A Naturalistic Fairy Tale-Part XIII

And then as the Earth did get older, it did indeed get older.1 In 1640, the Earth was 5644 years old. In the 1700’s it was between 75000 and several billion years old. Thus disproving the Cretards2 notion that the Earth was created as the Bible states. Thank Science that we are not naturaltards or evotards like the clearly evident Cretards and IDiots (which we do assert absolutely are the same; mentally retarded (IQ lower than 70-75; and impairments in adaptive functioning; we don’t like bigotry unless it involves Christians–thank you very much).3 By the early 1800’s we did definitely know that the world was definitely old. And in those 1800’s did the Earth age a bit–we did determine that it was 100,000 to several billions of years old. We then thought it was 20-million to several billions of years old. Then in 1905, did we figure out the truth, although we were wrong about every previous estimate. We did become intelligent. We did discover that the Earth was 4.55 Billion years old. Thank Science and Charles Darwin (Deity-like fellow; Praise Science; we don’t believe in deities), that we did come to know through evolution that the world must be much older than several millions of years.4 Our absolute truth (theory=truth; consensus=truth) wouldn’t work otherwise. Then did the chemical age of the Earth be determined at 8 Billion Years (dumb; 1927; early view). Then we became a bit smarter and determined the age of the Earth at 1.6 to 3 Billion Years Old (1927 also; smarter; dumb; not quite as dumb). In 1956, we did continue to get much, much smarter. We did again narrow in on 4.5 Billion +-.07 years for the age of the Earth. And in the year 1998, we did finally determine the age of the Earth to be 4.55 +- .02 Billion years of age.

1 http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geohist.html
2 http://morsdei.wordpress.com/2008/10/11/cretards-again/
3 http://www.aamr.org/Policies/faq_mental_retardation.shtml
4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

Advertisements

4 Responses

  1. On ID and creationists sites, all you hear are claims that deny the most current advances in biology that confirm or tweak evolutionary theory. And complaints that evolution and cosmology are always changing, in contradistinction to ID and religious claims, which never change.[1]

    On the other hand, evolution sites provide actual and even interesting facts and results in connection with their arguments. Today, for example, ERV[2] presented, in connection with a rebuttal of Michael Behe’s claim about the HIV virus, a fascinating account of “sex” among viruses, and how it contributes to their evolution.

    Although “Naturalistic Fairy Tales” and similar posts may be marginally humorous,[3] I much prefer to read new stuff about the way the world works. That’s why I may give up on this site altogether.[4] Same old stuff; no new facts, no new arguments.

    ================
    [1] Did you read the assigned “Voodoo Science” book? I thought not. On page 39, Park says about the changes that science undergoes: “Many people are uneasy standing on such loose soil; they seek a certainty that science cannot offer. For these people, the unchanging dictates of ancient religious beliefs, or the absolute assurances of zealots, have a more powerful appeal. Paradoxically, however, their yearning for certainty is often mixed with a respect for science. They long to be told that that modern science validates the teachings of some ancient scripture or New Age guru. The purveyors of pseudoscience have been quick to exploit their ambivalence.” (Remember that Park did not discuss ID or creationism at all in his book.)

    [2] http://scienceblogs.com/erv/2008/10/recombination_retrovirus_sex.php#more. Abagail Smith is a loud-mouth atheist, but she knows her stuff and says it well.

    [3] Although Poe’s law makes it hard to tell whether they are serious or parodies.

    [4] The planned trip to Australia did not come off. Six days before departure, my cardiologist sent me to a tour of Regions Hospital instead, for a cardiac stent. Then, the day after I got out of the hospital, my 99 1/2 year old mother died. God’s will that we didn’t go? I don’t know. Might have been just a coincidence.

  2. On the other hand, evolution sites provide actual and even interesting facts and results in connection with their arguments. Today, for example, ERV[2] presented, in connection with a rebuttal of Michael Behe’s claim about the HIV virus, a fascinating account of “sex” among viruses, and how it contributes to their evolution.

    Abbie comes across to me as high on arrogance, vitriol, and overstatement, but less impressive of “actual facts,” or even “interesting facts.” But I suppose an “interesting fact” is in the eye of the beholder. What does an actual fact contrast with?

    Although “Naturalistic Fairy Tales” and similar posts may be marginally humorous,[3] I much prefer to read new stuff about the way the world works. That’s why I may give up on this site altogether.[4] Same old stuff; no new facts, no new arguments.

    Sorry to disappoint.

    [1] Did you read the assigned “Voodoo Science” book? I thought not. On page 39, Park says about the changes that science undergoes: “Many people are uneasy standing on such loose soil; they seek a certainty that science cannot offer. For these people, the unchanging dictates of ancient religious beliefs, or the absolute assurances of zealots, have a more powerful appeal. Paradoxically, however, their yearning for certainty is often mixed with a respect for science. They long to be told that that modern science validates the teachings of some ancient scripture or New Age guru. The purveyors of pseudoscience have been quick to exploit their ambivalence.” (Remember that Park did not discuss ID or creationism at all in his book.)

    I like a good cynical quote as well as anyone, but I don’t know, that one doesn’t impress me. Too mainstream, too predictable, too many words to say, “there are a lot of stupid religious folks out there (Praise Science).” No, as the bad student I am, I must confess, I did not complete the required reading. More disappointment (or perhaps not as you predicted it–there’s some satisfaction in that).

    [4] The planned trip to Australia did not come off. Six days before departure, my cardiologist sent me to a tour of Regions Hospital instead, for a cardiac stent. Then, the day after I got out of the hospital, my 99 1/2 year old mother died. God’s will that we didn’t go? I don’t know. Might have been just a coincidence.

    Sorry to hear that. That’s a lot of difficult stuff. Seems like could have been His will that you didn’t go.

    Anyway, if you decide to go on to greener intellectual pastures–take care.

  3. The planned trip to Australia did not come off. Six days before departure, my cardiologist sent me to a tour of Regions Hospital instead, for a cardiac stent. Then, the day after I got out of the hospital, my 99 1/2 year old mother died. God’s will that we didn’t go? I don’t know. Might have been just a coincidence.

    I am also sorry to hear of your illness and loss, Olorin. Will pray for your health and sorrow!

  4. Shrink: “Sorry to hear that. That’s a lot of difficult stuff. Seems like could have been His will that you didn’t go.”

    dwilli58: “I am also sorry to hear of your illness and loss, Olorin. Will pray for your health and sorrow!”

    Thank you both for your prayers and concerns. (That is something one doesn’t get from Abbie Smith on a routine basis.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: