Educate your YEC educator

Originally posted by RJHinds
This is where you are ignorant. Carbon dating is not a reliable method of dating anything.

How do you think these dating methods were tested? Do you believe scientists just assumed the measurements would be accurate and then went out into the world and started dating things? To say they can't be used to date anything is clearly a false statement. They appear to have been useful in dating objects of known age.

Now where does that leave the YEC claim to fame, concerning the reliability of dating methods? That's right. You're full of shyte.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The image on the Shroud of Turin is evidence of the resurrection because the scientist have not been able to explain it in any other way, because it is a miracle image.

Lack of knowledge is not evidence.

Originally posted by C Hess
Lack of knowledge is not evidence.

But the miracle image is evidence. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
But the miracle image is evidence. 😏

It has an as of yet unknown cause. If you wish to call that a miracle, fine. If you want to consider miracles evidence, you need to accept any miracle claim as evidence, even claims that stands counter to your beliefs.

Is it true that even the pope refuses to make a statement as to its authenticity?

Originally posted by C Hess
It has an as of yet unknown cause. If you wish to call that a miracle, fine. If you want to consider miracles evidence, you need to accept any miracle claim as evidence, even claims that stands counter to your beliefs.

Is it true that even the pope refuses to make a statement as to its authenticity?

The scientists that studied it have already said it is authentic and not a fake.

It is also supernatural.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-say-turin-shroud-is-supernatural-6279512.html#

YouTube

Originally posted by RJHinds
The scientists that studied it have already said it is authentic and not a fake.

It is also supernatural.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-say-turin-shroud-is-supernatural-6279512.html#

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVVNh-mhsKY

Funny how you believe those scientists that corroborate your fantasies but totally reject those that refute your fantasies.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Funny how you believe those scientists that corroborate your fantasies but totally reject those that refute your fantasies.

Yes, that is funny how we believe that. So why don't you be serious and ask yourself would a person with common sense think it is more logical that a 20 million dollar mansion that can withstand hurricanes was designed and built by evolution or was designed and built by intelligent beings? 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, that is funny how we believe that. So why don't you be serious and ask yourself would a person with common sense think it is more logical that a 20 million dollar mansion that can withstand hurricanes was designed and built by evolution or was designed and built by intelligent beings? 😏

You may not know this, but there are hurricane proof caves that were built by nature. I bet you can even find one worth 20 million dollars if you look hard enough.

Originally posted by twhitehead
You may not know this, but there are hurricane proof caves that were built by nature. I bet you can even find one worth 20 million dollars if you look hard enough.

You are comparing a cave to a mansion?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, that is funny how we believe that. So why don't you be serious and ask yourself would a person with common sense think it is more logical that a 20 million dollar mansion that can withstand hurricanes was designed and built by evolution or was designed and built by intelligent beings? 😏

Mansion houses, no matter what they cost, are not alive and cannot reproduce. This means that they are not subject to natural selection, a designer is both necessary and accords with our understanding of the world. I'm sure there are trees along the Hurricane belt which can withstand hurricanes. In that case there is no evidence for a designer and no a priori requirement for one as they do reproduce and are subject to natural selection.

I accept that your understanding of the world is different from mine. But you seem to insist that intelligent design is a scientific theory. It is not. If you simply accept that what you believe is not scientifically grounded I have no argument with you, at least within the spirituality forum.

Science takes empirical data for it's claims to truth. The theory that is "true" is the one that best fits the empirical data, but that could be accidental there could be an unknown theory that is quite different that fits the empirical data better - in the way quantum theory replaced classical mechanics. Incompatibilist versions of creationism do not fit the empirical evidence at all and are not scientific.

You take the bible for your claims to truth. This relies on the interpretation of the Bible that you choose to be correct. You may want to think about your literalist interpretation.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Mansion houses, no matter what they cost, are not alive and cannot reproduce. This means that they are not subject to natural selection, a designer is both necessary and accords with our understanding of the world. I'm sure there are trees along the Hurricane belt which can withstand hurricanes. In that case there is no evidence for a designer and no ...[text shortened]... ible that you choose to be correct. You may want to think about your literalist interpretation.

My main point was not that the mansion could withstand a hurricane. I just added that as a quality that requires extra intelligent design than a normal house. We normally don't need to see a mansion to know that any house requires a designer and builder. That was my main point.

Even famous evolutionists have said biological things appear designed. So to extend my point to biological things that appear designed it is curious that the word "evolution" has such a magical power to those that believe in it.

Creation fits the empirical data better to me.

Originally posted by RJHinds
My main point was not that the mansion could withstand a hurricane. I just added that as a quality that requires extra intelligent design than a normal house. We normally don't need to see a mansion to know that any house requires a designer and builder. That was my main point.

Even famous evolutionists have said biological things appear designed. So t ...[text shortened]... h a magical power to those that believe in it.

Creation fits the empirical data better to me.

What 'data'? You refuse to even study the subject so how can you know ANY evolutionary data?

Originally posted by RJHinds
You are comparing a cave to a mansion?

You did not define 'mansion' other than to say it was hurricane proof and worth 20 million dollars. Do you have any other criteria that we can use to know whether or not the structure under investigation is a mansion?

Originally posted by RJHinds
We normally don't need to see a mansion to know that any house requires a designer and builder. That was my main point.

And I have refuted your point. Some houses (caves for example) were not designed.

Originally posted by twhitehead
And I have refuted your point. Some houses (caves for example) were not designed.

Caves may be used as shelters, but they are not houses.