Diogenes lamp12/7/2023 ![]() His comment has no content beyond the usual creationist combination of genetic fallacy plus ad hominem attack: ignore the math because it was “ made by those who have not studied the topic”- as if Lisle’s toy model is so friggin’ hard! (For other entertaining examples of creationists who respond to the demolition of their faked evidence and/or terrible math with the very mature, “ Wah, it don’t count because you’re all ignorant of my genius, ignorant ignorant!!“, without ever actually employing their superior intellects to show what’s wrong with the maths, you can peruse IDer William Dembski’s ad hominem “refutation” of Felsenstein and Shallit’s demolitions of his pseudomath, and creationist Jeffrey Tomkins’ infantile mental meltdown presented by him as a “refutation” of AceofSpades’ exposure of Tompkins’ incompetent huge overestimate of the genetic difference between humans and chimps.) I plan on doing a series on this blog on the topic of ASC, in which I will refute this and other criticisms made by those who have not studied the topic. Lisle: I’ve seen this criticism but I haven’t responded yet. In his only response, two years ago today, Lisle promised to explain why we’re all stupid and maths are all wrong and his shitty model actually rules. Subsequently critics confronted Lisle with a handful of different mathematical and observational arguments that refuted his alleged solution to the Starlight Problem, which he calls “ ASC” – one point being that his ASC would in fact require a gravitational field that ought to be observable, but isn’t observed. ![]() Lisle had whipped up a convoluted, technical explanation for why Young Earth creationists are right about the universe being created only 6,000 years ago, even though we can see galaxies that are millions of light years away, and their starlight must have been traveling towards us for much longer than 6,000 years. ![]() Happy Jason Lisle Day! Today is the second anniversary of the day when Jason Lisle, director of what passes for research at ICR (Institute for Creation Research), promised he would explain why his alleged solution to the creationist “ Starlight Problem” wasn’t really demolished by the math of Einstein’s General Relativity– in spite of much proof to the contrary that had been shoved right in his face. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |