Methods Of Dating Rock & Fossils

[Elendur]

Well, he's a bullfrog so he's likely somewhere near water. Oh, wait, different Elijah.

Yeah that Elijah done gone to heaven.

Or at least that's what his friends are telling the authorities.

I've heard that's an effective way to tax-dodge.

Edit: Wait a second... I think I might be onto something here.
New hypothesis:
Tax-dodging mastered long before modern economics!

 

[AV1611VET]

Well then you go get him. Tell him some skeptics wanna see him.

Oh, don't worry; he'll be back soon with Enoch.

Didn't you get the memo?

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, he's a bullfrog so he's likely somewhere near water. Oh, wait, different Elijah.

Don't you mean Jeremiah?

 

[juvenissun]

Juvenissun, obviously you have not seen Dad's non-stop use of the epistemological atomic bomb. He rolls right over Hume without a glance back.

So, I'm curious, why you would label Sandwiches request "like a question from a school kid".

I mean, it is hardly a question from a school kid. This is some pretty heavy, albeit intro epistemology.

I generally find your "dismissiveness" annoying and I'm willing to bet you won't engage in a substantive manner on this topic any more than you will on most geology topics.

Dad is playing in a part of the pool he doesn't even seem to understand, despite having it explained to him on numerous occasions. I've cited the various sources for Hume's writing and discussions of empiricism as well as the limits of empiricism.

Again, this isn't "kid stuff". Even if you, like most of us, were introduced to it when you were in undergrad in your philosophy classes, it is still pretty mind-bending and complex and doesn't reveal a clear answer.

It's effectively an "insoluble" problem in empiricism and that branch of epistemology.

I will not talk to you on geology. When you related anything to geology, I won't talk to you on that either. Sorry.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

I've heard that's an effective way to tax-dodge.

Edit: Wait a second... I think I might be onto something here.
New hypothesis:
Tax-dodging mastered long before modern economics!

Hmmmm,

Maybe that's what Hovind was counting on.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Oh, don't worry; he'll be back soon with Enoch.

Didn't you get the memo?

Yes. Didn't you get the new one?

 

[dad]

If anything had changed with physical and chemical processes, we would find a completely different different set of properties between pre and post change. There are no differences in any physical or chemical properties of any substances on Earth or the observed universe.

Keep up...who says anything change WITH physical only present state stuff??

 

[dad]

Well, to be fair to Dad, our "uniformity of nature" assumption is somewhat foundational.

Indeed if, say, the rate of radioactive decay dramatically and systemically changed there would be some indication (excess heating or even radiation-induced damage in crystals etc.), but if one posits that all of physics could have hypothetically been different in the past in such a way that all things fall outside of our understanding of it, it would render our ability to draw reasonable conclusions into doubt.

I like that. It sounds so reasonable.

This is precisely what Hume was running up against when he proposed Empiricism at it's extremes.

If the only way I know something, my only "epistemology" is via experiencing it, then I can't really draw conclusions on cause and effect. And indeed I cannot know that which I have not experienced.

The sun has always risen in the east and set in the west. I can only assume it will do the same tomorrow as I have no way to "experience" the absolute causal foundation of that effect.

True. Unless you had records where something different happened. History and the bible provide such a record. We need not go by the experience of a man.

In the case of the "unobserved past" we have to rely on our "common sense" and an acquiescence that processes that occur today likely occured in the past at roughly the same rate and with roughly the same effects and responses.

? No. Life spans and tree growth were quite different. The heat from continents moving was negligible...etc.

What Dad wants to do is toss all that out. NOT to replace it with anything more robust but simply to decree the past "off limits" to any sort of understanding. Of course he will carve out an exception for the Bible. It comes from the distant past but it can be relied upon to give a perfect and accurate understanding of what occured.

It is by the bible that we know it was different. If it is from God, of course the clues about the future and past are stunningly accurate.

I'm OK if Dad wants to drop the Epistemological Atomic Bomb on the discussion but I am not OK with him acting like it doesn't affect his own hypotheses about the past just because of some ex cathedra declaration.

The bomb you envision cannot affect God or His word to man.

 

[dad]

Elijah isn't lost -- you are.

(Unless, of course, you actually got saved at one time, like you profess you did.)

That sounds like once saved always saved.

 

[Hobz]

Dad if things were changing to any extent that could account for a magnitude of error of 10^7 (13.7 billion years <-> 6000 years) we would be able to detect it quite easily.

One easy possibility: If radiometric dating is wrong as you say, in the past the radioactive decay rates would have to have been much slower to account for this. Lets assume you're right, and we slow radiometric rates down to 1/10^7 of the original amount in line with your theory. With these rates the Earth wouldn't have sufficient heat to maintain a liquid outer core (and in fact a prediction of your theory would be that the core became liquid in the last 1000 years or so). Without the liquid outer core we have no magnetic field and without the magnetic field we're all irradiated by solar winds and life couldn't have existed over 1000-2000 years ago. Therefore the Bible couldn't be true, and you're up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

The numbers may be a bit out but the general idea looks good to me. For anyone that might know better is there something wrong with my logic?

