Re: How is this for an Anti-Evolutionist's use of quotes?

From: Allen & Diane Roy (Dianeroy@peoplepc.com)
Date: Thu May 04 2000 - 18:28:48 EDT

  • Next message: Stephen E. Jones: "Re: Intelligent Design"

    Re: How is this for an Anti-Evolutionist's use of quotes?----- Original Message -----
      From: Howard J. Van Till
        HVT: Here's the issue as I see it.

        1. The scientist cited was displaying exemplary professional integrity and candor. He should have been commended.

        I agree, this is about the only place in Evolutionary doctrinal works where you can find the assumptions listed so clearly. Most dogmatists, such as Dalrymple, disguise the assumptions with rhetoric.

        2. He noted that the credibility of particular outcomes of measurement and interpretation was dependent on the sample meeting clearly specified criteria.

        Rather, he noted that the method is clearly falsified, but still proposes that the method is useable by rationalizing away the problems. He clearly shows that radiometric dating is completely subjective. Objectivity is a myth. As long as you subject the data to interpretation and rationalization you can get "credible results."

        3. Given this state of affairs, it is imperative that every conceivable cross-check be done to discern whether or not those criteria were met by any individual sample. The quoted material made that clear.

        Given the state of affairs that radiometric dating is falsified and entirely subjective, he states that you must "cross-check" the assumption. This is a logical fallacy. You cannot prove what you assume. The criteria is what ever it takes to get the "correct results."

        4. Science has no interest in performing meaningless measurements or propagating fictitious interpretations. Time, energy and resources are too valuable to waste on some ridiculous game of conspiracy or deception.

        Conspiracy and deception are not needed, all you need is blind faith in the religion of Evolutionism. Everything else follows. Since when is Science a person. People propagate fictitious interpretation as long as the interpretation fits the model assumed true.

        5. This attitude minimizes the generation of nonsense and stuff that belongs in a crock.

        This attitude guarantees the promulgation of pseudoscience as fact.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 04 2000 - 18:30:01 EDT