The Official Perfection KOs Creationism Thread Part Two: The Empiricists Strike Back!

Status
Not open for further replies.
diablodelmar said:
eerrr, no...

show me a longer link then please and I will read it.

I will if you promise to tell me if there was rain and rainbows before the flood.
 
diablodelmar said:
Also, what you said about rate is also flat-out wrong.
No it isn't. We happen to know that the current rate is higher than the average for the past half-billion years, because can compare tidal and diurnal rhythms in Palaeozoic corals, and we know why: the current configuration of continents make it unusually hard for water to slosh around the planet, increasing tidal friction and thus the momentum transfer to the Moon.
 
^I wasn't expecting that answer!

I will if you promise to tell me if there was rain and rainbows before the flood.

Ah, we're on another page! Time to phrase your request again!
 
The Last Conformist said:
Not so.

Am I the only one getting the impression that diablodelmar is gonna make us post the entirety of t.o's list sooner or later? :lol:
You probably will have to because I think that site is dodgy.
 
diablodelmar said:
I am not copying and pasting!

How can you say that when you yourself are only throwing links at me?

You did find a good link though - read it because its written by the guy whos book I am reading and he has sound arguements.

You may be typing it out yourself, but word by word it's the same thing as that article.

I've read enough AiG already, but thanks anyway.

And we're throwing links at you because a) it's tiring to write up the answer over and over and b) because these links have references that you can refer to for further information.
 
ironduck said:
I will if you promise to tell me if there was rain and rainbows before the flood.
how can I "promise" to tell you? What if there was rain and rainbows before the flood - who cares?
 
El_Machinae said:
That makes no sense. It makes no sense to evolve to be half-American and half-European. Anybody who is half-European would be dead, because you need your whole body :crazyeye:

I did realise that. I should have also said that I'd expect the missing Euro/American link fossils to be found in rock less that 4000 years old in the middle of the Atlantic!

I'll duck out and leave this fellow in your capable hands guys.
 
The site has answers to every single question your book will answer. It's been put together because people are tired of answering the same points over and over
 
ironduck said:
You may be typing it out yourself, but word by word it's the same thing as that article.

I've read enough AiG already, but thanks anyway.

And we're throwing links at you because a) it's tiring to write up the answer over and over and b) because these links have references that you can refer to for further information.
I didn't even know that article existed!
 
El_Machinae said:
The site has answers to every single question your book will answer. It's been put together because people are tired of answering the same points over and over
Well I think its a load of crap personally. I have much longer claims than that site has answers and they are all dodgy and I can disprove them.
 
diablodelmar said:
Well I think its a load of crap personally. I have much longer claims than that site has answers and they are all dodgy and I can disprove them.

Disprove them? You're not even reading them!

How can you disprove them?
 
Well I think its a load of crap personally.

Why do you think evolution is a load of crap? What is the one thing that really jumps out at you as being 'stupid'? Let's talk about that. Because I don't think that measure moon speeds is something you're really interested in.
 
El_Machinae said:
Thanks! I get it now, kinda. Not fully, of course (like how you know much 'original' radiation was in the mother vs. daughter nuclei).
I'm not sure what you mean by your statement in the parenthesis, but, very briefly, how much of each element goes into a forming rock is a question of chemistry (electron orbital physics, if you want), whereas the subsequent evolution of the ratios in the finished rock is a question of radioactivity (nucelar physics, if you want). The two levels are almost entirely disjoint.

I'm off to the pub now - see y'all tomorrow. :cheers:
 
El_Machinae said:
Ironduck wants to know if there were rainbows and rain before the Flood. It's a fairly easy question.
I don't know... I haven't looked into it very much.
 
I'm not sure what you mean by your statement in the parenthesis

You answered my question. I didn't think that rock-formation would follow thermodynamic laws (too big). Anyway, I've been happy to be your daily dose of ignorance!
 
El_Machinae said:
Why do you think evolution is a load of crap? What is the one thing that really jumps out at you as being 'stupid'? Let's talk about that. Because I don't think that measure moon speeds is something you're really interested in.
I'm just as likely to believe it as you are to agree with AiG. Anyway i'm off as well - got revision to see too. I probably won't come back because I'm tired of reading TO website because its bull.
 
No really - what do you think is wrong with evolution? What's the 'big one' that makes you think the whole thing is stupid? You thought evolution was stupid before you started reading your book ...
 
diablodelmar said:
how can I "promise" to tell you? What if there was rain and rainbows before the flood - who cares?

You have told me other stuff. You have told me that evolution is bunk. You have told me that the earth is only 6000 years old (or something along that line). Surely you must know something as simple as whether or not there was rain and rainbows before the flood? At least give me your best guess.

Oh, and I care because I find the whole young earth creationism pretty funny :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom