[continued from previous message]   
      
   > The ID perps are contending that part of the fine tuning   
   > of our planet for life is that the designer had to wait around 8 billion   
   > years for the elements that make up our solar system to be created by   
   > dying stars.  The designer did not create the elements with the Big   
   > Bang, what was created was a lot of Hydrogen and some helium.  The earth   
   > is really old (4.5 billion years old).  As I pointed out you have ID   
   > perps claiming to have gotten their PhDs looking at rocks around 2   
   > billion years old.  These guys understand that there were a lot more   
   > isotopes that existed when the Earth originally formed, and we have a   
   > lot of decay products to understand that to be true.  Take U238 half of   
   > it is gone that once existed (half-life around 4.5 billion years). There   
   > isn't much U235 left because it's half life is only 700 million years.   
   > Your old universe, but young earth isn't compatible with the Top Six.   
   > Old earth day for agers are also incompatible with the ID perp's Top Six   
   > (like the Reason to Believe OEC that want the order of creation to be   
   > Biblical).  The intelligent design creationist scam is not your friend.   
      
   All opinion based on assumptions that can be interpreted otherwise.  I   
   don't feel like getting into this area either right now because of time,   
   but I'm sure you know there are many pieces of evidence and theories   
   countering your stance.   
      
      
   > No one is attacking the YEC but the ID perp's bait and switch scam is   
   > victimizing them.  It has always been the YEC denying reality.  Just   
   > pointing out what they are doing isn't attacking anyone.  The truth   
   > should not be viewed as an attack.  What is an attack is the bait and   
   > switch, and the stupid lie about the ID scam supporting a big tent   
   > religious revival.  Just look at the Top Six.  YEC are excluded by any   
   > legitimate scientific discoveries involving them whether they it is   
   > called ID science or creation science.  The YEC scientific creationists   
   > used to use the same Top Six gap denial arguments.  They just didn't   
   > call it intelligent design.  They just claimed that science didn't have   
   > an explanation for those gaps, and claimed that their god could fill the   
   > gaps.  As I pointed out the YEC scientific creationists only used the   
   > Top Six gaps as fire and forget denial of reality.  They treated them as   
   > independent bits of denial and never related them to reality or to each   
   > other.  No coherent model of creation was ever developed by the   
   > scientific creationist nor the ID perps that followed them.  The ID   
   > perps screwed up and told the rubes that they were listing them in the   
   > order in which they must have occurred in this universe, and that order   
   > is not Biblical, and it is not obviously not YEC compatible.   
      
   I don't really care about this past history you keep referring to.  I've   
   looked at the top 6 and nothing doesn't fit into my personal beliefs.   
   Are you saying these 6 gap issues and the theories are completely false,   
   or just put together in the way this group does is what you find fault   
   with.   
      
   ---snip---   
      
      
   >>   
   >> Oh, I have far more confidence in my ability to reason than I guess   
   >> you think I do.   
   >   
   > Then demonstrate that.  Can your religious beliefs survive acceptance of   
   > the ID perps filling the Top Six gaps with a non Biblical designer?   
      
   If that is what they do, of course not.  I am unaware of where they have   
   done this.  Even so, it doesn't matter to me what they do.  I don't   
   follow them and base my beliefs on what they say.  I certainly have read   
   things by some of the players, but have not read of this non Biblical   
   designer.  I don't even know what that would mean.   
      
      
   > MarkE claims   
      
   ---snip---   
      
   Yeah, I don't think I want to comment on past threads here.  How would I   
   know if what you say is his actual position, or if it is one you've   
   given him?   
      
   ---snip---   
      
   >>>> When it really comes down to it, most of the stuff you think you   
   >>>> know, is never a threat to my beliefs.  Most is either expected,   
   >>>> interpreted in silly ways, based on faulty assumptions, or just   
   >>>> outright theoretical guesses that align with materialism.  EV never   
   >>>> seems to connect the dots.  That's OK, I would expect everyone to   
   >>>> keep looking.  Yet if you attend today's schools, you would never   
   >>>> know this is the reality.   
   >>>   
   >>> What a nut job.  You obviously do not understand what the situation   
   >>> actually is.  Willful stupidity and ignorance is not your friend.   
   >>> There is no real reason for you to even try to support the ID scam at   
   >>> this time.  You likely do not want them to succeed in producing any   
   >>> valid ID science anymore than Kalk and Bill did.   
   >>   
   >> There you go.  Very unhelpful.   
   >>   ---rest snipped---   
   > Just the truth.  You are coming into this discussion pretty much totally   
   > ignorant of what the situation has been for decades, and even claim that   
   > you don't care about the creationist scam artists that have been messing   
   > with the notion for decades.  You can't just repeat their screw ups, you   
   > have to try to do better.   
      
   I'm sure I will continue to read your posts, but I am not very concerned   
   with this "scam" you refer to.  Too many areas to look into rather than   
   waste time figuring out what something that seems very insignificant to me.   
      
   --   
   Science doesn't support Darwin.  Scientists do.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)