My Accuracy Challenge

[AV1611VET]

In other words, you want to do nothing and keep hypocritically using the fruits of the science you don't agree with.

Aren't you just lovely.

And you're foolish if you claim God doesn't exist, while breathing His oxygen.

And for the record, do you use the fruits of the science you don't agree with?

 

[bhsmte]

So what? Quantity is irrelevant. Quality is what counts. And given that the majority of your posts are you demonstrating that you know how to add 1 to a number, I'd say the average quality of your posts is very very low.

How many posts do you have not including the counting threads, AV?

But to AV, somehow quantity of posts and posting in counting threads adds credibility.

It's really quite amusing.

 

[RickG]

And for the record, do you use the fruits of the science you don't agree with?

Mirror mirror on the wall...

 

[AV1611VET]

Mirror mirror on the wall...

... do you think she will answer at all?

Mirror: No. She will keep silent and hope others will answer for her.

 

[Kylie]

And you're foolish if you claim God doesn't exist, while breathing His oxygen.

And for the record, do you use the fruits of the science you don't agree with?

And what exactly would that be?

Because science is based on evidence. It's part of the definition of what science is. I may not agree with the use of some of the things science provides (weapons and the like), but I still agree that the science behind those things is correct. I agree that the reactions that take place in an atom bomb are correct, even if I don't like the fact that it's a weapon designed to kill people.

So stop trying to confuse the issue. I'm talking about you not using the fruits of science because you claim science is wrong. I have never made any such claim. On the contrary, I claim that science is the best possible tool we will ever have to learn about the universe.

(Cue AV quibbling about words and playing silly games in 3...2...1...)

 

[Kylie]

LOL -- solid aurum.

Rick, I guess she told you, didn't she?

I was addressing you, silly. I'd rather have a thimble full of gold that a truck full of manure.

I can see you're not into occupational therapy, are you?

It's more the fact that I can read that tells me the quality of your posts is, on average, very very low.

I'll take a wild guess and say 100,000.

Of those 100,000, most are repetitions themselves -- like my numbers.

From there, filter out the QVs, the challenges, and the times I've begged for answers, and I would say what is left is Scripture, solid doctrine, and pet theories.

And given that your guesses are well and truly laughable (your attempt to reconcile science and the Bible lead you to guess that embedded age was the answer), you'll forgive me if I consider the true number of actual posts you've made is much lower.

Of course, if you care to show me some evidence... (Like everything else, I'll believe anything if you show me evidence for it.)

 

[bhsmte]

I was addressing you, silly. I'd rather have a thimble full of gold that a truck full of manure.



It's more the fact that I can read that tells me the quality of your posts is, on average, very very low.



And given that your guesses are well and truly laughable (your attempt to reconcile science and the Bible lead you to guess that embedded age was the answer), you'll forgive me if I consider the true number of actual posts you've made is much lower.

Of course, if you care to show me some evidence... (Like everything else, I'll believe anything if you show me evidence for it.)

AV is just following his embedded age philosophy with his posts.

If the earth has false age embedded in it, why can't AV have post numbers embedded into his count?

 

[EternalDragon]

AV is just following his embedded age philosophy with his posts.

If the earth has false age embedded in it, why can't AV have post numbers embedded into his count?

Um...there's no false age embedded in the earth. God created it fully functional in one or two, 24 hour days. He says so right in Genesis.

 

[RickG]

AV is just following his embedded age philosophy with his posts.

Amazing that he has to stray so far from literalism to support his literalism.

If the earth has false age embedded in it, why can't AV have post numbers embedded into his count?

How else could he get such a count? His post count averages:

3,021,425 for 8 years
377,678 per year
31,473 per month
1,049 per day

That just isn't possible for one person. Get my drift?

 

[AV1611VET]

And for the record, do you use the fruits of the science you don't agree with?

And what exactly would that be?

It doesn't matter what that would be; nor is it any of my business.

The point is: if you disagree with it.

Unless you agree with all of science, I'm asking if you use the fruits of the science you don't agree with.

 

[AV1611VET]

I was addressing you, silly. I'd rather have a thimble full of gold that a truck full of manure.



It's more the fact that I can read that tells me the quality of your posts is, on average, very very low.



And given that your guesses are well and truly laughable (your attempt to reconcile science and the Bible lead you to guess that embedded age was the answer), you'll forgive me if I consider the true number of actual posts you've made is much lower.

Of course, if you care to show me some evidence... (Like everything else, I'll believe anything if you show me evidence for it.)

I consider what you think of me, or the quality of my posts, none of my business.

 

[AV1611VET]

That just isn't possible for one person. Get my drift?

Rick, not that I owe you an explanation (you didn't even address me), but QV my post count right now (3,021,429) and the time.

I'll be back after I make 100 posts.

Don't go away.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm back, Rick.

Still think it just isn't possible for one man?

 

[RickG]

I'm back, Rick.

Still think it just isn't possible for one man?

Not for one person.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not for one person.

So how many of us put those hundred on there in six minutes?

 

[RickG]

So how many of us put those hundred on there in six minutes?

Or 17 post per minute. That is not possible for one person. And that's an average.

 

[AV1611VET]

Or 17 post per minute. That is not possible for one person. And that's an average.

Oh, well.

You addressed bhsmte with this anyway; so I'll let him explain it.

I'm just butting in anyway.

 

[RickG]

Oh, well.

You addressed bhsmte with this anyway; so I'll let him explain it.

I'm just butting in anyway.

Yes, I would love for it to be explained, but not by bjhsmte, by the actual poster. How does one average 17 posts per minute continuously over an 8 year period and only be one person?

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, I would love for it to be explained, but not by bjhsmte, by the actual poster. How does one average 17 posts per minute continuously over an 8 year period and only be one person?

According to my stats, I currently do 1032.16 posts per day.

I just showed you that would take me what?

At 600 posts per hour, that would take me less than two hours.

And I'll ask you again:

Who all put those 100 posts on there in 6 minutes, if not just I?

And for the record ... if I switch browsers, I can do more than just 600 in an hour.

I'm currently using the slower browser, scientist.

 

[RickG]

According to my stats, I currently do 1032.16 posts per day.

I just showed you that would take me what?

At 600 posts per hour, that would take me less than two hours.

And I'll ask you again:

Who all put those 100 posts on there in 6 minutes, if not just I?

And for the record ... if I switch browsers, I can do more than just 600 in an hour.

I'm currently using the slower browser, scientist.

It isn't physically possible for one person AV, especially when response and reply is taken into account. Not continously on average 24/7 for 8 years.