Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[ImmortalFlame]

Obviously Dawkins and Gould were not coming out of the closet as creationists- but they openly acknowledge the lack of direct evidence,

Garbage. Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist who has written extensively about the evidence of evolution.

the very fact that the fundamental core mechanisms of evolution are still debated demonstrate how speculative the theory is.

The "fundamental core mechanisms" of evolution are mutation and natural selection. These are categorically not debated in the scientific community, and you are openly lying.

 

[JM2C]

Completely wrong. In fact every single sentence there is wrong.

1. Argon is not a "final or stable element of potassium". It is an element in its own right.

2. Argon is a gas, it escapes from molten rock but does not escape when the rock solidifies, which does not take 10 years.

3. Potassium will remain detectable in the rock for millions of years.

4. Potassium 40 is always decaying, its the point at which the rock solidifies that is being measured by the dating method.

Thanks for demonstrating that you definitely know nothing about K-Ar dating methods.

After gassing out the naturally occurring argon from the molten rock it then cools and hardens meaning no natural argon is present in the closed system. Any argon that is produce in this closed system is produced by the decaying potassium. Once the potassium starts decaying it produces argon.

You use the term "clocking", any confusion stems from your misuse of the terminology.

You are completely wrong. You don't understand anything about radio-metric dating, for example:
This is complete nonsense. No one measures the half-lives to date a rock sample. Half-lives are established and verified independently.

Let’s not get caught up in semantics here since you and I knew that we don’t know the language or terms use by scientists.

How do you suppose to measure the millions of years if you can’t measure it with half-life? If you don’t like the term “clocking” then, how about reset or set to zero? Or radioactive rocks are like a clock because they decay into other elements. Hence: The term “clocking” or the starts of decaying of parent isotopes into daughter isotopes. Any way you look at it, it’s like a clock.

“Potassium–argon dating, abbreviatedK–Ar dating, is aradiometric datingmethod used ingeochronologyandarchaeology. It is based on measurement of the product of theradioactivedecay of anisotopeofpotassium(K) intoargon(Ar). Potassium is a common element found in many materials, such asmicas,clay minerals,tephra, andevaporites. In these materials, the decay product40Ar is able to escape the liquid (molten) rock, but starts to accumulate when the rock solidifies (recrystallizes). Time since recrystallization is calculated by measuring the ratio of the amount of40Ar accumulated to the amount of40K remaining.

The longhalf-lifeof40K allows the method to be used to calculate theabsolute ageof samples from 200,000 to 5 million years ago.[1]” -wiki

 

[JM2C]

Strange, my family can be traced back over 500 years and in a patchy way up to 1000 years ago when the family name first arrived in the UK. Maybe the difference is that some people (i.e. my father and his cousins) are willing to make a serious effort while others just like to meander along celebrating ignorance.

Is that mean you belong to the more highly evolved race or the “Fit”, and those celebrating ignorance, the “Less Fit”, have not fully evolved yet or will never be? Strangely, why some of this highly evolved race is prone to the same ignorance as the “Less Fit”?

 

[JM2C]

Please read my response again, which was not even a response to the sentence you are quoting here. It was a response to these two statements:

"You see how Metis contradicted himself by describing “Moses brought down the first 10 in tablet form”. How can he rightly quote about Moses if he was not sure if he really exist or not?"

"And if you notice he even mentioned the “Seven Noachide Laws”. Was he referring after the flood on which the EVOLUTIONISTS do not agree at all?"

Presumably, the same way I can quote the Bible without believing it's the word of God, or quote Harry Potter without believing the origin of the statement was from Harry Potter.

Again, so? Referring to something doesn't mean believing it.

Read the sentence again.

What preceded the 10 were what we call the seven Noachide Laws.

Who are the “WE” here?

 

[JM2C]

Well, considering I've already seen you quote mine Darwin, you may want to re-address how truthful you actually are.

What do you think? Am I telling the truth when I quote Darwin?

 

[JM2C]

Except that when I accused you of quote mining, you were quote mining.

Sad that you are so out of touch with reality

but proved you wrong, right? When you accused me of quote mining, but turned out that it was you who was lying, it just proved that quote mining is not really a lie after all, right? Or you just don’t know how to apply the words quote mining just like the No True Scotsman?

 

[JM2C]

No, just your lack of debating skills.


And how you quote mining.

