Krispin;366345 said:
Yes I did read the entire article. The points you mentioned (agent orange, thalidomide) may have been reclassified, but the age of the Earth and the time of human appearance has been confirmed over and over and over and over again. It is therefore more reasonable to believe it than to believe the contradictory Biblical account. Therefore, you believe in something unreasonable. Therefore you are insane.
What I find so amusing about a little fella like you is that you're just sooooo anxious to denigrate and condemn that you feel obligated, for whatever self-absorbed reasons, create an issue where there is none.
I espoused no belief, on either side of the supposed argument, yet you attributed such to me by your own volition.
Sad, sad and somewhat desperate.
Your premature supposition that my contribution somehow stands in direct opposition to your own stated position and is then somehow even a threat to same is not only fallacious but also irrational given the content of my post.
And the use of the appellation "insane" is not only simply a hollow, self-serving deprecation, it's also just plain immature.
(This is a forum for adults, to discuss adult issues in an adult fashion. If you are unable to comport yourself properly perhaps you should explore the option of leaving before you are "asked" to leave. Your profile contains no age information, yet you list yourself as a student; you must be 18 years of age to obtain membership in [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words].)
You claim both reason and sanity as your method, you also claim to have read the entire article I cited, yet if these were actually true (presuming you have the requisite intelligence to understand the article's intent, of course) then you would have realized that the scientist who posted this article presented an entirely plausible explanation, using almost universally accepted precepts and methodology (Newtonian & Einsteinian physics in general) to offer proof as to how simple mistranslations from the source document and academic hubris have, in aggregate, over time, created a conceptual rift in understanding wherein none exists in actuality.
To simplify for you: the oft cited, and at times heated, dichotomy between the respective viewpoints, each, in turn, espousing and/or derrogating various ancient observations then modern deduction and religious establisHydromaxent, are, in fact, simply symptomatic of the diametricity imposed via rampantly divergent perspectives, aggravated by obdurate adherence to arbitrary paradigms, quite frequently in the presence of viable alternatives, and propagated to this very day due to blatant hostility from each party toward the other replacing healthy, rational intellectual discourse between adults.
Closing ones mind to new sources of insight and information is pathetic enough; closing ones mind to the
possibility of new sources of same existing is pitiable and regressive.
From now on ensure someone has actually stated a position before you attempt to attack it in so specious a fashion. A reply on your part is neither warranted, nor invited, yet inevitable I imagine; take care to ensure it is salient and mature.