@farmerman,
quote="farmerman"]
Quote: Tho Gunga 's claim that this planet is less than 1,000,000 years old
may not be plausible, your characterization of him is off topic, and ad hominem.
U choose to kill the messenger and the horse he rode in on.
Quote:Im reprehensible aint I? I oughta be ignored.
Well, the infraction was relatively mild,
since everyone is getting called an idiot anyway, including me.
Quote:
I gotta be me, so when gunga continues spewing
his irrational fact free ****, some of us usually would call him out .
Well, I imagine that he probably expects to be
challenged,
but is it OK to be polite, and hopefully to avoid scatological references ?
May we presume that in your classroom,
u like to keep it clean, and possibly polite ?
Quote:
Ad Hominems get his attention frequently. Since gunga has ignored everyone else,
Im all thats left (of a select group of scholars). I must carry on the work, "They" would want me to.
That is expected in a forum for debate, such as this one.
Quote:
Gunga is stuck with a conclusion that has no basis in fact.
He appears to have confidence in the propositions that he alleges.
Quote:
His attachment to the soft tissue issue is a feeble attempt to call into question the data re: the ages of the earth and life. He is, however, stuck in a corner in which none of any facts that would otherwise support his belief, are there. A fact basis for his beliefs just doesnt exist. Hes gone to try to support Kelvins calculations of the earths age based upon cooling rates. The "Bob BAss" character (Im not familiar with him so I looked him up), appears to be some Creationist "scholar" who likes to write from the hip and publishes crap on the web. Hes been highlighted by several internet folks as being "A nut", (A characterization that I am unable to either affirm or deny). The age of the earth has been suitably established by isotopic, landmass, and geologic data to be comfortably residing about 4.5 B y, with the initiation of the Archean at about 3.8 By.
http://www.geosociety.org/science/timescale/timescl.pdf (You can dowload a geo time scale at that site.
Theres no equivocation from science, there is no disagreement among the bulk of scientists re: the age of the earth or the methods used to measure it.
Only te Cretinists have a vested interest in preserving a Biblical view of the earth and thats truly a shame. Defiant ignorance is, to me, only worth ad hominems.
Well, if one of your students, asked u whether or not
people with whom we disagree shoud be treated politely,
what 'd u tell him or her, professor?
Quote:(And, I may get myself ignored by this clown )
Presumably, there is a lesser degree of chance of getting ignored
if debate is offered with respect. Too frequently, people deviate
from discussion of subject matter to award their listeners with
unsolicited evaluations of their mental abilities.
It seems unlikely that personal insolence strengthens your credibility.
Permit me to suggest that instead of using impoliteness as your weapon of choice,
that u employ logical, dispassionate factual analysis.
U have already done that here, to some degree.
David