Sciencescience

Tue Jul 24, 2018, 05:54 PM

How an atheist deliberately twists facts for the purpose of slandering a scientist!

A fellow DI'er posted a thread whose near sole purpose was to call an ICR geologist who has many peer reviewed research papers in both creation and non creation journals and has won several awards for his work in geology!

The thread is this: https://www.discussionist.com/101827527

As Paul Harvey used to say--and now for the rest of the story.

!. He accuses Dr Steve Austin of using the K-AR dating method (potassium 40-argon 40) dating method because it would be the most easily used to bet false results!

Now the truth! the K-Ar method of rock dating is the most widely used method of mineral dating due to K and Ar appearing in abundance in the earths crust! It is the most preferred method for volcanically formed rocks because it is assumed that all the argon 40 would have escaped while the rock was in a liquid state and thus all the argon in the rock sample will be fro decay of K40.

2. He then goes on and said a ten year old dactite from the Mount st. Helens dome should not give any age (if the dating method were reliable) and that if it does register is due to the terrible sloppiness of the physicists doing all the testing in not cleaning the machine properly!

Now the truth! Once again Austin being an accredited geologist- used the most common and preferred test for a rock formed from a volcano.

The rock sample is melted in a vacuum- so all possible contaminant gasses would have been sucked out oxygen, nitrogen, CO2, argon etc.) .

Now Ar40 contamination does not occur readily in nature as it requires high temperatures and high pressure to inject AR40 into the lattice matrix of a rock! This is why the labs are very careful to avoid contaminants prior to testing.

3. He does correctly state that with a half life of over 1 billion years and that 100,000 years is within the margin of error so a contaminant would still test the rock older but within the MOE.

Now the truth! When K40 decays to Ar40 it also decays to CA 40 and the ration is 89.1 to 10.9 with a very small MOE.

If ar 40 somehow got into the liquified sample after all gasses were flushed out- the ration of K40, CA 40, and AR40 would be far off. IOW if teh amount of ar40 ius out of balance with ca40 then contamination could be assumed. But these folks know how to keep things clean. This writer is just pulling assumptions to find a way to slander a decent man! He calls him completely and totally dishonest, but yet all his complaints confirm what ICR scientists has sh9own for many years--these methods are totally flawed as more non YEC scientists have found and reported in peer reviewed journals!

With a half life of supposedly over 1.2 billion years- scientists have to assume that that rock only liquified once! If they do not know how many times the sample had been involved in liquefaction due to volcanic activity the age is only a guess.

But a short article that explains K-AR dating:

mass spectrometer
by Tas Walker

One of the most widely used dating methods is the potassium-argon method, which has been applied to ‘dating’ rocks for decades, especially igneous rocks that have solidified from molten magma. The attraction of the method lies in the fact that one of the daughter elements is argon which is an inert gas. This means that the geologist can plausibly assume that all argon gas escapes from the molten magma while it is still liquid. He thinks this solves his problem of not knowing the initial quantity of the daughter element in the past and not being able to go back in time and make measurements. He assumes the initial argon content is zero.1

He assumes that any argon-40 that he measures in his rock sample must have been produced by the radioactive decay of potassium-40 since the time the rock solidified. He imagines that his radioactive hour glass sealed when the rock solidified, and his radioactive clock started running. And he hopes the rock has remained sealed until the time he collected his sample.

With these assumptions the geologist only needs to measure the relative amounts of potassium-40 and argon-40 in the rock at the present time to be able to calculate an age for the rock. Although it is a simple calculation the big question is whether his assumptions about the rock were correct.

How can the geologist know? He can’t.
If the rock actually contained some argon-40 when it solidified then the calculated age would be too old. On the other hand, if the rock was later disturbed by a geological upheaval and lost argon the age would be too young. How can the geologist know? He can’t.

What he does is check his calculated age with the ages produced by other dating methods. In other words, he checks to see if his calculated result falls into the range where he expects it to fall, given the geological situation of where he found his rock.. He always does this check because no dating method can be trusted on its own.

