06-05-2007, 11:24 PM | #21 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
We all know you are a bitter apostate that clings to science as evidence that Mormonism is all a crock. I don't think there's a soul on here that isn't well aware of where you stand on this issue. That being the case, there's no need for you to turn an unrelated discussion into a stage for your personal issues with religion. |
|
06-05-2007, 11:27 PM | #22 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
06-05-2007, 11:30 PM | #23 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
You seem bitter about science. Do you reject carbon dating because it's science? Why do you think you have license to critique carbon dating employing the scientific method in doing so?
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
|
06-05-2007, 11:33 PM | #24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
06-05-2007, 11:41 PM | #25 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Fine sense of humor...yeah, not so much. Every post I read (and I'm willing to admit that I don't read many of them anymore) of yours has been, imo, designed to lure people into trying to prove to you that the church is true. In fact, similar to what I'm experiencing in this thread when out of the blue comes this accusation about the Earth being 6K years old. What if I'd said yes? You would've loved that. It would have given you all kinds of license to turn this into a "look at the idiot Mormon that has deluded herself into believing crazy things that science disproves" thread. Because I don't put much stock in carbon dating I'm now bitter about all science? That's quite a bit of stretching you're doing there. I think I've been clear about why I don't trust carbon dating. Why don't you go back and read through the thread, and if you have any specific questions you'd like to ask, perhaps I can answer them for you. |
|
06-05-2007, 11:42 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Jordan
Posts: 1,725
|
Quote:
Nowhere did BDB claim that the earth is 6,000 years old. She expressed some skepticism (of which you are a big proponent when it suits your purposes) about RCD and about its accuracy as the objects in question get older and older. Unless I'm mistaken, the maximum radiocarbon age limit is somewhere around 60K years at which point you can't distinguish between the carbon decay in the object and that of background radiation. Thus, BDB's skepticism about RCD in general, while not pertinent to the chicken bones discussed in this thread, is not entirely unfounded or unreasonable. The bottom line is that scientists rely on faith just like other people do. Only with scientists it's not faith in supernatural stuff - it's faith in their framework: faith in theories, hypotheses, logic, and their own judgement. No, I don't think RCD is wrong or unreliable or completely inaccurate. I don't think science is evil and I don't believe the earth is 6,000 years old. That being said, I don't treat someone that is expressing polite skepticism about a specific scientfic precept as kooky or whacko or silly or a nut or a moron or completely ignorant/stupid/uneducated. If your goal is to educate/enlighten you would be much more effective if you condescended from your lofty position every once in a while and tried to talk to people on their own terms, tried to understand what they are saying, and tried to value them as individuals even though they may not think like you do. As it is, your general assholiness seems to get in the way and makes me not want to listen to anything you have to say. |
|
06-05-2007, 11:42 PM | #27 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
I'm not sure what Mormonism is anymore. I'm not sure Mormonism knows. For example, it doesn't tend to prove all aborigines are descendants of a sixth century B.C. Jew. If you keep diminishing what the Book of Mormon is supposed to be pretty soon there's not much left to analyze is there. The incredibly shrinking book.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
06-05-2007, 11:45 PM | #28 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
This is a common misconception, self-delusion or disingenuous statement depending on how informed is the speaker. Anyone makes this assertion loses all credibility with me.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
06-05-2007, 11:52 PM | #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
Did someone have a bad day in court? I didn't diminish Mormonism, althouh you tried to (again). Your image of it may be diminsihed by this evidence, but mine isn't.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
06-05-2007, 11:53 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|