Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation

[Cabal]

You weren't there ---

Yeah, you tell him, AV! So maybe next time you want to dictate how you think we do our research or how we were taught in higher education, we can remind you of the fact that you've never been to those science classes or those science labs at any point in your life? Can we do that? Or is this going to be another classic AV double standards when someone points out the logic of his own canards?

Apparently these guys didn't get the memo: World's Greatest Creation Scientists.

Hardly. Scientists who were creationists, more like. A world of difference.

Here, I'll even give you two more: Darwin and Linnaeus.

That depends - were they scarred or not? Because you seem to have this fixation with navels.

My point is, if you want this to be consistent, you're going to have to apply it to a lot more than just the navels of two organisms.

Anyway, would you please address this? Getting really tired of having to drag answers out of you, AV - might wanna reconsider that, or people might start thinking you have less of a clue than they already do.

 

[Bushido216]

Actually, you are wrong about AVET's model not making predictions (even though he would like it that way). It does make predictions we can test and it fails them. According to E.A. (Embedded Age) God embedded age into the earth but not history. From this, we can make the prediction that the Earth has no history older than 6,100 years ago, since that was when it was created. In addition, God did not embed any history (such as scars, etc.). When we look at the Earth, however, we see lots of very old history. We find old impact craters, extinct coral reefs buried under the ocean, coal seams with fossils in them, evidence of volcanic activity thousands of years old, chalk deposits miles deep made from dead microorganisms, hundreds of thousands of ice rings in the Antartic, etc. All this shows that the Earth has a History far older than 6,100 years. According to E.A. it should not. Therefore, E.A. is falsified. Either the Earth was made far longer ago than 6,100 years, or God created it with a history that never happened. AVET refuses to accept this, because E.A. is one of his little pet paradigms and he doesn't really care if it works or not.

That's actually what I was looking for, though I'm still not convinced that embedded age and fake history are different.

In other words, I'm not sure that embedding age wouldn't somehow create a false history, or whatever.

Of course, either E.A. makes a prediction and that prediction isn't borne out, or it's nonsense, so I guess we win no matter what.

 

[Bushido216]

Hey Nathan,

I did my Philosophy of Religion final on the political sovereign. It was in the form of a dialogue and I chose Batman and Joker while they're on the top of that building at the end.

I got an A.

 

[Split Rock]

That's actually what I was looking for, though I'm still not convinced that embedded age and fake history are different.

In other words, I'm not sure that embedding age wouldn't somehow create a false history, or whatever.

Of course, either E.A. makes a prediction and that prediction isn't borne out, or it's nonsense, so I guess we win no matter what.

This brings up the other problem with E.A. Why did God find it necessary to "embed" age, just to make the earth "mature" enough to support Adam and the rest of life He created? Sure, he would have to create topsoil for plants to grow in, riverbeds to keep rivers in their place (most of the time) and maybe a few other things, but "embed" time in them? For what purpose? Don't ask AVET, 'cause he doesn't know either. All he "knows" is that God did it that way.

 

[Split Rock]

Anyway, would you please address this? Getting really tired of having to drag answers out of you, AV - might wanna reconsider that, or people might start thinking you have less of a clue than they already do.

I think AVET has decided he is no longer going to take questions on embedded age creation, in his thread he entitled, "Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation." We are asking him too many questions he cannot answer.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Hey Nathan,

I did my Philosophy of Religion final on the political sovereign. It was in the form of a dialogue and I chose Batman and Joker while they're on the top of that building at the end.

I got an A.

Nice... I probably would've chosen the Joker's "Do I look like a guy with a plan?" Hospital speech.

Either that, or the interrogation room dialogue in my sig.

Either way, congrats!

 

[thaumaturgy]

...

 

[Bushido216]

Nice... I probably would've chosen the Joker's "Do I look like a guy with a plan?" Hospital speech.

Either that, or the interrogation room dialogue in my sig.

Either way, congrats!

I wrote the dialogue, myself, actually. I used those two characters because it fit the topic and they were already in the public imagination (I didn't have to explain them). I did the dialogue in character and borrowed parts of the movie.

It was pro.

The guy who read Batman for me sounded like Nixon though.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why did God find it necessary to "embed" age, just to make the earth "mature" enough to support Adam and the rest of life He created?

That word "just" shows that you are confused --- not to mention putting "mature" in quotes; but you did end it with a question mark, so I guess there's hope for you guys yet.

And please note that the answer is in the question.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think AVET has decided he is no longer going to take questions on embedded age creation, in his thread he entitled, "Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation." We are asking him too many questions he cannot answer.

I'd say that's pretty close to it.

If I thought you were really interested in learning, I'd continue; but my intuition tells me otherwise.

 

[Split Rock]

That word "just" shows that you are confused --- not to mention putting "mature" in quotes; but you did end it with a question mark, so I guess there's hope for you guys yet.

And please note that the answer is in the question.

