VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 12:25:10 06/09/99 Wed
Author: daniel
Subject: Re: Time continued
In reply to: David C. Wise 's message, "Re: Time continued" on 12:24:56 06/08/99 Tue


> <Daniel:>
> > P.S. Dr Gary Parker of AIG told me that the rate of
> > radiometric decay has been seen to change under high
> > energy bombardment.
>
> Again I ask you (in order of decreasing priority):
> 1. how much did their rates change?
> 2. just what effect do you wish to claim that that
> rate change would have? (i.e., just how much do you
> want to claim that radiometric dating is off by; e.g.,
> do you wish to claim that it falsely makes
> 10,000-year-old rock look like it's 1 billion years
> old?)
> 3. which isotopes?
> 4. what kind of decay was involved?

I am attempting to contact Gary with your post.


> <Daniel:>
> > > > Have you read the Creation Ex Nihilo Technical
> > > Journal?
> > > >
> > >
> <Kevin:>
> > > I have read many of it's articles.
> > >
> >
> <Daniel:>
> > And so it should be quite obvious to you that no real
> > scientific effort has been made by anyone that has
> > published in this magazine. Reminds me of studying
> > the devil's work. I study it so that I can know that
> > what ever is said is likley untrue. I will maintain
> > my subscription so that I will always know what
> > scientific claims are made in this poorly,
> > unsubstantiated Journal are substantially untrue.
> >
> > Thank you for the opportunity for me to easily
> > identify error. All articles written in the creation
> > ex nihilo journal are false.
> >
>
> Does this mean that you have finally seen the light
> about creation science?

Yes, I have seen the light. It is clear that you do not understand sarcasm. I will not write in this tone again. If you honestly believe that ALL articles in Creation Ex Nihilo are false, then your prejudice has seen fit to blind you.

Daniel

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.