Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:56 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

star2,

What I expected was a little more critical thinking and open mindedness, but apparently I was wrong. Virtually no one here is interested in the evidence, nor are they interested in having to critcally think about what they all collectively mean. Instead, many would rather cover their ears, shut their eys and yammer 'I'm not listening, na na na' like a little petulant kid.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:19 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"I am not much into throwing my pearls before swine,"

Ahhhh, how cute....almost poetic.

"what do you do for a living? "

You assume too much, what makes you think only one person is using this account? Dun dun dun!!

My questions would have an end if people would quit dodging them over over and retorting to tired biblical verses as a defense.

With no love, I say spare me the indignant routine. If you're too lazy, limp and ill read to repond to intellectual enquiry then you're not much of a thinker in the first place.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:29 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Topekan,

Here, I'll leave you a link so you can read it for yourself why only natural explanations are deemd Science. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

Topekan,

I wasn't refering only to radiometric dating, but more so towards all the science questions which are in scuh IQ tests and require basic understanding of them to answer. but it's quite hard to answer them and do well if you reject them. Ever more hilarious is how she claims she got a 120 IQ at age 10!! Riiiight.

"Evolution has never been, and can't be, tested using the scientific method. "

How do you figure? It makes falsifiable predictions, it thus falls within the confines of the scientific method. using the evolution as a theory we make predictions like about chromosome 2 fusion and locatios of fossils based on past finds and what do you know, they reafrim the theory. If evolution is wrong, then there were a lot of hominids wandering around 2+ million years ago for it to be wrong as well.

"Merely asserting that: 1) there must be a 'naturalistic' explanation'"

Oh boy, sorry pal but ONLY NATURALISTIC explanations cane be used as Science, look it up according to the scientific method. Secondly, we don't have to wait for anything, we have the fossils, we have the DNA which conforms to them. We have the fossils, we win.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:52 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

“When I was 10 yrs old I was administered the Stanford Benit Test by a PhD Clinical
Psychologist. My IQ determination was from that test not from some website.”

Oh, so now you’re telling us that your boasting of a ‘120 IQ’ was from when you were 10 years old then, do I have you right? Star, you’re digging yourself an ever deeper hole, get a clue. Can you even back this claim up, or is it more empty rhetoric?

“Such things are not asked on IQ test Mr. agentorange, you know that.”

Oh I agree star, however many of the things tested in standard IQ tests require basic understanding in biology, and other such Sciences that you overwhelmingly deny. It’s quite hard to claim you did so well on an IQ test when some of the testing is related to things that you deny on face value.

“My faith in God and His Word is my shield against the foolish thoughts of ignorant men.”

More like your faith is your only refuge and sanctuary against the wave of reality that would otherwise come crashing down on your empty rhetoric. The wave is the evidence and with your faith you hold it all back, not very logical star. There is a reason apologetics exist, think about it.

“You are probably also frustrated and somewhat mad because you are losing this battle.”

Losing what battle Star? Here I am presenting evidence upon evidence and your only retort is, 'I got faith’. Mmmmkaaay. Go ahead, refute how light speed is a constant and the universe is 13.7 billion years old as a result, try me.

Letter with Cries to Jesus Found in Colo. Gunman's Car

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:11 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

Great, the guy blames his follies on asking jesus for help... and no replies......why wasn't he putting the same effort in looking in himself for his own resolutions first?

What a cop out blaming a god for your follies and your acheivements.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:19 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

It's pretty hard to have an IQ of 120 when you reject virutally all the recent advances in science which the tests would be based on! On an IQ test, how could you explain in detail or understand a principle like radionmetric dating when you rejct it off hand, it's entirely illogical.

it's like arguing you're a whiz in science, but reject virtually all of it. That is entirely confounding logic star.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:15 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"No, my brain isn't all that great. I only have a 120 IQ"

Oh ok. star and my IQ is 121... are you serious? 120, from where, some website?

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:11 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

TerryH,

“It is very odd that scientist seem to think they can determine age by appearance.”

