|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
Master Elite Member
|
This argument (Pratt Claim CF201) assumes there is no source of modern Polonium. I didn't detect that assumption in the talkdeceptions piece. I wouldn't put it past them, but I read it twice and the assumption just isn't there. You might claim you refer to creationist arguments, but I know for certain they contain no assumption of the kind. Correct that to say "no natural source of the Polonium" since YEC's claim that the Polonium was instantaneously created by God when He formed the Earth 6000 years ago. I guess that would be the "assumption". Well guess again, because nobody has made this assumption either. Acknowledging (as everyone who's looked into the issue has) that Polonium can be a result of decay does not alter anything. The halos in question are not produced by uranium - they're produced by polonium. Were there uranium present, it would also have left a telltale halo of its own when it decayed. The evidence isn't consistent with uranium being present in the center of the halos. It is consistent with polonium. Both of these false assertions of assumptions where none exist are arrogant insults to the intelligence of the readership. Perhaps you might pray to your evogod(s) that they really are too stupid to notice.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
