RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (2) < [1] 2 >   
  Topic: Reserved for AFDave's YEC evidence< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1773
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,04:29   

Since AFDave continues to shine us on with his promise to provide his positive evidence for Young Earth Creationism, I thought I'd give him a special thread just for that purpose.

Go on Dave, quit being a tease!  Start presenting that positive evidence for YEC and a literal Bible!  Suggested topics include

A literal Noah's flood
Evidence that the earth is only 6000+ years old
Definition and evidence for 'kinds'
Geocentric earth
Cattle genetics affected by striped and spotted rods

C'mon Dave, you've been quite entertaining so far, in a bumbling clown kinda way.  So put that big red nose back on you flight school washout, and edjamacate we evilutionists!

P.S. If you get stumped, you can always answer those questions about scientific peer review  ;)

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
BWE



Posts: 1898
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,05:01   

Dave, it would be helpful if you start here.

This is an age appropriate overview of plate tectonics. :)  There are certainly nuances that this overview leaves out but from a specifically geological perspective, it summarizes core knowledge nicely.

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,06:55   

Why is it a good idea to start a new thread devoted to AFDave? He's got way too many as it is. If there was a way to merge all the AFD threads into one and delete the originals, I'd be all for it.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,07:05   

I'd also not mind rolling AFDave up into one thread.

   
GCT



Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,07:11   

Agreed here as well.  Let's not start any more AFDave threads, unless there is some way to do it humorously.  If you can make us all laugh, then I might be open to it.  As it is though, he's not really funny.  He's just pathetic.

  
sir_toejam



Posts: 846
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,09:56   

Quote
Why is it a good idea to start a new thread devoted to AFDave? He's got way too many as it is. If there was a way to merge all the AFD threads into one and delete the originals, I'd be all for it.


didn't Wes already attempt this?

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,11:20   

I think it's just a little significant that Dave has yet to even post to this thread. I can't imagine he doesn't know it's here. It only adds further confirmation (if any were needed) that Dave doesn't actually have any YEC evidence.

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
sir_toejam



Posts: 846
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,11:28   

on the contrary, Dave has all the "evidence" HE needs.

I asked him point blank if he thought he had posted tons of evidence in his threads that the rest of us had simply ignored, to which he of course replied that he did.

What you saw him posting IS how he views evidence.

his mind works very differently from ours.  

Try to pretend you're speaking to a chimp that has no idea what we mean by evidence, and simply isn't capable of even grasping the concept.

no, wait, IIRC, didn't somebody recently demonstrate that a chimp could deductively reason that paint could cause color and not a knife?

so, put chimps above Dave.  I give up, you'll have to come up with another analogous critter that reasons like Dave, if there exists such a thing.

hmm, maybe Dave is the space alien Behe et. al. have been looking for?

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,11:44   

Quote (ericmurphy @ May 24 2006,16:20)
I think it's just a little significant that Dave has yet to even post to this thread. I can't imagine he doesn't know it's here. It only adds further confirmation (if any were needed) that Dave doesn't actually have any YEC evidence.

I suspect AFD won't post here. He seems to be trying hard to conduct this 'debate' on his terms, not ours.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,11:51   

But, you know, just for appearances' sake, and maybe to shut us up about how he ain't got nothin.' I mean, I wouldn't expect him to actually come up with evidence here, but it must be kind of embarrassing for him to know this thread is up here, and not to have even made an appearance...

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1773
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 24 2006,18:13   

AFDave Evasion Watch

27 days since AFDave made this promise of evidence to support his original GOD hypothesis YEC claims

     
Quote
Posted  by AFDave:  April 27 2006,19:10
No, Arlen, there are mountains of evidence ... maybe not evidence to your liking ... but there is evidence alright, and my guess is you've probably seen alot of it already ...

But that's OK, I'll be giving it again ...


23 days since AFDave's Updated GOD hypothesis with the same YEC claims

     
Quote
Postedby AFDave: May 01 2006,08:19
C. All of human kind descended from two genetically rich parents, Adam and Eve, but did not diversify significantly due to minimal geographic isolation.  My hypothesis proposes that there was only one large "super-continent" prior to the Great Flood of Noah, thus minimizing geographic isolation and resultant natural selection and specialization/diversification.  The same applies to animals except that I make no proposal as to HOW MANY animals there were initially.  Obviously, there would have to be at least one pair of each 'kind' (a term to be defined later)

D. Early man was created perfectly, i.e. no deleterious genetic mutations.  It is proposed that early man was vigorous, healthy and possibly taller than modern humans.  Early families were very large--on the order of 30 to 50 kids per couple and lives were long, many over 900 years.  Sons routinely married their sisters in the ante-diluvian world with no worries of genetic defects.  The first laws prohibiting close marriages did not occur until the time of Moses by which time we assume that accumulated harmful genetic mutations would have been a significant consideration.

E. Mankind chose NOT to do God's will very early on (just as all young children choose not to do parents' will), thus prompting God to institute a system for persuading humans to admit their folly and begin doing His will, for "redeeming" humans who choose this path, and for reminding humans that the present physical world is only a "proving ground" or "training camp" for the next world which will be created at a definite point in the future.  These events are commonly called the Fall and the Curse by Christian Theologians.

