The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #155013   Message #3648061
Posted By: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
03-Aug-14 - 04:08 PM
Thread Name: BS: Church joins real world
Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
bill, those instruments are utilized to give measurements, not to tell time. assumptions are made, that favour the deep time mindset. but even then there are anomalies and disagreements.
for the life of me, I cant see why my arguments are less logical than yours, but as you got college training in logic, you may have the advantage. however, it seems logical to me that if operative, testable, science indicates no evidence of soft tissues surviving millions of yrs, that the bones are not that old. and while science should be open to some unknown mechanism, the obvious conclusion till that is validated is that dinos were much more recent. despite you and stu again claiming utter impartiality , the deep time worldview discounts the obvious conclusion.
and is it logical to say that because there are differences in religion, that therefore none are true , and probably no God. I recognize that I am saying something similar about evolutionists, and I reckon it just goes to show that consensus is not much of an argument.
which brings me to your use of the words "science/scientists" as though they are a priori evolutionist. most do subscribe to that worldview, but that would only be an appeal to numbers.
the atheist argument seems to be that creationist scientists are either blinkered, or worse dishonest, as though an atheist, evolutionist scientist must never be , or usually not, be researching with the aim of confirming their own faith position.
of course the well known lewontin quote supports my contention.

....a horse in the burgess shale........or soft tissue in dino bone ?
the first - an argument from silence, the 2nd an argument from science.
and I predict that should any of the examples you give be discovered that most evolutionists will not change their faith position, but rejig it, or claim reburial or some such scenario.
and of course creationist geologists would certainly want to discuss what this evidence is that can only be interpreted according to the deep time paradigm. I'm sure they could find a few problems for you too.