What happens if the results conflict? It’s simple; the geologist will change his assumed history for that rock.

For example, if the age is higher than he expected he will say that his rock contains ‘excess argon’ or ‘parentless argon’. By this he means that argon gas in his rock has come from the melting of some older rocks deep underground and contaminated his sample with a higher concentration of argon-40, which is why its age is too old.

This is a standard explanation and is essentially a new story about the past, different from the original story that explained how potassium-argon dating works. We could ask ourselves which of the details of this story have been observed.

It is a story about older rocks, melted rocks, solidified rocks and argon gas. It explains what each of these were doing deep inside the earth millions of years ago. The story explains that the behaviour of ‘excess argon’ (it even has a name) made the age too old. Too old compared with what? With the true age of the rock. But wasn’t that what the dating method was supposed to be measuring?

The problem is that although radiogenic argon and excess argon have different names they are exactly the same isotope—argon-40. It is impossible to distinguish between them experimentally. So, how do we work out how much excess argon we have? We can only calculate the amount of excess argon if we know the true age of the rock. But wasn’t that what we were trying to measure?

What happens when the age is too young? In this case the method is again salvaged by changing his assumptions about the past. Often a heating event is invoked to liberate the argon from the solid rock, although other assumptions are made as well.

What happens if the age falls into the range he expected? In this case the geologist assumes that everything went well, and he publishes his result as the crystallization age of the rock.

60 replies, 1011 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 60 replies Author Time Post
Reply How an atheist deliberately twists facts for the purpose of slandering a scientist! (Original post)
nolidad Jul 2018 OP
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #1
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #5
Cold Warrior Jul 2018 #8
nolidad Jul 2018 #10
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #13
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #23
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #24
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #25
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #27
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #28
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #29
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #30
Carlos_Danger Jul 2018 #31
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #35
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #39
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #40
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #41
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #42
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #43
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #45
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #48
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #44
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #46
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #47
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply !
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #32
Ilovestx Jul 2018 #33
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #36
uncledad Jul 2018 #34
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #37
uncledad Jul 2018 #38
docgeezer Jul 2018 #2
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #4
nolidad Jul 2018 #11
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #15
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #3
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #6
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #7
nolidad Jul 2018 #19
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #20
nolidad Jul 2018 #49
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #51
nolidad Jul 2018 #55
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #57
Cold Warrior Jul 2018 #59
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #60
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #21
nolidad Jul 2018 #50
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #52
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #9
nolidad Jul 2018 #16
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #18
nolidad Jul 2018 #53
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #54
nolidad Jul 2018 #56
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #58
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #12
nolidad Jul 2018 #14
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #17
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #22
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #26

Response to nolidad (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2018, 06:41 PM

1. couple of points

1) most of us already know, defense not required.
2) 75% of the atheists I've met are just agitating assholes who's only goal is to try belittling you. I suppose it's the only way they can feel better about themselves. You won't change their minds or get through to them, so no "debate" is required
3) the other 25% who aren't assholes won't call you stupid, they simply disagree... and you aren't likely to change their minds either. no "debate" is required

Let God sort it out. No one every talked me into my belief system, and I don't know a single person who could say they were. God himself allows for those opportunities in life, people either recognize them or they don't... most people try to latch on when it's already too late... in the last seconds of their short existence here. It's unfortunate, but that's what it is.
What it is NOT is worth wasting your time and energy on. Most of them just hate you because you don't think like them... so let the rot in their own miserable existence, it doesn't affect you.
When someone allows for it and is open to it, THAT is when I try to guide them, and normally that involves sending them to an expert becasue I barely keep myself in check, let alone other people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #1)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 04:15 AM

5. Lmao.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #1)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 05:29 AM

8. No one every talked me into my belief system

Do you honestly believe that? Do you believe that being brought up in a Christian culture with the vast majority of people believing in Yahweh didn't determine your beliefs? Do you think that had you been born and grew up in Karachi you would today be a Christian? Or a Muslim? Do you think had you been born in and grew up in Delhi you would today be a Christian? Or a Hindu?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #1)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 07:45 AM

10. Thanks mumbly peg.

In my 43 years as a follower of Jesus, I have learned that most people do become followers by talk and action.