F. God allowed the choices of mankind to take their natural course for the most part, intervening in the affairs of men sporadically and briefly.  Most of the "day-to-day management" of Planet Earth was delegated to mankind himself, similar to how modern parents delegate the day-to-day management of their children to a school or a day care center.

G. The natural result of collective disobedience to the revealed will of God was an extremely corrupt society--i.e. rampant dishonesty, injustice, murder, theft, etc.--which was terminated by God through the agency of a global, life-destroying flood--the Flood of Noah described in Genesis.  

H. The Global Flood of Noah was an immense cataclysm of enormous tectonic, volcanic and hydraulic upheaval.  It completely reshaped the ante-diluvian world and resulted in massive, worldwide sedimentation and fossilization, mountain range uplift, sea basin lowering, continent separation, and climate change.  The Flood was survived in a floating ark by 8 humans (four couples) and one or more pairs of terrestrial, air-breathing, genetically rich animals and birds. The diversity we see in the living world today is the result of subsequent geographic separation and isolation of species and natural selection.

I. Following the Global Flood, we hypothesize an Ice Age of undetermined duration brought on by the massive climate changes induced by the Flood.  It was during this time that the dinosaurs and many other species died out. Since the time of the Ice Age, the structure of the earth's crust and the climate which followed, has not changed appreciably, and uniformitarian principles may now be applied to geological studies.

J. We hypothesize a supernatural intervention by God at the Tower of Babel which instantly and miraculously created several new languages (we think on the order of 12 or so), whereas prior to this event, there was only one language.



Still no positive evidence of YEC from AFDave

Presented as a public service for those who can't stand a liar of any belief, from atheist to religious fundy.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1773
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 25 2006,09:56   

AFDave Evasion Watch

28    days since AFDave made his promise of evidence to support his original GOD hypothesis YEC claims.

24    days since AFDave's Updated GOD hypothesis with the same YEC claims

Still no positive evidence of YEC from AFDave

Presented as a public service for those who can't stand a liar of any belief, from atheist to religious fundy.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 25 2006,10:00   

Hmmm... still seems to be a lot of tumbleweeds and doors blowing open and shut in the wind, here...

Seriously, I don't think he's gonna show. AFD is very manly, you see, used to be in the Air Force and all, and he certainly isn't gonna let himself be pushed around by a bunch of liberals...

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Crabby Appleton



Posts: 250
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 26 2006,19:43   

Hey! He wasn't a flight school washout. He has seat time in both the T-38 and the UH-1, both of which are Phase 3 aircraft. He just couldn't finish his B-2 Training.

Maybe it was because he was doing too much 30,000/Mach 1 Geology while flying over the Grand Canyon? (What a Grand thing that Flood must have been! )

I always limited myself to Geology of the 50/50 type in the interest of safety of course.

  
sir_toejam



Posts: 846
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 26 2006,20:34   

new face? or did i miss it?

if not, welcome crabby.

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1773
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,03:28   

AFDave Evasion Watch

30    days since AFDave made his promise of evidence to support his original GOD hypothesis YEC claims.

26    days since AFDave's Updated GOD hypothesis with the same YEC claims

Still no positive evidence of YEC from AFDave

Quote
AFDave,

Just a quick question:
Why AREN'T you presenting your YEC evidence?


--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,03:49   

Quote (Crabby Appleton @ May 27 2006,00:43)
Hey! He wasn't a flight school washout. He has seat time in both the T-38 and the UH-1, both of which are Phase 3 aircraft. He just couldn't finish his B-2 Training.

Maybe it was because he was doing too much 30,000/Mach 1 Geology while flying over the Grand Canyon? (What a Grand thing that Flood must have been! )

I always limited myself to Geology of the 50/50 type in the interest of safety of course.

Welcome Crabby,
I'm not Air Farce, my patriotic service was done on salt water, but I grew up in a mixed Army/AirForce household and am familiar enough with both to have suspicions about Dave's accomplishments.  But I don't know what you mean by "phase 3".  This would be something new to me; would you care to explain what it means?

Quote
AFDave,

Just a quick question:
Why AREN'T you presenting your YEC evidence?


--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
Crabby Appleton



Posts: 250
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,19:37   

Yipper. I'm new, thanks for the welcomes.

Paul, I was a squid too.

My comment was about Air Force Special Undergrad Pilot Training (SUPT). There are three phases, Academic and Pre Flight, Primary Aircraft and Advanced Aircraft. The last is where you start to focus on a specialty. The T-38 pipeline leads to fighter/bomber track and UH-1 leads to choppers. With completion of the third phase you're considered a pilot and move on to your specialty.

AFDave claims seat time in a T-38 AND a UH-1 but he only  claims B-2 Simulator time. Sounds like he'd reached his level of Irreducible Complexity.

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,11:36   

Quote (Crabby Appleton @ May 28 2006,00:37)
Sounds like he'd reached his level of Irreducible Complexity.

HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa
HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa
HeeHeeHee...HooHooHoo...HaHaHa

<shakes self><cough,cough>Ehem,

Brilliant Crabby, brilliant.

