Originally posted by RJHindsI'll explain simply.
Explain please. That does not make sense to me.
Either you are taking the pith, or you are as thick as crap!
I'd prefer your prerogative to be the former, but I do wonder. 🙁
You have obviously no idea about the water cycle, or hydrogenetics, and dismiss it as evident proof of the ages of the planet earth.
Next time you drink a glass of water, I hope you enjoy the knowledge that what you are drinking was drunk by dinosaurs 265 million years ago, and that the water you consume is 4.6 Billion years old. 😏
If you don't know what a cycle is, please buy a tricyle and you may start to get a balance, before you get to a bicycle. When you get a bicyle and can ride it, you may understand about age.
For your info, babies ride tricycles, because they haven't learned a balanced experience yet.
And this is a pith take of your prior sermon. 😀
-m. 😉
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsI recently read of ice core data that went back as far as 500,000 years, I will get the link. The thing is, some ice core data is unreadable but some earlier data can be interpolated and correlated with other know data and the record rebuilt. It takes ice core data from the whole planet to built up a solid picture of the last few hundred thousand years. For instance, the measure of an isotope of oxygen, O 18, can infer the temperature of the area in a given layer of ancient ice and that data can be correlated with other data like it from other parts of the world, matching data sets gives scientists the confidence to show links in weather changes and so forth.
For sunhouse:
http://www.icr.org/article/ice-cores-age-earth/
I never said there was one continuous line of data from ice cores, only that the sum total of the ice core data from around the world builds up a coherent picture of ancient weather patterns.
On a side note, here is evidence of the first ice ages, caused by the evolution of plants almost a half billion years ago, lowering the CO2 in the atmosphere, causing an extreme lowering of the planet temperature, causing the first ice ages:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120201094923.htm
Here is one link to the half million year data from ice cores taken in Tibet:
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/guliya.htm
They even talk about the limitations of ice core data and how they get around them.
Why don't you talk about the problems of creationism or your anti evolutionary stance?
Originally posted by sonhouseThe following needs to be repeated for you guys:
I recently read of ice core data that went back as far as 500,000 years, I will get the link. The thing is, some ice core data is unreadable but some earlier data can be interpolated and correlated with other know data and the record rebuilt. It takes ice core data from the whole planet to built up a solid picture of the last few hundred thousand years. For ...[text shortened]... them.
Why don't you talk about the problems of creationism or your anti evolutionary stance?
Dishonesty comes in many forms and many do not know (they pretend not to know ).......why I use the word dishonest.
The following may help you.
*To come into the spirituality forum without any desire to learn or co-operate is dishonest.
*To ask baiting questions is dishonest.
*To twist and manipulate comments and words deliberately is dishonest.
* To deliberately mis-quote a person,s posting is dishonest.
* To reject truth on the basis of ones emotions is dishonest.
* To reject truth from a baseless/ignorant platform is dishonest.
* To come to a spirituality forum to mock is dishonest.
* To defend falsity is dishonest.
* To pretend to not understand is dishonest.
* To guess and speculate and fabricate is dishonest.
* To theorize and present it as truth is dishonest.
* To reject authority is dishonest.
* To set ones self up as the authority is dishonest.
* To deliberately band false religion and true religion together is dishonest.
* To judge true religion without knowing the truth about true religion is dishonest.
* To believe you know everything about true religion because you have googled it - is dishonest.
* To even comment about spirituality while embracing the above list is dishonest.
* To reject this list is dishonest.
Persons defending false religion and false science thrive on the above list.
However true religion has nothing to do with that list...... and anyone who desires to learn about true spirituality/religion must simply make humble/sincere enquiry - without the challenging negative and disingenuous attitude.......or you are also dishonest and have no business in this forum.
Dasa
Originally posted by RJHindsyou seem to have accepted the strawman that science is claimed to be infallible. no one has made such claims except those propping up those strawmen while trying to argue against/blunder against mainstream science.
Thanks for this little tidbit:
[b]"(ice core dating is not an exact science and never claimed to be)"
That is what sunhouse needs to understand. So coming from someone
that is not a YEC, perhaps he will believe it. There is no way that they
can know exactly what happened in the distant past, before we have been
gathering weather data, to know what all the layers represent.[/b]
the dating methods from ice cores does have an error range of which scientists are fully aware. further, this error margin can be reduced by collaboration with other geologic schools of science. the error margin will never be reduced to zero and this is acceptable as far as human knowledge is concerned.
human knowledge will never be complete, it is constantly evolving.
Originally posted by RJHindsDasa's subjective, idiosyncratic definition of other people's "dishonesty" did not serve him well as a member of this community.
The following needs to be repeated for you guys:
[b]Dishonesty comes in many forms and many do not know (they pretend not to know ).......why I use the word dishonest.
The following may help you.
*To come into the spirituality forum without any desire to learn or co-operate is dishonest.
*To ask baiting questions is dishonest.
*To twist an ...[text shortened]... genuous attitude.......or you are also dishonest and have no business in this forum.
Dasa[/b]
Originally posted by FMFRight on! But if we analyze ourself honestly we would see we all fall short
Dasa's subjective, idiosyncratic definition of other people's "dishonesty" did not serve him well as a member of this community.
in one way or another in being perfectly honest. That is why even Dasa
needs a Savior that he does not recognize as such. He seems to think he
can save himself with Vedic teachings, which actually only reveals his
shortcomings.
Originally posted by RJHindsWell I post honestly here. Why would I not? So if you are admitting you are not always honest, perhaps you should just speak for yourself. People who bandy about accusations of "lying", "liar" and "dishonesty", when what they are actually referring to are differences between their belief systems, are invariably either not propagating their faith here successfully, or - indeed - maybe they are just bringing themselves and their faith into disrepute.
Right on! But if we analyze ourself honestly we would see we all fall short
in one way or another in being perfectly honest. That is why even Dasa
needs a Savior that he does not recognize as such. He seems to think he
can save himself with Vedic teachings, which actually only reveals his
shortcomings.
Originally posted by FMFSo you join Dasa in thinking you are both honest and do not need a savior.
Well I post honestly here. Why would I not? So if you are admitting you are not always honest, perhaps you should just speak for yourself. People who bandy about accusations of "lying", "liar" and "dishonesty", when what they are actually referring to are differences between their belief systems, are invariably either not propagating their faith here successfully, or - indeed - maybe they are just bringing themselves and their faith into disrepute.
Good luck with that. 😏
Originally posted by mikelomI think "thick as crap!" is better. 😀
I'll explain simply.
Either you are taking the pith, or you are as thick as crap!
I'd prefer your prerogative to be the former, but I do wonder. 🙁
You have obviously no idea about the water cycle, or hydrogenetics, and dismiss it as evident proof of the ages of the planet earth.
Next time you drink a glass of water, I hope you enjoy the knowledg ...[text shortened]... ned a balanced experience yet.
And this is a pith take of your prior sermon. 😀
-m. 😉
Originally posted by RJHindsYou claim we are dishonest by seeing the data all fits an age of the Earth far older than you believe. I simply asked you to provide the evidence you want us to provide to make science infallible. Give us your scientific evidence that the Earth is only 6000 years old. I will refute it.
The following needs to be repeated for you guys:
[b]Dishonesty comes in many forms and many do not know (they pretend not to know ).......why I use the word dishonest.
The following may help you.
*To come into the spirituality forum without any desire to learn or co-operate is dishonest.
*To ask baiting questions is dishonest.
*To twist an ...[text shortened]... genuous attitude.......or you are also dishonest and have no business in this forum.
Dasa[/b]