Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#2301
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bngrfg$8h4$13@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <3F9A6C91.5030809@computer.org>,
> "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote:
> >Brent P wrote:
>
> >>
> >> For instance the kind of real evidence I speak of are things like star
> >> alignments of various acient monuments around the world. Monuments that
> >> go under water, on ground that hasn't been dry land since the last
> >> ice age, etc and so forth. Come up with hard stuff like that for
> >> creation. Not just the bible says so, so it is.
> >
> >All of the above depends on an accurate means of dating things that
> >occurred before any of us were around, and that simply doesn't exist.
> >And there is no way to calibrate accurately or prove it anyway.
> >
> >
>
> Sorry, radioactive dating is quite accurate.
Prove it. Not to me, but to someone who chooses not to believe it. Now you
know what arguing with you is like, you choose not to believ anything you
don't already believe. That is why you are Usenets biggest laughing stock.
>
> >Matt
> >
#2302
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bngrfg$8h4$13@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <3F9A6C91.5030809@computer.org>,
> "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote:
> >Brent P wrote:
>
> >>
> >> For instance the kind of real evidence I speak of are things like star
> >> alignments of various acient monuments around the world. Monuments that
> >> go under water, on ground that hasn't been dry land since the last
> >> ice age, etc and so forth. Come up with hard stuff like that for
> >> creation. Not just the bible says so, so it is.
> >
> >All of the above depends on an accurate means of dating things that
> >occurred before any of us were around, and that simply doesn't exist.
> >And there is no way to calibrate accurately or prove it anyway.
> >
> >
>
> Sorry, radioactive dating is quite accurate.
Prove it. Not to me, but to someone who chooses not to believe it. Now you
know what arguing with you is like, you choose not to believ anything you
don't already believe. That is why you are Usenets biggest laughing stock.
>
> >Matt
> >
#2303
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message
news:3F9C207A.20704@computer.org...
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
> > In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>,
> > "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote:
> >
> >>John David Galt wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>It does for me. Doesn't get much more incredible than saying we all
> >>>>came from a random association of elements... How many ordered
systems
> >>>>do you know of that just spontaneously emerged from a pile of parts?
I
> >>>>wish we could build cars that way! Would be much cheaper...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>That's only incredible if you ignore the fact that all the alternative
> >>>"explanations" require similar coincidences, ie, who created God?
> >>
> >>I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
> >>is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
> >>accurate.
> >
> >
> > Wrong. Evolution is as established fact as the existence of atoms.
>
> Only in your mind.
>
>
> >> The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
> >>answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
> >>scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
> >>claim that evolution is fact based.
> >
> >
> > And you're either ignorant or a liar.
>
> Any you're both based on your past posts in this group.
>
>
> >>I believe creation is the best available explanation.
> >
> >
> > Then you're stupid too.
>
> True to form, name calling always occurs once the argument is lost.
>
Or when your chatting with Lloyd, calling him names is fun.
WHy is it fun? Because it's true! ;-)
> Plonk.
>
#2304
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message
news:3F9C207A.20704@computer.org...
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
> > In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>,
> > "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote:
> >
> >>John David Galt wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>It does for me. Doesn't get much more incredible than saying we all
> >>>>came from a random association of elements... How many ordered
systems
> >>>>do you know of that just spontaneously emerged from a pile of parts?
I
> >>>>wish we could build cars that way! Would be much cheaper...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>That's only incredible if you ignore the fact that all the alternative
> >>>"explanations" require similar coincidences, ie, who created God?
> >>
> >>I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
> >>is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
> >>accurate.
> >
> >
> > Wrong. Evolution is as established fact as the existence of atoms.
>
> Only in your mind.
>
>
> >> The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
> >>answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
> >>scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
> >>claim that evolution is fact based.
> >
> >
> > And you're either ignorant or a liar.
>
> Any you're both based on your past posts in this group.
>
>
> >>I believe creation is the best available explanation.
> >
> >
> > Then you're stupid too.
>
> True to form, name calling always occurs once the argument is lost.
>
Or when your chatting with Lloyd, calling him names is fun.
WHy is it fun? Because it's true! ;-)
> Plonk.
>
#2305
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote in message
news:3F9C207A.20704@computer.org...
