- Oct 16, 2015
- 16,394
- 8,052
- 32
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
So.... do Creationists have anything new? Or have they given up here?
- Thread starter Warden_of_the_Storm
- Start date
- Status
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Ophiolite
Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Only if your reading comprehension is as bad as I think it is, or your willingness to put in the effort to understand is even worse than I think it is.
I quite understand that you will make judgements on matters before any evidence is presented. Thoughtful people prefer to do as I do here: wait until something new is presented and I have an opportunity to study it, reflect on it and form a provisional opinion, or construct a set of questions to help me better understand the proposers idea.
Knee jerk reactions are great for jumping clear of a car that is hurtling towards you; much less valuable for exploring novelty of thought.
No. The idea is clear: "It appears that YEC's have given up participation in this forum; why might that be?" Warden has made this clear in mutiple posts on the thread, but either you are too slow to pick that up, or it doesn't fit your disruptive agenda. Either way, it makes it unpleasant for everyone else.
No. A loud, definite, absolute "NO!". Instead why don't you do one of two things - address the question asked in the OP, or take a long vacation.
I recognise your obsession with Jacobean English, but that's no reason for you to avoid saying mea culpa just because it's in Latin.
If you honestly believe you are good at answering questions then I truly pity you. For once, please Read the Room.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
What evidence?
Can you be specific?
Ion trail? plasma cloud? microwave background? what exactly?
I've asked this so many times, I'm blue in the face.
You see -- you can't answer that because God didn't leave any evidence of creatio ex nihilo behind.
And that's because no evidence was generated.
To give you want you want, God would have had to have manufactured fake evidence.
You want me to answer this thread, here's my answers:
Q: Do creationists have anything new?
A: No, they never did in the first place.
Q: Have they given up?
A: I certainly hope so.
Now here's one for you:
Q: What specific evidence would you expect to see?
Upvote
0
- Oct 16, 2015
- 16,394
- 8,052
- 32
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
It's sad to see an agnostic so determined to stay one.
I guess some fences are comfortable to sit on.
As a self-professed OEC & Deist, what are you doing to help him?
Upvote
0
- Oct 16, 2015
- 16,394
- 8,052
- 32
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Buddy, you clearly refused to even read what he said, and just did what he said: just giving a knee jerk reaction to the statement he gave about what this thread is about and just going off on one of your insipid miniature rants. You literally ignored what he was saying.
So, again: QED.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Man, oh man.
LOL
Okay.
Read my post again.
To "stay on topic," I parsed and answered both questions in the title to this thread.
In addition, I don't feel obligated to address his post to me, which is full of ad hominems.
So for the record, consider both questions in your thread title addressed and answered.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Oct 16, 2015
- 16,394
- 8,052
- 32
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Man, oh man.
LOL
Okay.
Read my post again.
To "stay on topic," I parsed and answered both questions in the title to this thread.
In addition, I don't feel obligated to address his post to me, which is full of ad hominems.
So for the record, considered both questions in your thread title addressed and answered.
You really did absolutely nothing of the sort at all and his post wasn't full of ad hominems in the slightest, but sure, tell yourself that.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
- Oct 16, 2015
- 16,394
- 8,052
- 32
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Yeah, you've contributed less than anyone here. Maybe you should leave.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
- Oct 16, 2015
- 16,394
- 8,052
- 32
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
Ophiolite
Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Certainly. I was not talking about evidence for or against evolution or a young or old Earth, I was talking generically about your unwillingness to countenance evidence outwith the Bible and to decide on your reaction to any and seemingly every post with a knee jerk antagonism based on your biases, prejudices, pre-conceived ideas and kilometres thick confirmation bias. Evidence has been presented to you on dozens of subjects and you either ignore, avoid, obfuscate, or generally play the goat.
In relation to the specific evidence against evolution, or Earth's age, I don't expect to see any. I would like to see something more substantive than the usual drivel. It would be interesting. Knowledge comes out of contradictions, but I don't expect anything of value to emerge. I've been on the forum for possibly a couple of decades now and nothing of that sort has turned up so far.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
- Oct 16, 2015
- 16,394
- 8,052
- 32
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
You mean the thread where everyone told that you were wrong and you refused to accept what anyone told you? You know, the usual?
Upvote
0
Ophiolite
Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
The one in which you based your thinking on ideas portrayed in the popular press to sell newspapers. Inflated, inaccurate, outdated ideas about the possibilities of deep dust on the moon? Ideas that were in play in the 19th and early 20th century, but had largely been discounted by mid-century, because scientists had actually taken a proper look at the possibility. Too much against it: steep crater walls and mountain slopes; light reflection inconsistent with a "fluffy" surface, infra-red data inconsistent with the insulation effects that would accompany "fluffy" regolith; etc.
It attracted more attention as moon landings were considered. Due diligence means you re-examine the risks. The conclusion was a firm one - no significant problem. That was a broad consensus. A single notable exception - Tommy Gold reckoned it might be a problem, but Gold is the same guy who thought hydrocarbons originated from very deep in the crust, not from decaying organic matter. And most lunar scientists including those of the stature of Kuiper and Urey disagreed. It was the press and nascent conspiracy theorists who promoted the wrong idea.
So AV there was no reversal of opinion, or fiddling with numbers, just a nice matching of serious science prediction against reality. Doubtless you'll be unable to accept or see that simple truth. Your loss, not mine.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,857,048
- 52,817
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
From AI Overview:
Why NASA was concerned
Early Estimates: In the 1950s, a scientist named Hans Pettersson measured cosmic dust on Earth and estimated that a thick, deep layer of cosmic dust (meters to miles deep) would accumulate on the Moon over billions of years.
The "Dust Trap" Theory: Some scientists, such as astrophysicist Thomas Gold, hypothesized that electrostatic forces caused dust to migrate into low craters, creating thick "dust traps" that could swallow up landing modules and astronauts.
Spacecraft Design: Taking no chances, NASA engineers designed the Lunar Module with large, wide landing pads specifically to prevent the spacecraft from sinking.
Upvote
0
- Jul 2, 2003
- 155,507
- 20,720
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
