[[Everyone is talking to each other with the full knowledge that no one is going to move an inch.]]
Why should the one with hte FACTS move anywhere? The link I listed shows that radiometric dating methods were wrong- that’s all I’ve claimed- IF you or anyone else can provide coutner evidence to show that ASM testing didn’t prove the old dating methods were wrong- then feel free to provide it, but the fact is that you won’t find any such evidence because the fact is, they were wrong- as are hte other methods of dating- these aren’t opinions, these are scientifically verifiable evidences which quite reasonably show them to be wrong.
[[Science is not a religion (and calling it ‘scientism’ was a rather rude way to put it), but it is something that relies on a method that is different from that of religion.]]
IF you’re talking about hte ‘science’ of Macroevolution, then you are wrong- it IS a religion that flies i nthe face of biological reality- again, this isn’t opinion, but scientifically valid facts. I’ve posted many many such evidences refuting the hypothesis of Macroevolution, and exposing the biological impossibility of it, but NEVER get any responses except for the same lame ‘ID isn’t science’ crap- Again, why should the TRUTH move an inch when confronted with bogus biology violating hypothesis’?
Look, I wasn’t trying to get into the creationism vs. evolution (crevo) debate, but instead propose a solution that might make most people on all sides happy here. And I certainly wasn’t suggesting that only one side would have to cool it. In fact, I was really careful to make it clear that both sides would have to respect boundaries under such a plan, so I’m a little offended by your anger.