1/8/2013 10:46 AM
If you don't want to argue about it anymore, why do you continue to argue about it?
1/8/2013 10:51 AM
I'm responding for a few reasons:

1. bad_luck made an incredibly ignorant post after I had left the topic and planned not to return, so I addressed that to call him out for his ignorance.

2. It's entertaining in some way, but the value of that entertainment has dropped off considerably with the repetitiveness of his posts.

3. I'm honestly curious as to how long he'll keep the parrot routine going. Will he simply stop posting one day, or will he say something new? Oh, the suspense. *rolls eyes*

1/8/2013 10:59 AM
Posted by dahsdebater on 1/8/2013 2:34:00 AM (view original):
Genghis, bad_luck, either of you wish you could change your votes now?
This.  Please respond.
1/8/2013 10:59 AM
Posted by bistiza on 1/8/2013 10:42:00 AM (view original):
It was a debate, and it ended when you gave up by refusing to engage in it in any real fashion. The evidence was provided, you gave up and played games, so you lost. Deal with it.
I directly quoted the three things you gave as evidence. Your c14 and petrified tree arguments have been directly refuted. Your other argument, "the first and second laws if thermodynamics," can't be refuted because it isn't an argument. Nothing in those laws precludes an old earth.

This debate IS over. It ended a century ago when it was conclusively proven that the earth is billions of years old. Your inability to think critically doesn't change that.
1/8/2013 11:01 AM
Posted by dahsdebater on 1/8/2013 10:59:00 AM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 1/8/2013 2:34:00 AM (view original):
Genghis, bad_luck, either of you wish you could change your votes now?
This.  Please respond.
I do. Bis has taken this in a surprise landslide.
1/8/2013 11:10 AM
This debate IS over. It ended a century ago when it was conclusively proven that the earth is billions of years old. Your inability to think critically doesn't change that.

The debate is over, and it was over long ago. Nothing was conclusively proven in either direction, which only serves to support my position of neutrality. Your inability to think for yourself in even a small way regarding this topic doesn't change that.

As for dahs and the original topic, it needs more options, because my vote would be for bad_luck - at least with regard to his recent discussions. Funny, I used to agree with him on several things. I didn't realize how ignorant he would become in other areas.
1/8/2013 11:11 AM
Please address your three pieces of "evidence."

Two have been directly refuted.

One isn't evidence at all, just a statement.
1/8/2013 11:14 AM
Or continue to argue that all credible scientists are wrong and only you are smart enough to see ALL THE EVIDENCE for a young earth.

Of course, you aren't interested in sharing any of that evidence.
1/8/2013 11:14 AM
Learn to read. Once again:

The debate is NEVER going to be started again, no matter what you say. Deal with it.
1/8/2013 11:16 AM
Really, because you continue to avoid it and that means I win by bistiza logic. You are hiding in the hills, scared to reveal any other weak conspiracy theory-esque "evidence" you have. I think you're a religious fundamentalist who can't admit that science is right and the bible isn't literal.
1/8/2013 11:21 AM
There's no avoidance. You lost when you gave up as you refused on MANY occasions to address the evidence. You were given plenty of chances to do it and played games instead.

As for what you think of me, I don't care. It's hilarious how wrong you are (rather you believe that or not).

Honestly, though, the opinion of someone whose way of dealing with those who disagree with him is to attack like a 14th century lynch mob means less than nothing to me.

1/8/2013 11:24 AM
I address your evidence directly. You refused to reply.

Two of the things you gave as evidence (C14 & petrified trees) have been DIRECTLY refuted.

The third, "first and second laws of thermodynamics," isn't an argument for a young earth. When this was pointed out to you (several times), your response was: go read them. I've read them. Nothing in them precludes an old earth.

You gave up.

I win.
1/8/2013 11:24 AM
Posted by dahsdebater on 1/8/2013 10:59:00 AM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 1/8/2013 2:34:00 AM (view original):
Genghis, bad_luck, either of you wish you could change your votes now?
This.  Please respond.
Maybe. I can see both sides of the issue. If you can't, it's because you're not open-minded like me. I'm done here.
1/8/2013 11:25 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 1/7/2013 1:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 1/7/2013 11:47:00 AM (view original):
Here is a direct copy of your "evidence" post:

Bistiza, could you give one - 1! - piece of "evidence" that the earth is NOT billions of years old?  You claimed that there is evidence on both sides.  And can you show me any evidence that any scientists believe that?
The first and second laws of thermodynamics. 

The fact that carbon-14 should break down to virtually nothing past a certain point in terms of dates and yet it is difficult to find carbon without carbon-14, which with an old earth model should be virtually non-existent much of the time.

The fossil record shows many strata of rock which are thought to be formed over "millions of years" can actually form quite quickly. Sometimes there are fossils, including petrified trees, which span straight through several layers indicating they may have formed quite suddenly.


See. It's your "evidence."

All debunked.
See. Here is the entirety of your evidence. All debunked.
1/8/2013 11:27 AM
You gave up. I win.

No, you gave up long ago and now you want to come back and try again.

As I said before, the game was over hours ago. Your team lost. Go home, kid.

We're not going to re-start a long over game just because you gave up before and can't accept defeat.
of 37

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.