As Paul said in Romans:


Romans 10:17 New King James Version (NKJV)
17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

I have often sought to quit these "discussions" For several of the most prolific responders are nothing but people who wish to vent their hate towards the Lord. But there are reasons why I still continue. Personally I hope to end soon if the Lord allows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #10)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:12 AM

13. This has fuck all to do with the Lord.

This is about dishonesty. There are many Christian scientists who laugh at him.
There are many that would never go to such dishonest lengths to promote their beliefs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #10)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 02:36 PM

23. Oh bullshit!

 

Nothing to do with hate of "the Lord." Has to do with creationism not being science. That is all. Take your religion back to the belief forum and I mostly stay out of it unless it is on the latest page when I check in. Bring this stupid garbage into a forum named SCIENCE and you bet I will push back. It deserves nothing but ridicule and mocking. It is not science, it is dishonest nonsense. That these loons get any attention from mainstream press or educators is disgusting. It isn't even interesting anthropological history since it is just recent bullshit made up by scam artists. Apparently there are just enough ignorant suckers out there to make this crap profitable. The hucksters that promote it should be prosecuted

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #1)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 02:38 PM

24. LOL

 

You know everybody's take on theism that you meet? Enough so that you can quantify how many are assholes or not? Cool, what is your proportion of asshole xtians to not assholes?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #24)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 02:44 PM

25. gooby ggoba bla bla bla...

you make about as much sense as an expired condom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #25)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 02:49 PM

27. Oh sorry.

 

Too many syllables?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #27)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 02:59 PM

28. your inane babbling has absolutely nothing to do with what i posted or what I said.

If you have that much difficulty with comprehension, consider not posting... because it's not a good look for you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #28)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:08 PM

29. LOL

 

Yes I am the one with comprehension problems.

Clue: read your claim # 2, then read what I wrote again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #29)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:12 PM

30. here, i'll just do what you do.. EHEM:

LOL
Man you really hate people don't you.



there... now get bent.
something is wrong with you ... stay away from me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #30)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:19 PM

31. Alerted as harrasment

Bad faith; that was a silly ass alert.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Carlos_Danger (Reply #31)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:46 PM

35. Did he alert on himself?

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #35)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 04:46 PM

39. yea i think we know who did it. now as requested, stay the hell away from me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #39)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 04:50 PM

40. Yep.

 

You order me to "stay away" (LOL it is a fucking message board - you can hit ignore) and then you alerted for harassment, but obviously you hit the wrong post.

And then you reply to me anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #40)


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #39)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 04:55 PM

42. ...

 

LOL at your self-deletes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #42)


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #42)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 05:01 PM

45. because I know full well who keep mashing the alert button constantly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #45)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 05:08 PM

48. I know too.

 

Who was ordering who to leave them alone. You know, claiming some kind of harassment? It isn't me, I know what an open discussion board is for.

Harrassment.

Selfie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #39)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 05:01 PM

44. ...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #44)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 05:02 PM

46. now see, if I was a giant pussy, I'd alert on this post like it deserves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #46)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 05:05 PM

47. Just no self-discipline eh?

 

can't ignore and can't control your temper either. Certainly can't back up your lame assertion. All you can do is call names and self-delete like a coward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #30)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:21 PM

32. !