That is precisely what I thought, though I wasn't acquainted with exact terminology, and you did say it so much better.

When I was little the pilots down at Pope and Simmons were gods to me and they were certainly not shy about basking in the adulation they were buried under.  Yet AirFarceDave does not seem to want to bragg about the operational aircraft he flew.  Why wouldn't he also bragg about his basic and primary aircraft if that T-38 was so important to him.  (I don't know, does the Air Force still use Tweetybirds?)  And why would the Air Force waste time getting someone qualified in advanced jet trainers only to stick them in UH-1's?

Thanks Crabby, you made my day.

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
Crabby Appleton



Posts: 250
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,20:50   

Quote (Paul Flocken @ May 28 2006,16:36)
AirFarceDave does not seem to want to bragg about the operational aircraft he flew.  Why wouldn't he also bragg about his basic and primary aircraft if that T-38 was so important to him.  (I don't know, does the Air Force still use Tweetybirds?)  And why would the Air Force waste time getting someone qualified in advanced jet trainers only to stick them in UH-1's?

Thanks Crabby, you made my day.

They only use Tweetybirds when they're trying to hunt down puddycats.

His claimed Air Force record jumps out at anyone with experience for 3 reasons, seat time in 2 different phase 3 trainers (T-38 and Huey), the lack of operational aircraft experience and the track he seems to have been on, B-2 bomber.

Why didn't he finish B-2 training? The DoD doesn't like to spend large amounts of money training someone and NOT get some sort of return on their money. Two options come to mind, the B-2 was too complex for him as I've already alluded OR, since the B-2 is a nuclear weapons delivery system, maybe he wasn't considered mentally stable enough to finish training. I won't conjecture.

What to do with someone like this? You could use him as a T-38 instructor (if he's capable of that), or let him fly Hueys on S&R type missions till he's cashiered.

Either way he's NOT the AFStud he'd like us to believe.

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,21:05   

Interesting that he hasn't posted his "written language has only existed for 5,500 years, therefore the earth is only 6,000 years old" theory on this thread.

I'm assuming it's not because he's embarrassed by the scathing reception his "evidence" received. First, because he's clearly unembarrassable, and second, because he undoubtedly thinks he's scored another touchdown against those evilutionists.

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
sir_toejam



Posts: 846
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 29 2006,08:25   

the obvious answer is that it isn't his thread.

someone made the argument that he constantly wants us to do battle on his terms.

why would we expect he would want to present his "evidence" on our terms?

  
guthrie



Posts: 696
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 29 2006,11:32   

Yes, in that sense he is just using good military tactics.
And in that vein, would you ex servicemen or whatever you like to call yourselves, care to explain in plain english what you are talking about with regards to Daves flying time?

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 29 2006,17:39   

Guthrie,
To answer you,
If you had flown the big, fast jetfighters of the airforce(say like the ones the Thunderbirds* fly or the Blue Angels fly for the Navy) would you bragg about the training aircraft you started out in?  The airforce also doesn't spend the money training a pilot for the big, fast jets and then waste it (pilots are not cheap), by assigning him to a helo squadron, without some cause.  Crabby's snide suggestion was that Dave was doing something in the air he shouldn't have been, ("Maybe it was because he was doing too much 30,000/Mach 1 Geology while flying over the Grand Canyon?), but that was more humor than serious speculation.  Conversely, DaveTard might have started out in helo's instead, but that doesn't make sense to me either.  People join the airforce because they want to fly jets.  People who want to fly helo's (hard to believe, but yes, they do exist) join the Army or the Marine Corps.  DaveTard is certainly a pilot, we're not suggesting that he is not, but I think that for some reason he was less than desirable for the airforce at the original role he started out in.  Crabby's final suggestion, that he was cashiered, is a bit more than I would suggest but who knows absent any real information from DaveTard.  Strangely, despite the mild aspersians we have cast on his career, he hasn't deigned to respond.  Is it possible we struck the right nerve with the right nail?  He served on active duty for ten years.  Long time with no operational aircraft sticktime for a pilot.  I know he's reading this thread because he actually answered Crabby, but he did it in another thread.  I presume to avoid getting caught in this thread.

Crabby's post:
Crabby Appleton @ May 27 2006,00:43
Quote
Hey! He wasn't a flight school washout. He has seat time in both the T-38 and the UH-1, both of which are Phase 3 aircraft. He just couldn't finish his B-2 Training.


AirFarceDaveTard's reply on page 27 of AF Dave's UPDATED Creator God Hypothesis
afdave @ May 27 2006,09:21
Quote
Good work Appleton ... just curious ... where did you find the info?  Oh ... and I didn't apply to the B-2 program.  Had no interest in being a bomber guy ... too boring.  I asked for the B-2 Sim Instructor position as a comfy "getting out" job.

Scroll down to the bottom of post #26(or fifth post up from the bottom if that is easier).

Oh yeah, bombers are too boring for manly AFDave, who apparently didn't fly anything more exciting than trainers or the most stolidly boring helicopter in the entire inventory.  (T-38's though, nonetheless, are sweet little aircraft.  I wouldn't turn my nose up at one.)  Come on Dave tell us a little more about your flying for the airforce.  It can't be as bad as I have disparaged.

*Incidentally the T-38 was actually used by the Thunderbirds in the late seventies and early eighties.  They were replaced by the F-16 in 1983.  Their use had more to do with economy than anything else because of the various oil crises(sp?) of the seventies.  The Thunderbirds actually lost part of a show year because of fuel costs.

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
sir_toejam



Posts: 846
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 29 2006,17:51   

why does this kinda feel like shining a magnifying glass on an ant?

... don't stop 'till he starts to smoke, tho.

  
Crabby Appleton



Posts: 250
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 29 2006,20:21   

Well I'm not going to chase different threads to cover one topic.

Dave admits that bombers were too boring so he probably had the same feelings about the A-10 (the F-117 falls into the same category since it ought to be designated the A-117), that leaves the F-15 and F-16.

Dave wanted to be a shit hot fighter pilot stud but he didn't have the right stuff.

The how and why of his eggbeater seat time is another issue. Flying Hueys when you wanted to fly Falcons or Eagles had to be a smack to the old ego/onions.

Just a quick question:
Why AREN'T you presenting your YEC evidence?

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 30 2006,01:24   

Quote
Dave admits that bombers were too boring so he probably had the same feelings about the ...
I haven't been following all this Air Force stuff, but perhaps herein Dave's basic problem with science: it's just too boring, compared to the Vegas-style magic show he calls christianity.

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 30 2006,01:48   

After sleeping on it I decided I wanted to add:
This is not all to suggest anything malign on the part of AFDave.  There could be several reasons why he lacks operational experience.  He may simply not have been able to develop the abilities to pilot the fast jets.  Helo skills are somewhat different.  Perhaps his eyesight may have deteriorated rapidly.  IIRC the Army allows its helo pilots to use corrective eyewear.  I know the AirForce does not do this for fixed wing aircraft but perhaps they do for helo's, though I don't know for certain.  In any event the AirForce offered Dave an alternative and he chose helo's.  Suggesting that there was some negative reason for the change is too over the top.  I'm certain Dave had a wonderfully honorable career.  The point Crabby and I noticed was that there is probably more to the story than simply "Hi, I'm Dave.  I was an AirForce jetfighter pilot."  Especially since it was important enough to him that he made sure we all knew it even without having to visit his blog.

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 30 2006,08:43   

Quote
it's just too boring, compared to the Vegas-style magic show he calls christianity.


amazing how someone could conclude that a system of non-reality based off a single, very boring, hard to read collection of short stories could somehow be more exciting than the near infinite variety and fantastic real-life stories that come out of science every day.

any stories like wasps making zombie slaves out of their cockroack prey in the bible?

nope.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 30 2006,10:02   

Quote
any stories like wasps making zombie slaves out of their cockroack prey in the bible?
No, the book that dave likes is relentlessly anthropocentric. That's my main problem with that whole family of religions. I don't think anthropocentricity works very well in the modern world, even in the best interests of anthropoi (Faid - that one's for you!;)).

But refresh my memory - where can I read about the zombie cockroaches?

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 30 2006,10:14   

Quote
But refresh my memory - where can I read about the zombie cockroaches?


http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/02/the_wisdom_of_p.html

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 30 2006,10:41   

Thanks! That truly is one of the most amazing zoological stories I've ever seen.

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 30 2006,10:52   

yup.

ranks in my top ten most definetly.

...right along with the first time i heard about how male anglerfishes reproduce by becoming essentially a parasite on the female, and the first time i saw a single population of fish with no less than 4 distinct but simultaneously successful reproductive strategies.

wait; i'll stop there before i make a post that goes on for at least 8 pages.

8 pages, heck it would go on for 10 times the entire length of AFDave's KJV, for that matter.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1773
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 30 2006,17:44   

Paul Flocken says
   
Quote
This is not all to suggest anything malign on the part of AFDave.  There could be several reasons why he lacks operational experience.  He may simply not have been able to develop the abilities to pilot the fast jets.  Helo skills are somewhat different.  Perhaps his eyesight may have deteriorated rapidly.  IIRC the Army allows its helo pilots to use corrective eyewear.  I know the AirForce does not do this for fixed wing aircraft but perhaps they do for helo's, though I don't know for certain.  In any event the AirForce offered Dave an alternative and he chose helo's.  Suggesting that there was some negative reason for the change is too over the top.  I'm certain Dave had a wonderfully honorable career.  The point Crabby and I noticed was that there is probably more to the story than simply "Hi, I'm Dave.  I was an AirForce jetfighter pilot."  Especially since it was important enough to him that he made sure we all knew it even without having to visit his blog.


I tried questioning AFDave about his flying career a week and a half ago on the "Apes" thread

Posted by OA :May 22 2006,21:30
   
Quote
When you "flew" the T-38, were you sitting in the back seat or the front?

and
Posted by OA :May 22 2006,22:44
   
Quote
My guess is he made it through UPT (undergraduate pilot training), then as far as flying T-38s (an advanced supersonic jet trainer for potential fighter/bomber pilots) as a student pilot.  I also guess he washed out at that stage; probably his arrogance caused him to make too many unacceptable errors.  That's why he ended up flying helos (according to his blog at least).

