Gil Hamilton wrote:They require Egyptian history to be completely false and all mummies and structures to be much younger than carbon dating (which they consider wrong) would suggest.
On one occasion when I pointed out that carbon dating of Egyptian buildings etc. tends to kick their flood theories in the nuts, the rebuttal was "Yes, but before the flood there was that big-ass bubble of water around earth, which absorbed some radiation, so carbon aged differently back then."
That was such a brilliant argument I stopped debating creationists right there and then . Actually, is that some cut-and-paste argument from somewhere, or was this actual original lunacy? Never bothered to find out.
"Death before dishonour" they say, but how much dishonour are we talking about exactly? I mean, I can handle a lot. I could fellate a smurf if the alternative was death.
- Dylan Moran
Karza wrote:That was such a brilliant argument I stopped debating creationists right there and then . Actually, is that some cut-and-paste argument from somewhere, or was this actual original lunacy? Never bothered to find out.
It's a copy-paste. I had a lecturer in a college class tell me this with a completely straight face. He also denied the theory of relativity, among a million other things.
Of course, the huge ass bubble of water wasn't an excuse to make carbon dating look inaccurate (he already tried that with some weird story about a 10,000 year old snail) but to tell the class where the water from Noah's flood came and went.
18-Till-I-Die wrote:Afterwards he would have had to exterminate the whole race to 'fix' it
No, they're absolutely convinced that ID 'proves' their idea of god. Their idea of god is omnipotent. Wave of the hand, twitch of the eyelid, and they're fixed.
Superior Moderator - BotB - HAB [Drill Instructor]-Writer- Stardestroyer.net's resident Star-God.
"We believe in the systematic understanding of the physical world through observation and experimentation, argument and debate and most of all freedom of will." ~ Stargate: The Ark of Truth
Losonti Tokash wrote:
It's a copy-paste. I had a lecturer in a college class tell me this with a completely straight face. He also denied the theory of relativity, among a million other things.
You sat through that class? Such a thing would have me stand up, and go straight to the headmaster, complaining about the teacher and refusing to join his lessons anymore! And he would likely get dismissed, too...
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay
Dartzap wrote:I can only assume people here know that News biscuit is essentially the British version of The Onion?
You just had to ruin my laugh didn't you... I was having a great time watching these guys argue about this... Damn you, Dartzap, Damn you to Hell!
I know it's harsh, but I thought they were taking it a tad to seriously:P
Well, to be honest, nobody even bothered clicking on the link or discussing the original story much at all. It just instantly segued into the general topic of how well-designed human beings are, which is a serious topic.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Besides, the last bit about the guy being kicked in the 'nads was a little much for even the credulous, like myself.
"If one needed proof that a guitar was more than wood and string, that a song was more than notes and words, and that a man could be more than a name and a few faded pictures, then Robert Johnson’s recordings were all one could ask for."
Gil Hamilton wrote:They require Egyptian history to be completely false and all mummies and structures to be much younger than carbon dating (which they consider wrong) would suggest.
On one occasion when I pointed out that carbon dating of Egyptian buildings etc. tends to kick their flood theories in the nuts, the rebuttal was "Yes, but before the flood there was that big-ass bubble of water around earth, which absorbed some radiation, so carbon aged differently back then."
Thats when you respond that they're engaging in circular logic and ignoring the fact that IF such a thing happened, there should be a large gap between the young looking post flood samples and the old looking pre-flood samples. There is no such gap in the thousands of radiometric dating technique.
A better approach is that the assumption of a global flood indicates that there would only be between a few dozen to about a hundred people around to build the Eqyptian pyramids.
"everytime a person is born the Earth weighs just a little more."--DMJ on StarTrek.com
"You see now you are using your thinking and that is not a good thing!" DMJay on StarTrek.com
"Watching Sarli argue with Vympel, Stas, Schatten and the others is as bizarre as the idea of the 40-year-old Virgin telling Hugh Hefner that Hef knows nothing about pussy, and that he is the expert."--Elfdart
. Actually, is that some cut-and-paste argument from somewhere, or was this actual original lunacy? Never bothered to find out.