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #24)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:25 PM

33. A snowflake alerted on you. Voted to leave and the alert was sent in bad faith.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ilovestx (Reply #33)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:50 PM

36. I think he alerted on himself too.

 

Must be clicking alert on every post and accidentally clicked on one of his own as harassment. Ironically the one ordering me to leave him alone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #24)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:30 PM

34. Alerted on, voted to leave it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uncledad (Reply #34)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 03:52 PM

37. Some people can dish but not take!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #37)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 04:00 PM

38. ........... n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2018, 06:54 PM

2. I would guess that samples of recently solidified rock obtained from several recent volcanic

eruptions have been taken and analyzed for Ar40 content to test the assumption that all argon is flushed out of magma while it is still liquid. The history of these samples would be known, and so they would be a good test of the validity of the K-Ar dating technique.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to docgeezer (Reply #2)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 04:14 AM

4. From recent would not be good.

K-Ar is only practical with rocks at least 100,000 years old.
I suppose that's recent in a geologic time scale. Other dating methods would be used to cross reference to ensure accurate results.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to docgeezer (Reply #2)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 07:48 AM

11. Well I know of at least 3 samples tested from known volcanoes.

They were all done by YEC scientists so of course the scoffers and mockers and rabid believers in evolution woul ddiscount the results to 0.

But the standard accepted hypotheses as taught in textbooks is that any argon 40 found in rocks is there from K40 decay. Unless they can know of reliquification due to volcanic activity. Kind of hard to figure that out over a supposed 1.25 billion years!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #11)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:17 AM

15. Lol..

I don't understand how it works. .
So it doesn't work.
That's how you operate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 04:30 AM

6. Being an atheist has fuck all to do with it.

I never mentioned religion once. Not once.
Dr. Austin is no longer a scientist.
He's a loon and he's fair game whether you like it or not.
Scientists don't send known 10 year old rock for K-Ar dating. Loons do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 05:25 AM

7. Lmfao.

You still don't get it do you? 

It's deliberately dishonest to send a 10 year old rock for K-Ar testing. 
No cross referencing to detect errors. 
Just get the error you want and go with it. 

K-Ar is good for volcanic rock. Absolutely. 
That is at least 100,000 years old. 
No scientist would use K-Ar on a 10 year old rock. 
It would be dishonest to do that and use the results as evidence of flawed dating. . 

And you fell for it. 
The evidence is right in front of you, and you still fall for it. 
 

Not to mention you have no clue how dating works, why certain methods are used or what scientists do. You said "physicists didn't clean the machine." 
Physicists don't clean machines, they are physicists. They also don't do radiochemistry or nuclear chemistry. 
Chemists do that. 
You don't even know what field of science studies radiometric decay and try to let on that you know what you are talking about. 
That's understandable. Considering your fascination with ICR and the fact that biologists can do physics and geologists can do astronomy over there. You think that's just fine. 

You can't say anything bad about the loons. 
You also can't admit I'm right, so you whip out a childish call out thread to defend your buddy. 
Instead of arguing the point, you write a bunch of shit about K-Ar and scientists that you have absolutely no clue about. 
Fail. Big fail. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #7)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:35 AM

19. why is it deliberately dishonest??

you make a claim then scurry like a cockroach when the lights are turned on when asked to prove your allegations!

Simply either the labe screwed up preparing the equipment or there should be no AR 40 measurable.

As k-ar is used for rocks estimated to be from 100K to several billion years then it must have been massive contamination for a 10 year old rock to measure 340k to 2.5 myo years or a 150 year old rock to measure over 1 million years.

pretty hard to reconcile when K-ar is used to date rocks anywhere from 100k to 2+by.

Same with 200 myo coal with measurable c-14?
same with 500 myo soft tissue with measured c-14?
18 dinos with measurable c-14?

Maybe it is a deep conspiracy between about 10 labs and YEC scientists!!!!

but why did they test a young rock?