My limited knowledge of such things comes from having an ex-GF (many years ago) whose brother was a military pilot.  He followed the same career track but passed T-38 training, and was invited back to become a T-38 IP (Instructor Pilot) because at the time there were too few fighter slots available.  Tom (the brother) told many comical stories about the screw-ups of his students, and how they'd always end up whining "...but sirrrr...."   Eventually he ended up flying KC-10 tankers, the Mil version of the DC-10.

Edited to add: This is not meant to belittle what AFDave did achieve.  Just making it through UPT to get a ride in a T-38 is a major accomplishment, so props to him for that.  It's a pity that his arrogant and condescending attitude will keep him such a total dumbsh*t on some fascinating and amazing avenues of scientific knowledge.


AFDave got all miffed that I questioned his experience, but provided no relevant details save a boast about some award he claimed to have won.

Personally, I couldn't care less about his AF achievements (or lack of them) except to note his hypocrisy.  To wit:

AFDave continually claims that professional scientists working in the fields covered by evolutionary biology are all incompetent dupes who don't know real science.  He makes these claims despite the fact that he himself has proven to be the most scientifically illiterate dumbass around.

Now, when anyone else questions AFDave's bluster about his own experiences as a flying professional, he cries like a little girl.

It seems AirFarceDaveTard2 was so busy memorizing the Bible that he never learned the Golden Rule.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 31 2006,11:03   

Thanks Occam.
I should probably start reading ALL the threads before I start shooting my mouth off.  I'm sorry I stepped on your toes by practically restating exactly what you had already written.  I'll go read what you wrote when I get back from work tonight.  I do think it's interesting that three different laymen*, Doh! :O , all noted the same thing.  He thinks so highly of layman, after all, and so little of experts.  Makes it that much harder for AirFarceDaveTard/2 to juke and jink around looking like an imbecile.
Again, thanks Occam.
See you guys later.




*Laymen as regards to the AirForce, Dave being a real expert since he did actually serve in that branch.

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
Crabby Appleton



Posts: 250
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 31 2006,22:55   

Well I for one will not try to read every entry in every thread before I post, as a newb it would take too long. I WILL try to read every entry in a thread before I post though. I did actually make it all the way through AFDave wants you to prove... before I looked at his blog and said, hmm, this Bozo is trying to blow smoke up my butt.

I DON'T like smoke blown up my butt. How can I knock his red nose off?

All of his ID assertions had been SMOTHERED before I came here so I had to call him on what I could.

T-38 hot shot, yeah, it's a minor accomplishment. Then what? It's not like he peed on the moon or splashed 2nd rate Libyan pilots over the Med!

I made some mistakes (see how easy it is to do Dave?), the B-2 wasn't in service when he finished Phase 3 so he couldn't have been in that pipeline (What did you ask for Dave? The truth shall set you free!;) and you don't always get what you want in the military even IF you graduate at the top of your class.

How likely is it that Dave was top of HIS class?

Dave, UH-1 Huey, Dewey and Lewey managed to outwit Donald, can you?

I honestly believe Daves problem is the thought that his mother shares common ancestry with the other apes. Sit back, peel a banana and THINK about it Dave.

  
Renier



Posts: 276
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 31 2006,23:54   

I am not interested in Afdaves ramblings any more. He is just here to see what arguments we use so that he can start indoctrinating (brain-wash) children against them. He is arrogant and proud of this, thinking he does his fundie god a major favour. Let him lie as much as he wants to. It's not going to stop, it is who he is.

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 11 2006,17:05   

I see AirHeadDave is declaring victory over on his "Creator Hypothesis" thread. I am loath to contribute to that discussion, lest I lend credence to the pretense that it is a discussion. Since his deafening silence on this thread already serves as eloquent testimonial to the vacuity of his "science", I thought this would be a good place to sum up what we've learned.

First, let's keep in mind Dave's self-proclaimed reason for being here. It's not to learn, and it's not to teach. It's to gain facility in anti-evolution rhetorical technique, specifically for the purpose of inoculating children against the everlasting damnation that results from having any confidence in - or understanding of - of science, insofar as it is inconsistent with his primitive religion. With that thought firmly in mind, we won't get too frustrated with his consistent failure to recognize the solidity, interconnectedness, and downright overwhelmingness of the evidence he's so determined to deny. And we will recognize his puerile "victory dance" for what it is: another instance of the "Cordova Cockstrut"*.

*Named for Salvador Cordova, who routinely makes himself look ridiculous with displays of false confidence after having one of his creationist arguments dismantled and decisively demolished, and as a semi-formal announcement that he's abandoning efforts to defend it. See also, "Baghdad Bob"
and Monty Python's "Black Knight"

Mind you, AHD announced that that is his purpose, but the fact that he has repeatedly demonstrated that honesty - with himself, let alone with us - is not his first priority, might lead one to take with a grain of salt any statement of purpose.  I suspect, too, that AHD, being human, occasionally strays from his stated purpose, and gets drawn into attempts to actually defend his "science".  

Anyway, I think we should focus, not on trying to teach AHD, but on studying the substance and style of his creationist arguments.

