radiometric dating

[Subduction Zone]

I am correct. Jewish tradition does have Abraham as a contemporary with Noah. They even claim Abraham spent time with Noah.


And yes they do have a tomb where they claim Abraham is buried. It is, if I recall the second holiest site for Israel.

No, the fact that you believe in Noah and Abraham is where you first went off the rails.

I have a tomb where Godzilla was buried. It turns out that they had a barbecue after he died and only a few of the tougher bits were left behind. Prove me wrong!

Anyone can make ridiculous claims. Whether they can be supported by evidence is another matter entirely.

So that is still a big GONG for you.

 

[dad]

No, the fact that you believe in Noah and Abraham is where you first went off the rails.

So insane unbelief then. OK.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So insane unbelief then. OK.

Hardly dad. You can't support your own beliefs. Why would any sane person believe you?

My beliefs are supported by scientific evidence. They can be tested and verified in many different ways. How do you test the Bible and show that it is different from in any significant ways than other religions?

 

[dad]

My beliefs are supported by scientific evidence.

Your beliefs are not needed here.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your beliefs are not needed here.

Sure they are. They are much more useful than your beliefs which are neither biblical nor supported by science.

Ideas supported by science have historical record over biblical ideas that is almost perfect.

 

[bhsmte]

Your beliefs are not needed here.

Indeed.

Deny the evidenced beliefs, to protect our beliefs that do not have evidence.

It is a primitive, but effective defense mechanism - at least temporarily.

 

[dad]

Indeed.

Deny the evidenced beliefs, to protect our beliefs that do not have evidence.

It is a primitive, but effective defense mechanism - at least temporarily.

No. All I ask of you is to cut the semantics, and mental gymnastics and call your belief set of so called science what it is.

No more dishonesty or childishness from either side is needed.

 

[dad]

They are much more useful than your beliefs...

Nothing else matters about you beliefs at this point, except there are beliefs. How wonderful or mighty you may think they are is of no matter.

 

[bhsmte]

No. All I ask of you is to cut the semantics, and mental gymnastics and call your belief set of so called science what it is.

No more dishonesty or childishness from either side is needed.

You are free to ask whatever you like.

 

[dad]

You are free to ask whatever you like.

OK. Thanks. So will you renounce your godless belief set and admit once and for all they are not real science?

 

[bhsmte]

OK. Thanks. So will you renounce your godless belief set and admit once and for all they are not real science?

With adequate reason, sure no problem.

 

[God's Child]

 

[dad]

With adequate reason, sure no problem.

Radiometric dating requires a belief in the laws and forces in the past to be a specific way. That cannot be proven.

 

[bhsmte]

Radiometric dating requires a belief in the laws and forces in the past to be a specific way. That cannot be proven.

I don't buy it.

You can though.

 

[justlookinla]

Radiometric dating requires a belief in the laws and forces in the past to be a specific way. That cannot be proven.

True.

 

[Loudmouth]

Radiometric dating requires a belief in the laws and forces in the past to be a specific way. That cannot be proven.

We have shown you the evidence, but you automatically reject evidence you don't like and call it "demonic delusions". We can't teach those who are unwilling to be taught.

 

[RickG]

We have shown you the evidence, but you automatically reject evidence you don't like and call it "demonic delusions". We can't teach those who are unwilling to be taught.

It is amazing the number of claims about radiometric dating by YEC proponents that are completely unsupported with any science.

 

[RickG]

True.

And suggesting that the laws of chemistry and physics have changed in the past is supported by what?

 

[Loudmouth]

It is amazing the number of claims about radiometric dating by YEC proponents that are completely unsupported with any science.

Those rather large problems are further compounded by hypocrisy. They will make arguments about evolution violating the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, or how the laws of chemistry won't allow for abiogenesis. At the very same time, they will say that radiometric dating is wrong because we "assume" those very same laws. They require the most fundamental physical laws to change in order for radiometric dating to be wrong, and yet claim those very same laws are unchangeable when it comes to other topics.

 

[RickG]

Those rather large problems are further compounded by hypocrisy. They will make arguments about evolution violating the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, or how the laws of chemistry won't allow for abiogenesis. At the very same time, they will say that radiometric dating is wrong because we "assume" those very same laws. They require the most fundamental physical laws to change in order for radiometric dating to be wrong, and yet claim those very same laws are unchangeable when it comes to other topics.

Yes, a true hypocrisy.