusions from Hawaii', by John G. Funkhouser and John J. Naughton, J. Geophys. Res., 73, (14), 4601-4607 (1968). You can read the abstract at https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.com/doi/abs/10.1029/JB073i014p04601 . I read the paper in the late 1970s, when I started taking an interest in the creation-evolution controversy.

 

[pitabread]

That is your opinion- and it is wrong!

This isn't a matter of opinion; it's a matter of fact.

Organizations like AiG and CMI require their members to adhere to faith statements. Those faith statements include the rejection of any findings that contradict their religious beliefs. AiG also states in their journal submissions that they may reject submissions not in line with their faith statement. Which again, includes that anything that disagrees with their religious beliefs is not valid.

Likewise ICR has a statement of core principles that includes allowing for miraculous intervention by God. As I quoted from their RATE project previously, they are not shy about appealing to miracles when their ideas run afoul of scientific investigation. That's not science.

They reject evolution and long ages based on science and research and faith just as you reject YEC based on science and research and faith.

Creationist organizations do not reject evolution on the basis of science. They reject it on the basis of it contradicting their religious beliefs. This is directly written into their faith statements.

Are you not familiar with those organization's faith statements? You're the one trying to defend them, but you don't seem that familiar with what they stand for.

You are just more arrogant in your slander of those who would dare disagree with you!

There is no slander here. Just a statement of fact. You can always read their faith statements for yourself. This is public information published on their web sites.

ICR: Foundational Principles

Answers in Genesis: Statement of Faith

CMI: What we believe - creation.com

 

[pitabread]

If you can’t even bring yourself to accept this simple and obvious fact I hold little hope that there is anything to be gained from any discussion with you.

What I don't understand is where the disconnect is. Do they just not understand how creationist organizations function? Do they not understand the scientific method? Are they just in denial?

What's the deal?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is not what the reports I read said. YEC geologists know the difference between new lava and xenoliths. Though you see conspiracy around every YEC corner!

If they did then why did Steve Austin treat samples with xenoliths to whole rock dating?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you want all the known assumptions that go into radio and ice core and dendochronological dating that all have been proven wrong?

I can't answer why every radiop test ever done produce every result it ever did!

I would love to hear them. Please provide reliable sources.

 

[46AND2]

If they did then why did Steve Austin treat samples with xenoliths to whole rock dating?

Cause he's Stone Cold?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Cause he's Stone Cold?

I thought that it was due to the Six Million Dollars.

 

[46AND2]

I thought that it was due to the Six Million Dollars.

Nah, his WWE contract was much more lucrative.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nah, his WWE contract was much more lucrative.

Rats. I had to run the figures through an inflation calculator and you are right. His net worth from wrestling etc. is over 45 million dollars while 1974's six million dollars is only 31 million dollars today. You win this one

 

[46AND2]

Rats. I had to run the figures through an inflation calculator and you are right. His net worth from wrestling etc. is over 45 million dollars while 1974's six million dollars is only 31 million dollars today. You win this one

Oh yeah, inflation...I got lucky.

 

[46AND2]

Rats. I had to run the figures through an inflation calculator and you are right. His net worth from wrestling etc. is over 45 million dollars while 1974's six million dollars is only 31 million dollars today. You win this one

He's nothing if not prolific, though. Got to give him that much. Heh.

I heard he was in Goonies and Rudy before he made a name for himself, and decided to drop the pseudonym.

 

[Ophiolite]

What I don't understand is where the disconnect is. Do they just not understand how creationist organizations function? Do they not understand the scientific method? Are they just in denial?

What's the deal?

Dunning-Kruger.

 

[nolidad]

I would love to hear them. Please provide reliable sources.

Well before i invest time- define what you mean by reliable!

 

[nolidad]

If they did then why did Steve Austin treat samples with xenoliths to whole rock dating?

Cite?