Perhaps for these known facts of radio dating:

First, rocks of known age always show vastly inflated radioisotope “ages.”
Second, various radioisotope methods or even various attempts using the same method yield discordant ages more often than concordant ages.
Third, many dating methods that don't involve radioisotopes—such as helium diffusion, erosion, magnetic field decay, and original tissue fossils—conflict with radioisotope ages by showing much younger apparent ages.

also rocks taken from the same lava flow and in very close proximity to each other in the same sedimentary oayer in the grand canyon dated anywhere from 840my to 2515 my using 4 different methods! so much for dating methods agreeing with each other!

I may make errors in terminology and fields of study- but you live with blinders on with anything that exposes the machanisms that are the only legs that give credence to long ages are shown to be fatally wrong!

That is okay, now that radio and c-14 dating has shown to be not only very fallible but actuall dead wrong- more and more research and study will be done and more peer reviewed research will be published in non YEC journals showing how unreliable these methods are and should not be used!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #19)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:47 AM

20. It's dishonest because he fucking knew

K-Ar would give the wrong results.
How did he expect to get a date of 10 years using K-Ar if it's only good from 100, 000 years and up?
It's dishonest because he didn't cross reference it to see what matched up.
He did it purposely, to deceive people who don't know better.

Now you should know better.
Yet you still can't see where it's dishonest to do something like that.

You really believe he had nothing but good intentions when he deliberately used a technique that he knew would fail.

That's where you fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #20)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 06:14 PM

49. Sorry I don't buy your lame excuses!

All you are good for is throwing out wild conspiracy ideas and never proving one of them!

He did not expect to get a 0 date because he did this after he did Grand Canyoin testing using four common methods and got dates form the same ancient flow with samples in very close proximity to each other in the same flow from 824 my to 2125 my That is a swing of 1.3 billion years for rocks that should be testing in near identical ages! This is not a rare occurrence!

Even the neladi cave yielded ages from 35k to over 800k years using differing methods!!!!!

If the method was valid it would ot have registered any age! Remember the rock sample is placed in a vacuum and then melted- your contamination manure is completely invalid and you should know that!!!! Any contaminant gasses would have been removed before the process started and thus not be a factor!

It is you adding misinformation upon misinformation to defend a failed dating method!

Same with Cold Warrior. ICR scientists (not to mention evolutionary paleontologists) have gotten C-14 dates from dino fossils from in situ! So far ICR and AIG scientists have 18 samples from dinos that date at from 22k to 70K years!!!

LAbs will no longer accept unknown samples for dating due to the massive embarrassment they faced because of this scandal!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #49)

Fri Jul 27, 2018, 03:37 AM

51. You can twist and bring other shit up all you want.

It doesn't change the fact that what the loon did is dishonest and done with malicious intent.
Then to try to use it as evidence that people like you fall for is reprehensible.
Shit like that is what keeps you back. What makes you look foolish.
It's all on them, I don't blame you but now you know the types of tricks they pull.
Do you really want me to go through their other shit? I'll find out their dishonesty in those as well.. after a while you'll have no choice but see them for what they are. Once you see it, you can't unsee it.
You can still worship God without the loons. Don't let them hold you back from reality and the beauty of nature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #51)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 04:02 PM

55. Well your arrogance killed off another perfectly good thread.

Irt seems the only thing you pretend ot be good at is reading other peoples minds and intents.

Making claims without evidence and slandering anyone who dares diagree with you.

Have your last word! I have pulled this off my bookmarks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #55)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 04:55 PM

57. Lmao..

Poor nolidad.
Starts a thread to call me out, gets humiliated and has to leave his own thread because he can't face the facts about his beloved loon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #57)

Sun Jul 29, 2018, 02:19 AM

59. Amazing! He starts a thread calling you out

Then whines that you’ve ruined the thread by arrogantly responding!?! By Yahweh, that’s pretty weak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold Warrior (Reply #59)

Sun Jul 29, 2018, 08:32 AM

60. He blames me every time.

He runs out of things to say other than scales to feathers and 2 or 3 other things he thinks are his slam dunks, they get shown to be ridiculous, he calls me names or arrogant or bigoted and stops replying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #19)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 10:16 AM

21. So..

You copy/paste info from ICR mentioning dating methods.
As your proof after being shown that the king of the loons over there has been deliberately dishonest in his research.
Then you expect me to believe what they say is honest in your copy/paste defending said dishonesty.
You don't see any thing weird about that do you?
Lmao.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #21)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 06:16 PM

50. Other than you making an accusation and repeating it

ad-nauseum, you have presented 0 to support your defamation!

