08 Jun '11 09:25>
Originally posted by RJHindsCould you explain how the data is false?
That is because they are believing in false data. They just
don't know any better. They don't realize they are being lied to,
like I do.
Originally posted by Proper KnobThis is what the young-earth creationist discovered, quote"
Could you explain how the data is false?
Originally posted by RJHindsThere were three samples, all of which were dated by scientific methods. I ignored none of them.
See what I mean, he ignores the majority samples and concentrates
on the one doubtful sample that conforms to his world view.
Originally posted by RJHindsHow does the above quote support the YEC viewpoint? It doesn't make any sense.
This is what the young-earth creationist discovered, quote"
"Canyon Lake Gorge, Texas, was carved in 2002 during a single catastrophic flood. The event offers a rare opportunity to analyse canyon formation and test palaeo-hydraulic-reconstruction techniques under known topographic and hydraulic conditions. Here we use digital topographic models and visible/ ...[text shortened]... he newer data is supporting the young-earh
creationist as is indicated from the above quote.
Originally posted by twhiteheadWhy are you so determined to prove me wrong? I am not God.
There were three samples, all of which were dated by scientific methods. I ignored none of them.
You however chose the totally unscientific method of taking a majority vote amoungst samples and thus ignored one of them.
[b]Then he accuses me of ignoring this one sample, as if it were more important than the others.
They are all important.
[b ...[text shortened]... t I think is wrong. How can I ask the expert questions about you? He doesn't know who you are.[/b]
Originally posted by RJHindsSo because this canyon was formed relatively quickly, you think that means the world is only a few thousand years old?!
Because it happened quickly and not over a long period of time
like the old-earthers believed from the old false data.
Originally posted by RJHindsDid not see it I'll go back. However one thing to think about is the whole E=mc2 thing would totally change if light were travelling faster in the past then energy output say from the like of stars and such would also have been increased in the past and not just a small amount.
I guess you didn't light my version of the creation of the
starlight on the thread "Atheism and morality" then.
Originally posted by Proper KnobI can't speak for Mr. Hinds but I think it is a YEC position that things such as the Grand Canyon happened faster than say millions of years. This would also mean a younger earth because things can happen geologically faster than once believed.
So because this canyon was formed relatively quickly, you think that means the world is only a few thousand years old?!
Is that what you're telling me?
Originally posted by RJHindsBecause you are so determined to pretend you are right when you know fully well that you are wrong.
Why are you so determined to prove me wrong?
Originally posted by Proper KnobThe article only points out that the earth does not have to
So because this canyon was formed relatively quickly, you think that means the world is only a few thousand years old?!
Is that what you're telling me?
Originally posted by twhiteheadI do not know I am wrong. I was saying what I believed the article
Because you are so determined to pretend you are right when you know fully well that you are wrong.
[b]I am not God. I have been wrong many times.
Then learn to admit your errors and move on instead of getting deeper and deeper into a web of lies every time you are caught out.
Now are you satisfied.
Are you admitting that you were in e the truth at all. That is just you trying to be a mind reader and not being very good at it.[/b]