First and foremost, of course, is his inability to separate religion and science. He claims of course, that that is not the case; that he judges science solely on the evidence, but that he regards the Bible as a perfectly sensible source of "hypotheses". But a "hypothesis", by definition, can be right or wrong, whereas AHD takes as axiomatic that the Bible can't be wrong. Go figure. The flip side, of course, is that AHD deploys the old (inaccurate) tu quoque, claiming that scientists have the opinions that they do, not because of the evidence, but because of a supposed precommitment to an "atheistic" worldview.

Now there's another interesting twist to the AHD conflation of religion and science. He thinks that we're missing an important part of life in not "getting to know our Creator" - as he thinks he does. But the creator he thinks he has personal knowledge of is one that makes specific truth-claims about physical reality, that are at odds with everything science knows.

Then there's this interesting gambit most clearly illustrated in the GULO exchange: the substitution of the assertion that the creationist explanation is at least as successful as the real-world one, for the explanation itself. Note: he never offered this explanation; merely asserted that (a) it exists and (b) it fits the data better than the one accepted by the tens of thousands of PhD's who have spent their lives studying the data. Note also we saw this same strategy deployed in the "Portuguese = Spanish + French" argument: no actual evidence offered; just the assertion repeated ad nauseam, coupled with the claim that anyone that didn't recognize the conclusiveness of the (non)evidence must be "blind".

The heart of the whole creationist enterprise, of course, is the baffling supposition that somehow any question is still open as long as some crackpot like Russell Humphreys is refusing to bend to reality. As if the tons of peer-reviewed literature and the consilience of all of science commands less attention and respect than the scattered, and inconsistent, pleadings of the odd fanatic whose religious commitment to the dissenting view is obvious, acknowledged, and absolutely central to his psychology. Even after having his nose rubbed in the mess that AiG made of the human/chimp chromosome fusion story, AHD still cites AiG (and ICR, and Dembski, and any and all creationist "scientists") as if they're just as trustworthy as the peer-reviewed journals that professional scientists rely upon and contribute to.

Is it "child abuse"? Well, I'm with Stephen Elliott and stevestory on this one. Yes, I think AHD's whole project - inasmuch as it's aimed at indoctrinating his and others' children - is a disservice. But I don't think it's more reprehensible than any a lot of other ignorance and superstition that parents and pastors attempt to impose on impressionable youngsters. Like madrasas in Pakistan: it's not how I would want kids educated, and lots of bad things will undoubtedly result. But with parents - and pastors - physically, sexually abusing kids, realistically I think society needs to pick its battles, and reserve the word abuse for the more concrete cases.

I may have more to say on the "meta-analysis" of AHD's enterprise, but that's all I can stomach for tonight. Anyway, I urge you all to think not so much of how you can show him the error of his ways, as to show others (school boards, newspaper readers of letters-to-the-editor, kids that need deprogramming...) the error of his ways.

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 11 2006,17:29   

I actually think what he's doing is, mildly, child abuse. But I think it's counterproductive to call him a child abuser for reasons I simply find too tedious to write down. Left as an exercise to the student.  
Quote
Anyway, I urge you all to think not so much of how you can show him the error of his ways, as to show others (school boards, newspaper readers of letters-to-the-editor, kids that need deprogramming...) the error of his ways.Anyway, I urge you all to think not so much of how you can show him the error of his ways, as to show others (school boards, newspaper readers of letters-to-the-editor, kids that need deprogramming...) the error of his ways.


Indeed, I would question the intelligence of anyone who thinks they can actually make headway with Dave at this point. Doing it for the lurkers, or some other similar reason, is the only good reason to engage him.

Quote
I am not interested in Afdaves ramblings any more. He is just here to see what arguments we use so that he can start indoctrinating (brain-wash) children against them. He is arrogant and proud of this, thinking he does his fundie god a major favour.


Several people have stopped arguing with him. There's no point.

I actually think less of YEC's as a result of Dave's efforts. Not sure I would have thought that possible.

   
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 11 2006,19:42   

Quote (stevestory @ June 11 2006,22:29)
Indeed, I would question the intelligence of anyone who thinks they can actually make headway with Dave at this point. Doing it for the lurkers, or some other similar reason, is the only good reason to engage him.

I agree. There's absolutely nothing to be gained by trying to show Dave how absurd his "arguments" are. He ignores evidence he doesn't like, and wildly overstates evidence he thinks supports his position. His argument re the Fenton Hill zircons is a perfect example. I cannot get him to understand how hilarious pitting two anomalous results against the tens if not hundreds of thousands of results supporting an old earth really is.

But I keep responding to Dave for three reasons: 1) to goad him into making increasingly ridiculous claims (which frankly doesn't take much work); 2) for the benefit, however slight, of lurkers; and 3) because listening to people like Faid, Jeannot, Arden, deadman, and JonF, who have actually done research in the relevant fields, will actually make me learn new stuff (and further demonstrates the overwhelming strength of the evidence in favor of evolution, cosmology, etc.). Plus, it's occasionally fun to get in a particularly devastating critique of something stupid Dave says. Kind of like hitting the occasional bulllseye in a game of darts, or sinking three balls in a row in a game of pool. So I guess that's actually four reasons.

