1/7/2013 2:16 PM
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?
1/7/2013 2:17 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 1/7/2013 11:57:00 AM (view original):
I posted a direct quote from you.

One of your arguments is easily debunked, C14 is produced in the atmosphere. A second, the petrified tree argument, is debunked here.

Your argument about the laws of thermodynamics isn't really an argument. Yes, the laws exist. No, they don't preclude an old earth.

I guess this isn't over until you stop posting.
Here is where it is debunked.
1/7/2013 2:21 PM
bis, you think you "won?" bad_luck dropped you like Kostya Tszyu dropped Zab Judah. And like Zab, you tried to get up and talk **** and you just fell back down, and you can't accept that you got beat because you're brains are too scrambled from the beating you took. Train harder next time, Zab.

Either we've found bad_luck's other identity or someone else has no idea what's going on here.

I'm guessing the former. Nice try agreeing with yourself there. Thanks for another laugh.
1/7/2013 2:24 PM
Still waiting for you to explain how the "evidence" I quoted directly from your post is valid.

Thanks.
1/7/2013 2:26 PM
Posted by bistiza on 1/7/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):
bis, you think you "won?" bad_luck dropped you like Kostya Tszyu dropped Zab Judah. And like Zab, you tried to get up and talk **** and you just fell back down, and you can't accept that you got beat because you're brains are too scrambled from the beating you took. Train harder next time, Zab.

Either we've found bad_luck's other identity or someone else has no idea what's going on here.

I'm guessing the former. Nice try agreeing with yourself there. Thanks for another laugh.

Uh huh. Apparently, the whole scientific community has no idea what's going on, either. But some kid googling feeble "objections" that have been discredited for decades gets it. I wish I owned the tin foil hat store in your neighborhood, kiddo.

1/7/2013 2:27 PM
The game's been over for hours. Your team lost. Go home, kid.


1/7/2013 2:29 PM
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.


Bistiza's one and only post of the evidence for a young earth.

Wow.

You are "undecided" on the age of the earth and this is all you can come up with?

No wonder you don't want to talk about it.
1/7/2013 2:30 PM
Uh huh. Apparently, the whole scientific community has no idea what's going on, either. But some kid googling feeble "objections" that have been discredited for decades gets it. I wish I owned the tin foil hat store in your neighborhood, kiddo.

The whole scientific community doesn't agree, wise guy. I've done far more research than you realize, but as for "googling", you might want to give that a whirl yourself before you keep spouting more non-truths.
1/7/2013 2:31 PM
Bistiza's one and only post of the evidence for a young earth. Wow. You are "undecided" on the age of the earth and this is all you can come up with? No wonder you don't want to talk about it.

I could bury you under mounds of evidence if I wanted. There's no point. We've been over this before.

The game's been over for hours. Your team lost. Go home, kid.

1/7/2013 2:32 PM
So much research and you don't want to talk about it?

I wonder why.
1/7/2013 2:47 PM
So much research and you don't want to talk about it? I wonder why.

Pick one:

1. You're a close-minded person, so you who would argue no matter how much evidence I showed you.

2. You'll believe the mainstream like a sheep, so you would argue no matter how much evidence I showed you.

3. You can't think for yourself, so you would argue no matter how much evidence I showed you.

4. You resort to childish tactics such as personal attacks, and are therefore not worth my time to engage in debate.

All of the above are true, but pick one and that's why I won't debate it with you.

Once again:

The game's been over for hours. Your team lost. Go home, kid.
1/7/2013 2:50 PM
Well it is.

One guy is arguing that a young earth is likely and that all of science is wrong. One guy is arguing that that is an incredibly stupid position.

Who lost?
1/7/2013 2:50 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 1/7/2013 2:29:00 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.


Bistiza's one and only post of the evidence for a young earth.

Wow.

You are "undecided" on the age of the earth and this is all you can come up with?

No wonder you don't want to talk about it.
Here it is again, just so we keep track of who's arguing what.
1/7/2013 2:56 PM
No.

One guy is arguing we should keep debating something that ended long ago when he gave up but now he wants it to begin again.

The other guy won't play his games but keeps responding because he's getting entertained by it, though he's quickly becoming bored so he may very well stop soon.

The debate is NEVER going to be started again, no matter what you say. Deal with it.
1/7/2013 2:57 PM
If you don't want to talk about it anymore, I understand. I wouldn't want to talk about it if I said something as stupid as you.
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.