Real time or evo time?

[Kylie]

Except the bible state past is backed up by the bible. Since science cannot back up any state in the past, it stands supreme. Undaunted. Mighty. True.

So what? The wizarding world is backed up by the Harry Potter series. What's your point? Just because it is in an old book doesn't mean it is real. If you want me to accept that something is real, show me that thing IN REALITY.

 

[Kylie]

Very simple to prove. Just name a few so called methods of science for dating, and voila...same state past basis for all. Every single one. NO exceptions. It is total religion, absolute fraud and utter deception.

You complaining about science does not show that your position is true.

Wrong. Totally wrong. I am saying that the processes that existed in the former state also were active and affecting the ratios. NOT in the way OUR present forces and laws do though, of course. Then we add to that CREATION itself.

Except you can't say how.

Your idea seems to be extraordinarily lacking in anything specific.

Since I just dashed your misconception about my position, there is no need to address that strawman.

lol, you think that your reply was any kind of devastating attack on science from which I can never recover? That's funny...

Absurd. Let's get this straight the former nature was not the present state or the present state changed, or accelerated, or bent out of shape or etc etc. The former state was different and NOT this state. WE are the change. To know how we changed we would need to know exactly what the former nature was. Science doesn't. Not at all. It doesn't so much as know there ever was any former state!!!!!!!!! Pathetic.

So? All you are saying is that you have no scientific evidence for your claims. And with no evidence, why should I believe a word you say?

No. One assumes that after the fall, the big change was after the flood in the days of Peleg. It was in his day the earth was split...divided.

Is your entire argument built on assumptions? Oh wait, I know the answer to that...

Close. Peleg was, by some accounts a century or two after the flood. That allows for rapid evolving of animals, the fast separating of continents..lower lifespans, etc.

So was the rapid evolution in the present state or past state?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Except the bible state past is backed up by the bible.

Is it backed up by, you know, ever having actually happened?

 

[AirPo]

It's called hand waving. Just away all the pesky facts and just keep making things up.

Nothing to say still, eh?

By the fact the methods are all the same .. every single one. ALL based on the foolish little satanic belief system of claiming the past was the same state. End of story.

QED!

!

 

[Loudmouth]

Because you cannot show that the ratios represent anything formed in this state.

We can, and have shown what they represent. They represent a same state past because they match what we should see from a same state past. That's how evidence works.

 

[dad]

So what? The wizarding world is backed up by the Harry Potter series. What's your point? Just because it is in an old book doesn't mean it is real. If you want me to accept that something is real, show me that thing IN REALITY.

The point is that since science doesn't know they can shut their mouth.

 

[dad]

You complaining about science does not show that your position is true.

Not in any way. I merely point out they do not know what state it was. That relegates them to the intellectual sewer on issues of creation.

So? All you are saying is that you have no scientific evidence for your claims. And with no evidence, why should I believe a word you say?

My point exactly, science has no evidence for the foundation of their models for the past.

So was the rapid evolution in the present state or past state?

Former.

 

[dad]

QED!

!

Yes all methods of radioactive dating have the same belief set for a basis. This is news?

 

[dad]

We can, and have shown what they represent.

No, you have tried to claim they represent something based on the present state with no proof.

They represent a same state past because they match what we should see from a same state past.

False. They only represent a fantasy past of non existent ages! There is no match in reality whatsoever.

 

[AirPo]

The point is that since science doesn't know they can shut their mouth.

Guess who doesn't know either?

 

[AirPo]

Yes all methods of radioactive dating have the same belief set for a basis. This is news?

The handwaving of The HI Theory is not news, just so predictable and funny.

 

[Derek Meyer]

The point is that since science doesn't know they can shut their mouth.

This one is really funny. Science is a method, not a person to shut a mouth....

 

[Derek Meyer]

Very simple to prove. Just name a few so called methods of science for dating, and voila...same state past basis for all. Every single one. NO exceptions. It is total religion, absolute fraud and utter deception.

This one is funny.

It's easy. In trying to understand the age of the rocks investigated in natural resource exploration in my country there is not a single exploration or mining company that uses a young-earth model to find or exploit new reserves. Old earth models work.

 

[Kylie]

The point is that since science doesn't know they can shut their mouth.

Once again it seems that you think that insulting science somehow improves the standing of your position. It doesn't.

 

[Kylie]

Not in any way. I merely point out they do not know what state it was. That relegates them to the intellectual sewer on issues of creation.

First of all, again with the name calling. It really looks immature, y'know.

Secondly, science DOES know, and both I and many others have tried to explain it to you. You either do not understand the science or you refuse to. In either case, you lack the understanding of science that would demonstrate to you that this different state past idea is impossible.

My point exactly, science has no evidence for the foundation of their models for the past.

Neither do you.

And science DOES have a very strong foundation for models of the past. The fact that those models predict things that could only exist if they were true is proof of that.

Former.

So, let me get this straight. There is evolution today, but it is very slow. There was evolution in the past, and it was greatly accelerated.

 

[Derek Meyer]

KTS, you're trying to have a rational conversation with someone who believes that the Universe is 6 000 years old...

 

[AirPo]

KTS, you're trying to have a rational conversation with someone who believes that the Universe is 6 000 years old...

Which is actually the most rational of a very colored history.

 

[Loudmouth]

No, you have tried to claim they represent something based on the present state with no proof.

The proof is the match between the isotope ratios.

False. They only represent a fantasy past of non existent ages! There is no match in reality whatsoever.

How do they not match? How are the measured isotope ratios different from what a same state past would produce?

 

[dad]

Guess who doesn't know either?

Who cares? Long as we see that science doesn't know, the bible is uncontested.

 

[dad]

This one is really funny. Science is a method, not a person to shut a mouth....

The persons publish the fables in the name of science talk a lot. They never shut up.