But trying to educate Dave isn't even on the list.

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 12 2006,08:00   

A nice illustration of the Wonderland (as in "Alice in...") that YEC's call home:
Quote
Only a lunatic or a blind man would say that chimps are 40% (or whatever your number is) closer to humans than gorillas are.
So virtually every primatologist, geneticist, and every other kind of scientist on the planet that studies these things is either blind or a lunatic.

Once again, there's no point in trying to convince the denizens of Wonderland that their world makes no sense (as Alice learned). But to the outside observer with any familiarity with science at all, this sort of nonsense pretty much speaks for itself.

The frustrating thing about arguing with creationists is that you have to step into Wonderland to even have the discussion. But for all their predictions of imminent triumph and other forms of Cordova Cockstrutting, out here in the Real World, science takes even less notice of them than we (aficionados of freak shows) do. One has only to page through any serious science journal to be reassured of that.

Now the serious challenge we face is that a shockingly high percentage of the general population - at least in the U.S. - can't tell the difference between Wonderland and the Real World. That speaks very poorly for the state of education in this country. Can it be fixed?

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 12 2006,09:02   

can it be fixed?

not unless we start dealing with the underlying factors seriously.

How is that one becomes a creobot in the first place?

brainwashing? genetics? simple peer pressure?

It's really got far less to do with actual religious beliefs than most seem to think.

We often point out how the vast majority of xians have no problems with science or the ToE.

creobots are a special case, and it's easy to identify and categorize the differences.

they frequently exhibit manifestations of mental disabilites that are very similar from case to case.  Anybody who takes a look at large at how they argue, the things they say, can readily see rampant projection and denial that characterize a severe state of mental confusion, with active defenses on high alert.

Until we deal with the cognitive dissonance this specific belief stucture creates in folks, the problem will only compound itself.

We see it at the highest levels of government, and in federal funded GO's like the FDA.  Take the case of Plan B with the FDA as a great case on point.

Yes, science as a discipline remains fairly isolated, as these individuals simply can't function at the level needed to publish a legitimate piece of scientific research that would in any way increase their level of dissonance.  

However, science as a career has and will be further eroded by this belief structure, especially as it is promoted by high level peers like the President.

Think about how "school vouchers" and the encouragement of funneling money into xian charities, instead of secular NGO's, will only contribute to the problem in the future.

I see the psychological and economic pressures that create the "creobot" only INCREASING in the long term, unless there is something done to treat this as a legitimate problem, instead of a just a simple set of harmless beliefs.

If we wait much longer, the problem will reach large enough proportions that drastic action will become a necessity, and then we WILL have our own american-born Taliban.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 12 2006,10:55   

I was visiting my parents in Arizona (that hotbed of liberal atheism) this weekend, and while we were there we went on this fun little train ride through Verde Canyon in central Arizona. The train ride had one of those mildly irritating canned narrations, pointing out points of interest and various historical curios, clearly aimed at scientifically-unsophisticated tourists.

At one point, we were passing one of the many, many outcrops of sedimentary strata that the river had cut through in its relentless project to carve through the planet's crust. The narration stated, among other things, that the area had been at the bottom of a large, shallow lake eleven million years ago.

This got me to thinking. Polls seem to consistently suggest that nearly half of all Americans are essentially young-earth creationists, i.e., they believe that God created the earth, all life, and human beings, in more or less their current form, some time in the last ten thousand years or less (six thousand years seems to be a popular figure).

Now, if we assume that the polls are broadly accurate, and that Arizona is at least typical in the proportion of YECs (my guess is it contains a larger portion of YECs than typical for the nation at large), we should assume that approximately half the people on the train (I'd estimate that to be about 75 people) must have heard that particular part of the narration and thought, "Who does she think she's kidding? Eleven million years? Everyone knows the earth is only a few thousand years old!" (assuming, of course, that they were listening to it at all).

I mean, it's not like you don't hear this stuff all the time. You hear constant references in movies, books, in news stories, etc. to times in the past far in excess of thousands of years old. Do we have 100 million Americans wandering around dismissing any number of years they hear that's more than six or seven thousand? Or maybe it's an example of double-think? Where people can hear something a few times a week that contradicts their world view and think nothing of it?

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 12 2006,11:35   

Quote

If we wait much longer, the problem will reach large enough proportions that drastic action will become a necessity, and then we WILL have our own american-born Taliban.


Couldn't disagree more. The long term trend in America is one of liberalization. Short term regressions mean nothing to me.
Quote
Or maybe it's an example of double-think? Where people can hear something a few times a week that contradicts their world view and think nothing of it?


First of all, they don't hear old-earth info multiple times a week. Most people get only a trace amount of science in their daily lives. Second, when they say on a poll that they are YECs, they're really much more apathetic than your AFDaves. They might say, if pressed, that they believe that, but they just don't care really.

At least, that's my impression, having lived in 5 southern states.  If you call them and ask if they believe in the bible, they'll say "Sure, yeah, you bet." and then they hang up and go back to voting for Kelli on American Idol and reading People magazine.

That's the majority. Despite that, there are, though, several million AFDaves.