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
> > In article <3F99A319.703@computer.org>,
> > "Matthew S. Whiting" <m.whiting@computer.org> wrote:
> >
> >>John David Galt wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>It does for me. Doesn't get much more incredible than saying we all
> >>>>came from a random association of elements... How many ordered
systems
> >>>>do you know of that just spontaneously emerged from a pile of parts?
I
> >>>>wish we could build cars that way! Would be much cheaper...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>That's only incredible if you ignore the fact that all the alternative
> >>>"explanations" require similar coincidences, ie, who created God?
> >>
> >>I agree. Saying we don't know for sure is accurate. Saying evolution
> >>is based on fact and creation is not based on fact, is simply not
> >>accurate.
> >
> >
> > Wrong. Evolution is as established fact as the existence of atoms.
>
> Only in your mind.
>
>
> >> The only honest answer is that we don't know the complete
> >>answer and likely never will. Lloyd, and others who claim to be
> >>scientists, are incorrect at best, and disingenuous at worst, when they
> >>claim that evolution is fact based.
> >
> >
> > And you're either ignorant or a liar.
>
> Any you're both based on your past posts in this group.
>
>
> >>I believe creation is the best available explanation.
> >
> >
> > Then you're stupid too.
>
> True to form, name calling always occurs once the argument is lost.
>
Or when your chatting with Lloyd, calling him names is fun.
WHy is it fun? Because it's true! ;-)
> Plonk.
>
#2306
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bngqj4$8h4$3@puck.cc.emory.edu...
a bunch of meaningless BS.
I see you still won't tell us what peer reviewed journals you read Lloyd,
nor where you have been published.
You're no scientist, your a wannabe. Shutup and stop pretending to be
something you will never be, you are embarrrassing the real scientist with
your shameful behavior.
#2307
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bngqj4$8h4$3@puck.cc.emory.edu...
a bunch of meaningless BS.
I see you still won't tell us what peer reviewed journals you read Lloyd,
nor where you have been published.
You're no scientist, your a wannabe. Shutup and stop pretending to be
something you will never be, you are embarrrassing the real scientist with
your shameful behavior.
#2308
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bngqj4$8h4$3@puck.cc.emory.edu...
a bunch of meaningless BS.
I see you still won't tell us what peer reviewed journals you read Lloyd,
nor where you have been published.
You're no scientist, your a wannabe. Shutup and stop pretending to be
something you will never be, you are embarrrassing the real scientist with
your shameful behavior.
#2309
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Bill Funk" <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message
news:b71opv8v0in3q2ra8l4u8fd4t6qa8p9vhb@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 26 Oct 03 10:48:15 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> wrote:
>
> >>Then, obviously, that can't be the cause of global warming, can it?
> >>Since global warming happened with the lower CO2 levels,
> >
> >No, it started the same time CO2 started rising.
>
> Then where did all the ice go?
> It seems that you are denying the presence of pasdt ice ages (and the
> following global warmings).
Only an idiot would believe the climate we have now is stable. It has never
remained stable for long, regardless of whether man were here or not the
climate would still warm for awhile, then cool off again, then warm again,
just as it always has. Lloyds claim is that the current global warming is
man made. He ignores all the evidence which contradicts his claim. He is a
joke, a self delusional wannabe scientist grasping for any fame he can find.
He is actually prety pathetic, but not so much I won't laugh at his stone
age beliefs.
#2310
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Bill Funk" <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message
news:b71opv8v0in3q2ra8l4u8fd4t6qa8p9vhb@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 26 Oct 03 10:48:15 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> wrote:
>
> >>Then, obviously, that can't be the cause of global warming, can it?
> >>Since global warming happened with the lower CO2 levels,
> >
> >No, it started the same time CO2 started rising.
>
> Then where did all the ice go?
> It seems that you are denying the presence of pasdt ice ages (and the
> following global warmings).
Only an idiot would believe the climate we have now is stable. It has never
remained stable for long, regardless of whether man were here or not the
climate would still warm for awhile, then cool off again, then warm again,
just as it always has. Lloyds claim is that the current global warming is
man made. He ignores all the evidence which contradicts his claim. He is a
joke, a self delusional wannabe scientist grasping for any fame he can find.
He is actually prety pathetic, but not so much I won't laugh at his stone
age beliefs.