Search results

speculation plays a roll in everything, ever. so what.

I need to make a list. I'm actually surprised at how many names I recognize after a year away. Glad for the input from the believer side as well. AV, philo, etc.

Also, thank you for your educative posts.

Truth. But I don't want to gloss this over for him. Literally the issues he has with "speculation" apply to almost everything in physics.

Fair. Touche.

.

Indeed. Hence my comment a while back that he would, by rationale, need to disregard Calculus entirely.... Which is odd considering he claims to be a physics teacher. Must be algebra based physics for non-STEM students.

Thank you for putting in the time you do. You were patient and prolific before my year long hiatus, and you continue still.

That's disappointing. I was going to give an example I'm sure you'd agree with, but he don't wanna hear it from me.

"The Age of the Earth" by Brent Dalrymple is a good starter. It was written in '91, and we have more/better methods now, but it gives a good synopsis about how the estimates got better over the years. I believe he developed the K/Ar and/or Ar/Ar methods.

If that's how you feel about the math, you'll need to disregard pretty much all of Calculus.

Don't know. Since time began with the expansion during the BB, then I suppose "first" would be the singularity, but it's not really the right way to think about it. The term "first" is dependent on time, and asking what there was before time makes about as much sense as asking what is north of...

Nobody claims something comes from nothing.

Missing links is your moniker, not scientists'.

It isn't guessed, it's measured. With multiple techniques. Which agree with each other. Definitively prove? No. But with each unique measurement that matches with others, it increases the probability that the result is correct. Which is all science claims to do in the first place.

No

But let me give you an example why that probability argument carries little weight. What are the odds that you, specifically you, were born? The answer is 1, of course, but using your method, it's essentially zero. Because the exact sperm from your dad, out of billions had to come together with...

This is an argument from incredulity gussied up with unsupported "probabilities." Starting with a conclusion is not how science works. Besides which, many Christians have no issues with science discovering HOW god created. IOW, learning about the natural mechanisms he set in place.

It's the same thing...""I don't see how this could have occurred naturally, therefore designed."

Every time I have seen this claim, it comes from a god of the gaps, argument from incredulity.