   
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 12 2006,11:44   

Quote
This got me to thinking. Polls seem to consistently suggest that nearly half of all Americans are essentially young-earth creationists, i.e., they believe that God created the earth, all life, and human beings, in more or less their current form, some time in the last ten thousand years or less (six thousand years seems to be a popular figure).


hmm, IIRC, most of the poll data I would guess you are thinking about (like the gallup data cited in the Nat. Geo. article from 2004), wasn't inclusive as to "all life"; but human life only.  IOW, the data i saw didn't include questions about how old the earth was, but whether the repondents thought "god essentially created human beings, in more or less their current form, some time in the last ten thousand years or less."

so, there may be a bit of a dichotomy between folks who can't imagine how humans could be anything but creations, and folks who think everything must have been a creation in the same vein.  I don't recall the poll data on age of the earth type qeustions; but it would be interesting to see if there is data like that.  I would imagine the numbers to be far smaller.

EDIT:

It's quite likely that the estimation of how many YEC's there are comes from the YEC's themselves quote mining the results of the gallup polls to support their own contentions.

here's an example:

Quote
According to a 1993 Gallup poll, 47% of the American public adopted the young earth creationist view that humans were created by God around 10,000 years ago. Another 35% were theistic evolutionists, and only 11% believe the universe has evolved naturally. This makes evolutionists who try to portray young-earth creationists as a small fringe group look a bit silly.


(from http://www.rae.org/polls.html)

note how this misrepresents what questions were actually asked in the gallup polls.

/EDIT

It's bad enough that there are large numbers of americans who don't know that "one year" represents the time it takes the earth to go around the sun (pardon's to Gawp ;) ), but I don't think we can yet classify half of america as being YEC's.

yet.

I have the links to the gallup poll data floating around somewhere.  If you're interested, I'll track them down and post them.

EDIT:

unfortunately, gallup doesn't allow public access to poll data, but there are plenty of sources around that have the correct questions asked and the data from the gallup polls cited by Nat. Geo.  Here's one:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

I still have yet to see poll data with actual YEC type questions from gallup published anywhere.

I suppose poll data on a simple thing like "how old is the earth?" would be at least suggestive; you'd think YEC sites would post this data if gallup had conducted such a poll, and it made them look good.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 12 2006,11:49   

Quote
Do we have 100 million Americans wandering around dismissing any number of years they hear that's more than six or seven thousand?

IMO, yes. I think these people basically just cringe when they hear stuff like that, picture the big Evilution Cult Religion as the enemy, and if anything it just makes them cling that much more to their comforting faith.

There is probably a higher percentage of those people in that midwestern state, but, just an idea, how many of the people on the actual train do you think were from that state, or other midwestern states?

I think people like afdave see the world inside out. As much as they accuse humanists of making themselves into gods, so does their little world revolve completely around themselves as the most special of all creations in the universe. They see God creating us in "his" image. We see all the gods that man has created in our image.

I've followed all the dave threads all the way through. I've only skipped a few paragraphs and links here and there. To continue my inside out analogy, I've seen dave, a few times, come close to being able to see in the other direction. One in particular was the beginning of the conversation on the shared vitamin-C error. At first, I thought I could see that dave understood the plaigerism analogy perfectly, and it seemed like he got excited about it in a scientifically inquisitive way, briefly. Then, of course, as started he started getting more confused about the not-so-black-and-white and simplistic realty of the way that error can actually be seen through the clutter of other things happening (which all help to paint the broad picture perfectly logically), he got lost and went back to clinging to his bible. Idolator!  :p

I've been doing some experimenting with 3d flash animation and I was picturing dave's view of the world as he approaches being able to see the other side as what happens when I move an object so close to the "camera" that part of the object goes inside it. With that very short focal length and the object spread between the two sides of the lens it gets very wierd.

Hmm... maybe a better analogy would be that dave's looking at a stereogram. Dave's got a bible in each hand held out before him. He's focused so hard on them that his eyes have crossed so he can see one book. Or is that three... trinity!

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 12 2006,11:57   

Quote
The long term trend in America is one of liberalization. Short term regressions mean nothing to me.


long term in the sense of centuries? perhaps yes, but if you consider the last 25 years to be "short term" and of little consequence, you must not have seen the same things I have.

I'm sure Islam in the long term will become more liberalized as well;  but how far will it go in the meantime in the opposite direction?  how much damage will there be?

There has ALREADY been significant damage to education and science in this country because of creobots.

I'm sure you don't need me to cite section and verse.

what evidence can you provide to indicate we need do nothing, and this will all go away on its own?

Hey, unlike Dave, I'd be happy to see evidence that suggests creationism and the belief structures surrounding it are "just a passing phase in the march to liberalization".

Maybe your great grandkids might be able to look back and agree with that statement from a historic perspective, but right here, right now, the economics, sociology, and politics seem to favor increasing levels of this kind of dissonance, not decreasing.

In some sense, I'd also bet that the increasing disparity between the rich and poor, and the decline of the middle class, will contribute to many looking for ways to gain "empowerment" by joining the ranks of the extreme religious right.

heck, if they can have such an obvious influence on politics, that's sure to act as a recruitment factor...

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
  46 replies since May 24 2006,04:29 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (2) < [1] 2 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]