Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Two connected evidences

Expand Messages
  • w_w_c_l
    ... If creationists are still trying to discredit C-14 dating 15 years from now, I don t think correctly referencing their silly mammoth claims to the 1962
    Message 1 of 126 , Dec 3, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, Ray Ausban <rayausban@...> wrote:
      >
      > Rick,
      >  
      > And you understand how this works. You put up the
      > correct references. They take it and correct the
      > editions of their next book printing and the next
      > and next. Fifteen years from now it looks like
      > they never screwed up.

      If creationists are still trying to discredit C-14 dating
      15 years from now, I don't think correctly referencing
      their silly mammoth claims to the 1962 Radiocarbon journal
      is going to make them look any less screwed up.


      > There will be no acknowledgment of the mistake and no
      > admission as to how they got the corrected references.

      They're not going to correct their references, Ray. This
      is not an isolated case.

      But if creationist authors want to start linking their readership
      to the online Radiocarbon archives, no need to thank me!
      https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/issue/archive?issuesPage=6#issues


      > I think your effort deserves better than that.

      Verily, I have my reward.

      They'd probably spell my name wrong anyway.



      Rick Hartzog
      Worldwide Church of Latitudinarianism
    • w_w_c_l
      Hey, Todd, I was hoping you would drop by! Now that I have a decent internet connection I see you ve been busy elsewhere. (I hope you like my dog.) ... Well,
      Message 126 of 126 , Sep 7 8:51 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hey, Todd, I was hoping you would drop by! Now that I have
        a decent internet connection I see you've been busy elsewhere.
        (I hope you like my dog.)

        You noted:

        > Well, to be honest, he's fighting a lost battle.
        > Lost over two hundred years ago. ;-)

        Well, yeah, but in that context I wasn't speaking strictly of
        geology... I was thinking more along the lines of Acts 5:39.

        Are you familiar with the book I linked in that last message?

        Title: History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom
        Author: Andrew Dickson White
        Date: 1896
        http://www.gutenberg.org/files/505/505-h/505-h.htm

        There's some pretty good stuff in it, including a chapter on
        astronomy. As I understand it, White's method of "conflict
        thesis" is rather outdated in terms of historiography -- but
        then again, so is creationism itself. It's pretty amazing to
        see all these same excuses from the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries
        still parading around the internet as modern creation science.

        Here's something from Chapter 7, about archaeology:

        | In the last years of the sixteenth century Michael Mercati
        | tried to prove that the "thunder-stones" were weapons or
        | implements of early races of men; but from some cause his
        | book was not published until the following century, when
        | other thinkers had begun to take up the same idea, and
        | then it had to contend with a theory far more accordant
        | with theologic modes of reasoning in science. This was
        | the theory of the learned Tollius, who in 1649 told the
        | world that these chipped or smoothed stones were
        | "generated in the sky by a fulgurous exhalation conglobed
        | in a cloud by the circumposed humour."
        |
        | But about the beginning of the eighteenth century a fact
        | of great importance was quietly established. In the year
        | 1715 a large pointed weapon of black flint was found in
        | contact with the bones of an elephant, in a gravel bed near
        | Gray's Inn Lane, in London. The world in general paid no
        | heed to this: if the attention of theologians was called
        | to it, they dismissed it summarily with a reference to the
        | Deluge of Noah; but the specimen was labelled, the
        | circumstances regarding it were recorded, and both specimen
        | and record carefully preserved.

        Uh oh. I can see where *this* is going...

        "Conglobed in a cloud by the circumposed humour" is pretty
        humorous in itself!

        And this book was published in 1896 -- the year radioactivity
        was discovered.

        Uh oh.


        Rick Hartzog
        Worldwide Church of Latitudinarianism
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.