Newsgroups: talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.religion.christian,alt.politics.correct,alt.christnet,talk.religion.misc,alt.folklore.urban,alt.christnet.bible,talk.abortion,alt.blasphemy,alt.postmodern,sci.lang,alt.catastrophism,alt.fan.publius,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,talk.atheism,alt.philosophy.debate
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!scramble.lm.com!news.math.psu.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!uwm.edu!msunews!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!news.bri.connect.com.au!news.gil.com.au!news
From: lfooks@gil.ipswichcity.qld.gov.au (Linden Fooks)
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution - RIDICULOUS.
Sender: news@gil.com.au
Message-ID: <Du2EqD.ABn@gil.com.au>
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 02:51:42 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ppp8.ipswich.gil.com.au
References: <xanidu-2306960830540001@lucky118.nuts.nwu.edu> <4qlp8s$cll@news.ox.ac.uk> <xanidu-2506962023090001@lucky146.nuts.nwu.edu> <4qr4ss$et2@news.ox.ac.uk> <31D20104.2C54@pe.net> <31D2BA86.3EA9@plea.se> <4qvues$n2@News2.Lakes.com>
Organization: Global Infolinks Internet Server, Ipswich Qld Australia
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lines: 46
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:186693 sci.lang:56971

rcpilot@prairie.lakes.com ((R/C plane instructor heli pilot)) wrote:

>David Hultgren <hard.to@plea.se> wrote:


>>The main problem creationist have with the numerous methods avalible is 
>>not that they must all be wrong for creationist to be right, but that 
>>they all give the same result. (i.o.w. the correlation between them).

>	Well, that and that when I was in high school physics, in public
>school, my physics teacher brought in a scienctific journal with an
>article on carbon dating.

>	In that article, it told about a group from northern California who
>did a little experiment to test how accurate carbon dating REALLY was.
>They had been raising some clams for the food industry, and knew
>EXACTLY how old each of three clams were when they had died.  They let
>the three clam's shells bake under sun-lamps for a week after each one
>had died, then burried them, with the locations marked.

>	At the time they were sent into the labs, one had been burried for 5
>years, another 7 years, and the third 12 years.  Each one was broken,
>with parts identified and sent to separate labs.  When the carbon
>dating results came back, NOT ONE lab was correct!  They were ALL
>within 100 YEARS on the 5 year old clam.  However, on the other two
>they ALL had reported the carbon dating of the shells to put the age
>of the other two clams at between 2500 and 15,000 YEARS OLD.


WHAT HAS THIS GOT TO DO WITH THE POSTMODERN DEBATE?!??!?!?

If we truly are discussing the objections of postmodernism to all
metanarratives, then the facts about Noah would not be prime in this
debate. 

I mean postmodernism makes the point that we can never truly now it
all, so why hold to these views? 

Quoting facts to poeple who do not believe the basis of modernism
anyways is possibly the wrong way to go about it.

Cheers,

Linden.