 

[dad]

I'd ask you for a reference that says that anywhere in any description of "Logic" but I know you wouldn't respond with anything that even remotely resembled "thought" or "consideration of the point".

"
1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.

2. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation: We were unable to follow his logic.

3. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study."

The main principle governing logic is that God knows more than man. His method is to tell us stuff that is above our understanding. We can then apply this to any branch of science.


Simple.

Well, obviously Eve is one of the world's first geologists and we often reference her when doing our science.

Oh?

Yup, evil to the core are we.

Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings....

"True logic"? Sounds like a "True Scotsman". Well if it's above the mind of man how would you know anything about it?

Inside info.

And when your dancing results in painful joints you know where to come, dontcha? The ol' aspirin bottle. Too bad science works its nasty way in there when it is needed isn't it?

Aspirin is a pill of the present state.

Meet the Fire Ant:

Need a picture of a boot? Maybe a little stain on the sole of a boot?

Live for a while in the South and tell me what threatens you.

Why? South of...what?

Oh we don't even mask it anymore. We usually start science classes out with an acknowledgement to all that is evil and dark. Then we put on our magical robes of evil and cast magical incantations. Only then do we bother with collecting data and doing statisitcs.

I think, truth be known that you try to come off as angels of light.

Yeah! Modern medicine? Ptewie! The computer? Who needs it? Ha! Electricity? What an evil crock! Science sux!

Present state stuff, all. Nothing to do with the future or past.

But it is the only way we can enforce our evil on the most unsuspecting in the world.

No more. Vile henchmen will learn to cower and hide.

Don't drink the kook aid, Dad. We wouldn't want you in science. You'd destroy us with your vast knowledge and super "True Logic"!

I won't. Really.

You tell us!

"Not too bright". Yup. That's us. I wish we were as smart as you!

If wishes were horses....

 

[Hobz]

The main principle governing logic is that God knows more than man.

Uhhhh. No. The main principle governing logic is valid inference. Formal logic was developed in ancient India, Greece, and China, 3 cultures without a copy of the Bible handy.

History of logic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[dad]

Uhhhh. No. The main principle governing logic is valid inference.

To be able to infer one must have at least a good part of the whole picture.

Formal logic was developed in ancient India, Greece, and China, 3 cultures without a copy of the Bible handy.

No wonder they failed. Maybe they ought to have measured a sacred cow's knee, or a chop stick, or the degree of attraction between men in a Grecian army? Leave the actual thinking and logic to others.

 

[Jazer]

Uhhhh. No. The main principle governing logic is valid inference. Formal logic was developed in ancient India, Greece, and China, 3 cultures without a copy of the Bible handy.

Abraham was a Chaldean from the city of Ur. They later when on to become the Babylon Empire. He was called to come out from among them. To separate himself from their error. Yet if you look at the remains of their cities today they were great builders. It was very impressive what they were able to do. The Assyrians for example were able to develop the wheel and along with the Mongolian horse they created an awesome war charoit. It looks like they sold them to nations like Egypt and Solomon in Israel. Today they are rather a strong Christian nation compared to other middle east nations.

 

[AV1611VET]

That sounds like once saved always saved.

Yipper --

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Don't you mean Jeremiah?

Man, I knew I'd get that wrong. It's so hard to keep those Old Testament prophets straight!

 

[thaumaturgy]

I will not talk to you on geology. When you related anything to geology, I won't talk to you on that either. Sorry.

Ouch! So why not? Do I intimidate you?

 

[Hobz]

To be able to infer one must have at least a good part of the whole picture.

No. Your vague statement doesn't mean anything.

No wonder they failed. Maybe they ought to have measured a sacred cow's knee, or a chop stick, or the degree of attraction between men in a Grecian army? Leave the actual thinking and logic to others.

Those ancient Greeks, they got it all wrong! Trial by jury, democracy, logic, rigorous mathematics, philosophy, and applied science; all happened first in ancient Greece, for some reason it doesn't surprise me that you don't like them.

 

[AV1611VET]

Man, I knew I'd get that wrong. It's so hard to keep those Old Testament prophets straight!

Especially when your zeal to ridicule causes you to type before you think, eh?

 

[Split Rock]

Except man can't get to the far side of it to peek into heaven. However windows to that far side can and have been opened to earth, as in the flood. Science can't even get out of the flippin solar system!!!

Wrong again, dad.
NASA - PIONEER 10 SPACECRAFT SENDS LAST SIGNAL