You are not a mind reader, you do not have telekinetic powers, nor are you god so unless you got sometehing- all you have is your odorous hatred.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #50)

Fri Jul 27, 2018, 03:59 AM

52. I absolutely presented evidence.

He used K-Ar on a 10 year old rock.
Knowing the age of the rock and knowing that was the wrong method to use.
What more do you need?
Tell.me one way that would be considered an honest thing to do.
You known it wasn't. You can't admit it though.
But you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 07:33 AM

9. Tas walker.

A failed mechanical engineer reduced to writing blogs for creation dot Com.
Lmfao

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #9)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:18 AM

16. And you know this how?

Oh wait he must be a failure because He knows God!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #16)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:31 AM

18. He's a failure because

He isn't a mechanical engineer anymore.
He writes bullshit articles way out of his field for the loons.
What does mechanical engineering have to do with K-Ar dating methods?

Again.. this has fuck all to do with God
Yet, you keep brining it up..
Then you yap about strawman and red herrings..
Lmao..
Oh. Nolidad..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #18)

Fri Jul 27, 2018, 04:20 PM

53. I saw this on you tube and I thought it could be you!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #53)

Fri Jul 27, 2018, 05:42 PM

54. I don't make videos.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #18)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 04:06 PM

56. Well if you bothered to look past your own

Christian hating nose--- You could look up worldviews and find that this is part of the world battle.

If you have any integrity- You would know that Darwinian Evolution is still just a hypotheses because there is no empirical evidence. We have no record of mutations causing all these changes and preserved and then advanced by natural wselection- that is just the opinions of scientists.

Mutations have never been shown to advance a species but bring harm ultimately- over 99.94% of all mutations land on the harmful side (some barely but still have a negative impact)

I have become convinced by your infinite insulting, that you know you cannot prove anything you say and use insulting to try to rescue you r position.

Anothier thread dies from too much slander by the son of the great slanderer!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #56)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 04:59 PM

58. Lmao...

Poor nolidad.
You keep trotting out your 5 or 6 bullshit points that have been debunked over and over here.
Then whine and stop replying in threads you got you as handed to you in.
It has nothing to do with God.
Only to you.
Lmao..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:00 AM

12. Oh. .

"This writer is just pulling assumptions to find a way to slander a decent man!"

Yeah a decent man that knowingly dates 10 year old rock with a method that isn't practical until around 100,000 years.
Gets the wrong date he was hoping for and uses it as evidence for his ridiculous claims
Yup. What a decent man.

He used K-Ar knowing it wasn't going to work.
He had to know.
That's completely dishonest.
And you fall for it and defend his actions calling him a decent man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #12)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:17 AM

14. any rescue device so you will not accept the truth!

ad-hominems, red herrings, logical fallacies, what ever works for you to slander people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #14)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 08:20 AM

17. Rescue device?

Haha haha

I don't need a rescue device.. you do.
This whole thread you posted is your rescue device.

Knowing what he did and still defending it shows you do not care about facts and the truth.
Your belief is more important.
I knew that already, but it's nice when you post it for all to see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 12:43 PM

22. You call me out in a thread.

Saying I twisted facts because I'm an atheist, even though it has fuck all to do with that.
Now that it's plain to see I didn't twist any facts you fall silent.
The loon did exactly what I said he did and now you can't back up your twisted facts.
It's hilarious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Thu Jul 26, 2018, 02:45 PM

26. Wow this is some willfull blindness.

 

Isn't there some bible quote about motes and beams in eyes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Sciencescience