Are you claiming that it was necessary for God to embed age into Adam or the earth, in order for either to be mature? That would be a strange assertion, considering the fact that you cannot tell us what "embedded age" actually is.

I'd say that's pretty close to it.

If I thought you were really interested in learning, I'd continue; but my intuition tells me otherwise.

You are the one that is not interested in learning. Despite the title of the thread, you set this thread up to tell us what Embedded Age is, not to exchange ideas. You refuse to learn from what we are telling you about the problems we see with E.A. So don't point such a finger at us, when there are ten pointed back at you.

 

[Nathan Poe]

That word "just" shows that you are confused --- not to mention putting "mature" in quotes; but you did end it with a question mark, so I guess there's hope for you guys yet.

he seems to have it just right -- the jury's still out on whether there's hope for you.

 

[thaumaturgy]

If I thought you were really interested in learning, I'd continue; but my intuition tells me otherwise.

Ahhh, the ultimate cop-out for the poor teacher. If the students can't learn what is being told them, it must surely be the students' fault!

We've all been there, AV. Well, those of us who have actually taught.

It is a common hope when he give a test and the vast majority of the students get the wrong answer that somehow almost all of the students are just plain stupid.

But that's just a hope.

And it is a really good idea to throw up your hands and give up. Because everyone else is so dense. So very, very dense.

 

[AV1611VET]

We've all been there, AV. Well, those of us who have actually taught.

No, you haven't --- don't think you're some kind of superteacher.

If your students ignored you, insulted you, left you threatening notes in your in-box, refused to take your quizzes, and changed everything you said around; then whined because they didn't understand anything, I'd venture to say you'd be no different than I.

 

[Cabal]

No, you haven't --- don't think you're some kind of superteacher.

You sure as hell aren't.

If your students ignored you, insulted you, left you threatening notes in your in-box, refused to take your quizzes, and changed everything you said around; then whined because they didn't understand anything, I'd venture to say you'd be no different than I.

Try not whining any time you get asked a question you don't like*. There's no such thing as a dumb question, but apparently not in AV's "class" - anything's a dumb question other than total and utter acceptance.

*Especially in a class that's dubbed as a Q&A session - in an actual school the students would have a field day with you for making a mistake that idiotic.

 

[Nathan Poe]

If your students ignored you, insulted you, left you threatening notes in your in-box, refused to take your quizzes, and changed everything you said around; then whined because they didn't understand anything, I'd venture to say you'd be no different than I.

Except that thaumaturgy is a qualified teacher with something worthwhile to teach.

BIG ol' difference there.

 

[AV1611VET]

Except that thaumaturgy is a qualified teacher with something worthwhile to teach.

BIG ol' difference there.

I don't care if he's teaching arithmetic.

If he's being laughed at, ignored, misquoted, thought of as a troll, supertroll, liar, deceiver, or just plain wrong; the students are not going to learn anything.

 

[Cabal]

I don't care if he's teaching arithmetic.

If he's being laughed at, ignored, misquoted, thought of as a troll, supertroll, liar, deceiver, or just plain wrong; the students are not going to learn anything.

The only reason a teacher would be thought of as those things in the first place is if he's utterly unqualified and yet insists on eye-rolling anytime someone asks a question.

 

[Skaloop]

I don't care if he's teaching arithmetic.

If he's being laughed at, ignored, misquoted, thought of as a troll, supertroll, liar, deceiver, or just plain wrong; the students are not going to learn anything.

If all those things are happening to him, it would be his fault as a teacher. Obviously, any teacher is going to have to deal with some troublemakers. But if every student, on every topic, is laughing/ignoring/misquoting/etc., then it's the teacher who needs to look at changing his tactics.

Your tactics obviously aren't working. If you don't attempt to change them, then you are failing in your teaching.

 

[AV1611VET]

The only reason a teacher would be thought of as those things in the first place is if he's utterly unqualified and yet insists on eye-rolling anytime someone asks a question.

I disagree.

The students wouldn't know if he's unqualified to teach arithmetic.

Can you picture someone starting to teach arithmetic to such a class?

Teacher: Please note that one plus equal...
Student: What about the alphabet? What's one plus a?
Teacher: Arithmetic is numbers without the alphabet.
Student: Then that's deceptive. Can't 'a' be added to something?
Teacher: Yes, but that's called "algebra".
Student: Then you're making up this 'arithmetic'. What does that term mean, anyway?
Teacher: It means 'the art of counting.'
Student: So it should be taught in art class?
Teacher: Look, let's get back to one plus one.
Student: What about drawing us a 'one' on the chalkboard, since you just admitted arithmetic is artwork? I want to see what a 'one' looks like.
Another student: Hey, man, cut it out. Let's hear the teacher explain himself. You can add one to one, but not one to 'a'? I'm confused.
Teacher: Again --- arithmetic is numbers without the alphabet.
Student: So you can't draw letters on the chalkboard? How do you depict them then?
Teacher: /class
Students: Mission accomplished! Works every time!
​