Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CottShop

You need to cite a real reference, not a science denier site. There is no content on creationwiki that’s worth the effort to read. No one there knows what they are talking about. It’s a prime example of the Purveyors of Unknowledge. Obviously you’ve never actually done such an experiment, not do you understand the first thing about radiometric dating. You should stop peddling ignorance.


211 posted on 06/15/2007 6:43:30 AM PDT by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies ]


To: doc30
There is no content on creationwiki that’s worth the effort to read. No one there knows what they are talking about. It’s a prime example of the Purveyors of Unknowledge. Obviously you’ve never actually done such an experiment, not do you understand the first thing about radiometric dating. You should stop peddling ignorance.

Did someone say "Purveyors of Unknowledge?:



In the history of the world, only a tiny fraction of all the people who ever lived have had the opportunity to ask highly qualified scientists direct questions, and learn from their wisdom. Happily, because of the internet and places like FR, it was possible for people from all walks of life to converse directly with all sorts of scientific experts; we have had physicists, microbiologists, mathematicians, astronomers, and chemists, to specify but a few, roaming these threads, and eager to explain what they know and how they know it to virtually anyone willing to ask an intelligent question.

But there is another segment of people on these threads who, instead of asking these learned folks intelligent questions and thus expanding their knowledge and understanding, insist instead upon bludgeoning them with their ignorance, and questioning the patriotism, honesty, and intellect of people who have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of scientific knowledge.

I submit that such people are not here to learn anything, but are in fact interested in quite the opposite. I submit they are here to interfere with the dissemination of scientific knowledge that they find offensive. They don't want other people to ask the experts questions and learn from them; no, they are here to attack the experts and cast doubt upon their wisdom, in the desperate hope that others will turn away and not listen to them.

IMHO that is why the same people show up over and over again parroting the same refuted diatribes and misinformation, and spewing the same bogus out-of-context quotes designed specifically to disrupt the dissemination of scientific knowledge. That's why the same people show up over and over again misrepresenting what scientific theories and laws are, despite having had it explained to them 1720th time; they are here to instill confusion and spread their ignorance, not to disseminate knowledge.

The experts [who were once] here on these threads ought to be revered and thanked for sharing with us their insights and explanations of the natural world around us; instead scorn is heaped upon them and their knowledge by the belligerently ignorant. I submit that these purveyors of unknowledge should be treated for the intellectual disruptors that they are. They stare stared the best opportunity any of us will ever have to gain more insight and understanding in the eye, and spit spat in the faces of those who offer and have the knowledge to help make that a reality.

Behold, I give you the belligerently ignorant, the intellectual Luddites of our time. Know them for the anti-knowledge disruptors they are.

Sadly, the Purveyors of Unknowledge have been very, very effective and chasing away most of the scientists and pro-science posters we one had on FR, to the point where bedwetting buffoons feel it is safe to insult the few remaining scientists on FR while parading their own ignorance for all to see.

That, in a word, is "pathetic."

231 posted on 06/15/2007 3:06:40 PM PDT by longshadow (FReeper #405, entering his tenth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies ]

To: doc30

[You need to cite a real reference, not a science denier site.]

Science Denier Site- Bahahahaha- Yup- Science deniers- whatever.

[Obviously you’ve never actually done such an experiment, not do you understand the first thing about radiometric dating. You should stop peddling ignorance.]

What a brilliant rebuttle to what is in Woodmorapp’s book- By golly- that was simply stunning!


240 posted on 06/15/2007 8:17:10 PM PDT by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson