Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
"According to current evidence..."

Nobody knows the exact age of the universefor sure. Is it particularly important? The Lascaux cave paintings precede the date derived by counting back to Adam.

Is time an arrow or a ring?

The Lascaux cave paintings precede the date derived by counting back to Adam.

The Lascaux cave paintings have a date on them?

Originally posted by KellyJay
What is real, does not depend upon human guess work or theories, it
simply is what it is no matter what we think about it. You believe you
know what happened billions of years ago maybe, or you have some
educated guess, but it is still between your ears, it is a belief nothing
more, evidence or no. Much of what is called evidence are simply
stories wra ...[text shortened]... or that, it could be true, maybe not, the point it is, it is
still faith like it or not.
Kelly

That is the dumbest thing I've read in weeks. Beliefs are between our ears, but beliefs that have more evidence in their favor are more likely to be true. Beliefs with a lot of evidence in their favor are very likely to be true. When we believe on the basis of a lot of evidence, we are justified in believing. When we have sufficient justification, the justified belief counts as knowledge. To know does not require that one be absolutely certain. If it did, then nobody would ever know anything at all, since no belief is absolutely certain. This does not entail that all beliefs are instances of faith, and it certainly does not entail that all beliefs are equally likely to be true. If you deny these claims, then you will have to accept that your belief that you are not know dreaming is only based on faith, and that it is only faith that leads you to believe that your floor will be solid next time you step on it. Unless you are prepared to accept these absurdities, please desist in saying such stupid sh_t about evidence and faith! It makes you look like a retard.

Originally posted by Phuzudaka


The Lascaux cave paintings have a date on them?

Are you the same person as dj2becker? Yes or no?

Originally posted by Phuzudaka
The Lascaux cave paintings have a date on them?

Three dating methods were used at Lascaux: pollen, carbon, flint. They yield an approximate age of 30000 years.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Three dating methods were used at Lascaux: pollen, carbon, flint. They yield an approximate age of 30000 years.

Would you mind explaining how those three dating methods work? And would you mind focussing on explaining how you know for sure that the assumptions made by those dating methods are correct?

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Are you the same person as dj2becker? Yes or no?

I don't know a person with that name.

Originally posted by Phuzudaka
Would you mind explaining how those three dating methods work? And would you mind focussing on explaining how you know for sure that the assumptions made by those dating methods are correct?

If you are really interested to know, go to page 2 of this thread.... then follow the link given on the last post at the bottom of that page.

Originally posted by Phuzudaka
I don't know a person with that name.

Considering that he also lacked the ability to answer yes or no questions and also the ability to understand simple English words like 'name' we can assume that you are essentially identical to him and therefore not worth debating with as he was an inconsistent liar who apparently had no interest in actual genuine debate but rather seemed to find entertainment from asking dumb questions and making false claims whilst never admitting to the fact when he was proven wrong.

Originally posted by Phuzudaka
I don't know a person with that name.

Nice dodge, but that's not quite yes or no.

Here, I'll make it easier for you. Which of the following sentences is true for you:

A.) I have posted under the username dj2becker.
B.) I have never posted under the username dj2becker.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Nice dodge, but that's not quite yes or no.

Here, I'll make it easier for you. Which of the following sentences is true for you:

A.) I have posted under the username dj2becker.
B.) I have never posted under the username djbecker.

A and B aren't mutually exclusive, and B is definitely true (there's no user with that name), unless the user name has been changed at some point.

Originally posted by Nordlys
A and B aren't mutually exclusive, and B is definitely true (there's no user with that name), unless the user name has been changed at some point.

Help me out here! Is that better?

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Help me out here! Is that better?

Ye2s.

Originally posted by Nordlys
Ye2s.

The devil's in the d2ails.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Considering that he also lacked the ability to answer yes or no questions and also the ability to understand simple English words like 'name' we can assume that you are essentially identical to him and therefore not worth debating with as he was an inconsistent liar who apparently had no interest in actual genuine debate but rather seemed to find entertai ...[text shortened]... questions and making false claims whilst never admitting to the fact when he was proven wrong.

Well other than that he was a nice guy, right?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well other than that he was a nice guy, right?

His sense of humour was underrated.