Yah, well we Sciency types don’t determine the age by mere ‘appearance’ but rather analyze the age itself by numerous methods. Just like your example of the person who looks 40, but in reality after more testing and deeper analysis reveals they are in fact olde, same goes for our earth. We at first didn't suspect it to be that old b/c the human lifetime is quite short compared to geological changes and as a result no one would have argued earth being more than some 20 million years old, which is abot the age Lord Kelvin gave for Earth. However being creationist, Kelvin didn't know about radioactive decay elements that would provide additional heat/energy to the earth and result in it being far older.

Our earth’s appearance changes over time as tectonic plates move (africa and south america are obvious examples) and mile wide asteroids collide with earth and other events that show the very surface has been reshaped countless times as a result.

I’ve asked Star and others to try to explain why light speed (which is a constant) and other testing methods reveals that our Universe isn’t some 6000 years old, but it’s over 13.7 billion years old. Even the distance to our closest galaxy, Andromeda is more than 6000 light years away and yet, you want us to think folks from NASA and other global cosmologists and astronomers are off by that much of a margin?

How can Star explain, or dare I say rationalize, that the universe isn’t actually 13.7 billion years old? I'd love to see you try this one star.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:45 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"I am sorry but I will not listen to anyone tell me that mankind and all life for that matter has been on this planet longer than approximately 6000 yrs. The Word of God is my authority not the opinions of man"

Hello, earth to star...who do you exactly think WRTOE the bible? Yes....men. in the end, inspired by god or not, men, faliable men penned it. so the very logic that you use to suggest that other works are 'mere opinon' is a logical fallacy.

Why do you even bother researching anything at all (radiometric dating) if in the end you will come to the conclussion you just did? You state that certain things are flawed before even looking into them and then when you do research them you find them to do quite accurate and in response you simply ignore them and close your eyes, cover your ears in defiance. That isn't logical at all star. You argue god gave you a great brain, well then use it. It's entirely illogical to argue god gave you such a tool to use only not to use it as you do. you don't worship a god, you worship your book and you're an idoltar of it, can't you see that?

With your attitude you'd be better of not researching anything else at all, why even bother star. Like I said, talking to you, is like talking to a brick wall. (flagged myself)

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:55 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

“Yes, I get it but do you? You have no idea how old anything is before you test it.”

Actually we do, I told you already we use multiple dating techniques, it’s not just radiometric.

“What if your lava flow or your rock, or whatever isn't as old as you think it is?”

Well star if we just saw the lava come out of the volcano we already know it’s age, however as soon as it hardens it’s taken back to the lab for dating, so I think we can know the dates pretty accurately based on that. Additionally we use numerous dating techniques to establish accuracy. IE, we use Dendrochronology (tree rings) and those go back over 10,00 years and ice cores go back over 700,000 years.

“The ages would be off by a large anount wouldn't they be? Millions of yrs, wouldn't they be?”

Please read up on it on Wiki, I am going to bed. Please read it and get back to me, you should find answers from the Wiki page and the related links attached to it. Go ahead, be skeptical, read into it and objectively look at what that creationist site tries to pawn off as being poor dating and you'll see they are ignoring the details.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:48 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

star2,

Do some research on the miniumum dating ranges for Ak-r, it's around 100,000 years, so obviously it would result in an error for anything recent. Different particles decay after different rates and this decay rate is used to establish a 1/2 life for it and that's how we establish the dates.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:45 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

“If you don't make that assumption then you tell me big boy what was the parent to daughter ratio in the beginning?”

Star, when the isotopes are analyzed we can know what the ratios are for parent to daughter elements and know based on continued observation how fast certain isotopes in the same sample will decay at. Read up on it on Wiki. All you stated were old creationist regurgitation that fails to mention WHY the K-Ar method revealed such hig dates for recent material. It’s b/c it’s not used to date recent material in the first place. DUH! If one uses the wrong measuring device, of course it’s going to result in an error. It tries to give the impression that they are flawed, but ignores to metioned the DETAILS that not all isotopes decay at the same rates and thus dating recent material with an slowly decaing isotope obviously results in an error. You're getting lied to star, get a clue.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:40 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

star,

You still didn't show me anywhere when we must know that no daughter elements are present, so again I afraid I have caught you in a lie.

