MEASURABLE 14C IN FOSSILIZED ORGANIC MATERIALS: CONFIRMING THE YOUNG EARTH CREATION-FLOOD MODEL

http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf ^

[Right Wing Professor]

In #190, you italicized text from rwinkansas, quoting him directly. In that post, the italicized text clearly indicated material you were quoting. You've done the same elsewhere. So you're trying to tell us that when you italicized a completely fabricated quote in a follow-up to a post from me, you had no intent to deceive?

[Tribune7]

Great Post!!

[Right Wing Professor]

A content-free post, and clearly a troll. Please ignore.

[ALS]

You are the posterboy for the warning below..

To: js1138

If not, I'm afraid the contract is toothless.

Not only toothless. It's counterproductive. All the "evildoers" will joyfully sign on and continue their merry ways, emboldened by a document that will be used to legitimize their behavior.


1,221 posted on 07/30/2003 9:43 AM CDT by Nebullis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/952079/posts?page=1221#1221

[Terriergal]

I take it you are a christian by the way the evo-packs are nitpicking your every dot & dash?

lol. How very observant! Although I have met one atheist who was very nice and would be appalled at the obnoxiousness that goes on by his peers here.

[Terriergal]

And no, I didn't mean he is a freeper either.

[humblegunner]

I challenge everyone to invent a New Idea that doesn't build on what they already "know" to be true.

OK, you and everyone else simply exist to entertain me; likewise
all objects and places. When I am no longer amused or have moved on,
you all cease to exist. Solipsism.

"I'm always here, sometimes the rest of you go away"

You have made some good posts on this thread!

[Terriergal]

OOPS the article's from a Creation science website, It *must* be ignored/considered unscientific/biased.

ahem...

[ALS]

Quite pathetic how the evoids run around projecting their own fallacies upon others in a self-deluding romp through the daffodils of dumbness.

[Terriergal]

OK, you and everyone else simply exist to entertain me; likewise all objects and places. When I am no longer amused or have moved on, you all cease to exist.

Not totally new... Creation Scientism (as opposed to Creation Science) already thought that one up, essentially.

[Terriergal]

Boy that was a mouthful.

[js1138]

Because 1% of 90 years = 9 months in the womb, then 1% of 900 years = 90 years in the womb.

No, because a drop from a 900 year lifespan to 150 in five generations, extrapolated to 300 generations, would leave little lifespan left.

[ALS]

From the files of Darwin's Believe it or Not!:

I actually watched them try to formulate a plan to send all newbies to a pro-evo website once they entered a thread.
Something about "fair & balanced".

[Terriergal]

Every scientist, like every person, and certainly everyone with a political party, cannot help but tweak and prod everything they do along the railroad track of their own existing beliefs. I challenge everyone to invent a New Idea that doesn't build on what they already "know" to be true.

Nope nope nope. Evolutionists are by definition entirely objective, dontcha know? They are completely scientific. Oh never mind that they cannot explain the origin of life by natural means without a preexistent universe- which if it were preexistent would be pretty darn homogenous... (entropy/energy you know...) never mind all that. They're completely objective and non faith based. Which makes them MUCH smarter people.

[Ichneumon]

Hello..... People... Please observe that there are NO quote marks around #151.

Hello.... Elsie... You've been registered at FreeRepublic for almost five years now. "Please observe" that leading off a reply with italicized text sans quote marks *IS* how quotes of previous posts are usually done here. So surely you can't be unaware of the fact that posting a reply with italicized text is going to be presumed to be a quote of the post to which you are responding.

This pose is especially transparent when a quick review of your posts on other threads shows you consistently following this same convention countless times (i.e., quoting prior posts by italicizing a passage from them, followed by your own comments in normal font).

So pretending to be unaware of how your post would look if you italicized YOUR OWN parody in reply to RWP seems to be a case of bearing false witness (both against him, and in your "acting unaware" excuse for it).

Corinthians 5:20: "We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us."

Do Christ's ambassadors pretend to be quoting someone when they're not, then claim to be unaware of how their misrepresentations would be received?

Merely a PORTION of another reply was used. Over 50% was my OWN burbleing....

...which you presented in the format that is almost universally used on FreeRepublic to signal a quote of the post to which you are responding, and which you yourself use frequently when quoting.

Why is everyone so uptight here today??

Because we don't appreciate that sort of behavior.

[ALS]

"Because we don't appreciate that sort of behavior."

oooooooh, I like that litmus test! Mind if we apply it to you?

[Terriergal]

Doesn't matter. God's word never returns void no matter how many lies one reads/believes.

Wisdom cries aloud in the streets (no one can ever say "why didn't you tell me?") for someone to listen to her.

[Terriergal]

I actually watched them try to formulate a plan to send all newbies to a pro-evo website once they entered a thread. Something about "fair & balanced".

Sounds suspiciously like the behavior that they hated from medved when he'd post his creation science website links on each crevo thread. Isn't that odd? But then, I shouldn't question them. they're so much smarter than little old me.

[Terriergal]

So surely you can't be unaware of the fact that posting a reply with italicized text is going to be presumed to be a quote of the post to which you are responding.

certainly, people make mistakes in their html and one should ask for clarification before making accusations.

Ahem.

Then again, I shouldn't question someone with so much book knowledge. Secular people obviously know what's best.

[Ichneumon]

* Something * EVIDENCE of substance - relevance --- REALITY // sanity ! Serious mental problems (( denial // projection )) --- seeing things (( delusians )) !

Could you be so kind as to translate this into ordinary grammatical English? Thanks.

If I catch your drift, however, it appears that you're accusing me of "serious mental problems", "denial", "seeing things", and "delusions" (note correct spelling), all for pointing out that precambrian fossils do actually exist and asking you to cease your repeated untrue declarations that they do not.

If so, please confirm so that I can respond appropriately.