Not as bad as your one-liner comment I guess.

 

[JM2C]

Yet I also noticed how you quote mined the article.


You posted partial quotes and did 0not post other aspects that were vital to the understanding of the topic. That's is called quote mining

Give me examples of those quotes.

That is not a true statement.


Pointing out creationist weak methodology of debating IS NOT a means of refuting the lack of evidence they provide.



Creationist NEVER have any credible evidence to refute.

You can’t even explain how evolutionist got the 3,200,000 years on Lucy.

 

[JM2C]

That's not a message it's a question, and it's one that Darwin himself answered in his own time. The answer I gave you is simple. Do you or do you not accept it?

The accurate quote, the context of which you appear to have accidentally missed out, is this:

"But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?It will be more convenient to discuss this question in the chapter on the Imperfection of the Geological Record; and I will here only state that I believe the answer mainly lies in the record being incomparably less perfect than is generally supposed. The crust of the earth is a vast museum; but the natural collections have been imperfectly made, and only at long intervals of time."

- Origin of Species, chapter VI

How so? Why a message can’t be a question? This is what Darwin was saying: “It will be more convenient to discuss this question in the chapter on the Imperfection of the Geological Record;”

In reference to “"But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?”

What is the “Imperfection of the Geological Record” theory in chapter 9? It’s a geological gap that no scientist has ever recorded but only in a theory based on Darwin’s friend, Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology. Now, if there is no geological record because the “earth’s surface is constantly in flux” then the argument of finding them in “countless numbers” cannot be refute at all.

 

[JM2C]

So? He was asking why we DON'T find countless numbers. I explained why, and Darwin himself knew why. We have, however, found thousands.

You don’t understand the question at all. It’s like saying: we won’t find them in “countless numbers” because of the “Imperfection of the Geological Record” based on a theory by Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology. Therefore, one cannot argue or ask “why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?” because of the “Imperfection of the Geological Record”. It’s a circular theories by Darwin.

 

[metis]

Who are the “WE” here?

Those of us in Judaism plus some in other faiths. Th Noachide Laws were those given prior to Abraham and are believed by some to encompass all peoples regardless of what their faith may be. You can find them here with explanation: Seven Laws of Noah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JM2C]

1. True.

2. Lies. The strata are dated using techniques based on the laws of physics. Techniques that provide coherent and reliable results time after time.

3. Lies. Index fossils are simply species whose period of existence has been established using radiometric dating. That means that the approximate age of strata where such species appear can be established without further radiometric dating.

You are wrong! You cannot date Sedimentary strata using K-Ar dating method. What are dated are the igneous rocks by K-Ar dating method. You said it yourself,

For example the out-gassing of Argon from molten rock before it hardens after an eruption for example produces a state that is akin to a clock resetting which allows us to make calculations.

Igneous rock is formed through the cooling and solidification of magma or lava. -wiki

If they can date igneous rock with K-Ar dating method, then they can date the strata, and that’s how they date fossils by dating the igneous rocks first, and that’s how they date the strata by dating igneous rocks first. It’s a circular dating method base on Index Fossil.

You are just like this guy who does not know what he is talking about.

Neither is inherently older than the other. Igneous is created from volcanic activity while sedentary is placed by various different mechanisms in sedentary layers. Sedimentary layers are erosion of other rocks and almost all rock on the earth at one time was igneous. But any specific soil sample doesn't have to be younger or older simply because of its type.

And have you ever thought of actually going to the real sources rather than creationist sources? Just for fun one day?

Sedimentary strata could have come from everywhere and therefore cannot be dated.

 

[JM2C]

Those of us in Judaism plus some in other faiths. Th Noachide Laws were those given prior to Abraham and are believed by some to encompass all peoples regardless of what their faith may be. You can find them here with explanation: Seven Laws of Noah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TheSeven Laws of Noah (Hebrew:שבע מצוות בני נח‎Sheva mitzvot B'nei Noach), or theNoahide Laws, are a set of moral imperatives that, according to theTalmud, were given by God[1]as a binding set of laws for the "children ofNoah" – that is, all of humanity.[2][3] -Wiki

If you believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob then you should be able to understand that evolution did not come from God.

 

[JM2C]

You should stop that then.


Take a class on biology and geology at a college or university, then come back when you can speak about things you actually understand well

When are you and mestemia gonna start debating? I’m not learning anything from you and mestemia. David M, Skeptic, Immortalflame, MonkofReason and Jonathan180iq, these guys are here to debate and I’m learning a lot from them, not that they are right, but you and the two ninjas, you guys are just wasting bandwidth.

 

[metis]

You are wrong! You cannot date Sedimentary strata using K-Ar dating method. What are dated are the igneous rocks by K-Ar dating method. You said it yourself, Igneous rock is formed through the cooling and solidification of magma or lava. -wiki

If they can date igneous rock with K-Ar dating method, then they can date the strata, and that’s how they date fossils by dating the igneous rocks first, and that’s how they date the strata by dating igneous rocks first. It’s a circular dating method base on Index Fossil.

You are just like this guy who does not know what he is talking about.
Sedimentary strata could have come from everywhere and therefore cannot be dated.

False all the way around.

 

[metis]

When are you and mestemia gonna start debating? I’m not learning anything from you and mestemia. David M, Skeptic, Immortalflame, MonkofReason and Jonathan180iq, these guys are here to debate and I’m learning a lot from them, not that they are right, but you and the two ninjas, you guys are just wasting bandwidth.

Not interested.

 

[David M]

If they can date igneous rock with K-Ar dating method, then they can date the strata, and that’s how they date fossils by dating the igneous rocks first, and that’s how they date the strata by dating igneous rocks first. It’s a circular dating method base on Index Fossil.

That is not circular in any way.

Igneous rocks can be dated, that gives the age of those rocks. That's it. Sedimentary rocks, where fossils can be found, can be given date ranges by dating igneous rock layers around them.

You are just like this guy who does not know what he is talking about.

The level of projection is strong here.

Sedimentary strata could have come from everywhere and therefore cannot be dated.

No, Sedimentary strata cannot come from "everywhere". They have to be deposited in relation to other strata around them and that means that they can be given dates. They just can't be directly dates which is why they often have a wider date range assigned to them.

 

[David M]

Is that mean you belong to the more highly evolved race or the “Fit”, and those celebrating ignorance, the “Less Fit”, have not fully evolved yet or will never be? Strangely, why some of this highly evolved race is prone to the same ignorance as the “Less Fit”?

Nope, just that there is a lot of evidence out there if people can be bothered to look for it with an open mind.

 

[David M]

Let’s not get caught up in semantics here since you and I knew that we don’t know the language or terms use by scientists.

You certainly don't.

How do you suppose to measure the millions of years if you can’t measure it with half-life? If you don’t like the term “clocking” then, how about reset or set to zero? Or radioactive rocks are like a clock because they decay into other elements. Hence: The term “clocking” or the starts of decaying of parent isotopes into daughter isotopes. Any way you look at it, it’s like a clock.

You don't "measure half-lives", which is what you claimed. You measure the ages of rocks by measuring the relative quantities of specific radioactive isotopes in the materials. Half-lives are used to calculate the age based on the measurements of those isotope ratios.

Rocks are not "like clocks". Its a gross oversimplification that I suspect you are using because you don't understand the underlying science. Just use the correct terminology which you can get from Wikipedia.

“Potassium–argon dating, abbreviatedK–Ar dating, is aradiometric datingmethod used ingeochronologyandarchaeology. It is based on measurement of the product of theradioactivedecay of anisotopeofpotassium(K) intoargon(Ar). Potassium is a common element found in many materials, such asmicas,clay minerals,tephra, andevaporites. In these materials, the decay product40Ar is able to escape the liquid (molten) rock, but starts to accumulate when the rock solidifies (recrystallizes). Time since recrystallization is calculated by measuring the ratio of the amount of40Ar accumulated to the amount of40K remaining.

The longhalf-lifeof40K allows the method to be used to calculate theabsolute ageof samples from 200,000 to 5 million years ago.[1]” -wiki

Good, you can quote from Wiki, but you still don't seem to be able to process the information.

 

[McBell]

but proved you wrong, right? When you accused me of quote mining, but turned out that it was you who was lying, it just proved that quote mining is not really a lie after all, right? Or you just don’t know how to apply the words quote mining just like the No True Scotsman?

Except I was not lying.
You were quote mining.

The No True Scotsman is a logical fallacy you implore far to often.

The fact that you still are unable to comprehend that exchange and are still misrepresenting it in other threads reveals your dishonesty.