“lava dome at Mount St. Helens that was formed in 1986”

Star, you can’t use the Potassium-Argon [K-Ar] method do date recent material b/c it’s ½ life is very looooong. Learn to read about dating methods. If the K-Ar dating method has a Looooooong ½ life, then obviously it can’t be used to date recent material as it decays too sloow, now can it?

Same thing goes for number 2 and 3. C-14 has a SHORTER ½ life than the K-Ar method and therefore b/c it decays faster it’s used for dating recent material which K-AR can’t do. Get it?

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:16 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"There was water underneath the earth. A mist came up from the ground to water everything.
(Genesis 2:5-6)'

So you're telling me a single 'mist' of rain was enough to allow for life to live all tha time till your no-way flood? Ok...get real star.

"Your assumption is that there were no daughter elements in the beginning. It is only an assumption. You have no evidence to back that up.”

No offense star, but you’re pretty thick. Show me anywhere in here where it says it relies on no daughter elements being present. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"God's Word also plainly states that the human was a unique creation of God. The human, unlike all the other forms of animal life, was created in the image of God and "

Hello NEWSflash Star, who exactly do you think wrote the bible? yes MEN ! think about it. obvously they are giong to coin themselves as the pinnacle creation. try to think a little more critically.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:57 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

“The Word of God implies that there was no rain prior to the great flood (deduced from Genesis 9:13).”

Ya, and how exactly did people live back then wise guy? You need water to grow things, all living things on earth require water to live. Get a clue. Oh, let me guess…another miracle to explain it away!

“These dating methods start out with the premise that all the radioactive substances started out in it pure form. I reject that assumption.”

Fail again star. We don’t use that assumption for dating radiometric techniques star, we rely on the ratio of parent to daughter elements which results in decaying isotopes decaying into others, by knowing the ratio we can measure it as it decays and establish how old it is.

“If all that was on the earth was subjected to the continual breaking up of the ground, and the gushing waters then it is logical to conclude that all life forms were buried under all the mud and at differnt levels.”

Sorry Star, but we find quite an orderly arrangement of types of life depending on the strata. In a real deluge like your flood you’d have all animals all mixed on all levels, but we don’t find that at all.

“Sometime back I gave you many articles that were written showing the unreliabilty of many of the different dating methods”

Ya star, you mentioned what are known as anomalies, which is why they were are from like the 1950 and prior to how our understanding of processes like the ‘reservoir affect’ which results in inflated dating.

I'd rather not even have you address my questions anymore star, talking to you is like talking to a wall. Even a wall can think more critically.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:47 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

star2,

Fine star, you say earth dating methods are flawed....explain why when we use light speed which is a constant to measure the universe it's not 6000 years ofd. heck, even the andromeda galazy isn't 6000 years old, get a freaking clue already.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:45 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

star2,

star, I am talking about evidence here. not rhetoric in your tired 3000 year old book. please try think outside of that box and address the evidence I presented outside of that, that is what I am saying.

Federal Judge Prohibits School Vote on Graduation Prayers

agentorange20 »

Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:08 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

“The most frustrating aspect of these discussions is what I believe Nietzche called unyielding despair that”

Most Atheists don’t even prescribed to Nietzsche’s views on life and that ‘nothing matters’ and Nihilism, what have you been reading? Or do you read?

“your bias is so firmly rooted it can not nor will not allow you to examine anything without the filter of your atheism.... and that is sad”

Yea, and like this can’t be said for the other way around for Theism right? Get real kid. Sorry but the door swings both ways in this regard.

I would just appreciate it if you or someone else would review the links to vids I posted earlier and then get back to me.