Kyrie Irving thinks the earth is flat.......REALLY

[jrpross_rivals]

Like really really. He's one of those flat-earth people. I wonder what class at Duke taught that.....

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.time...ie-irving-flat-earth?source=dam?client=safari

 

[morgousky]

The earth isn't flat, but I don't buy for a minute that we can properly gauge the age.

I've looked into the flat earthers when I was in college. Most of their beliefs can be immediately discredited with facts, some personally visible.

 

[kybassfan]

The earth isn't flat, but I don't buy for a minute that we can properly gauge the age.

I've looked into the flat earthers when I was in college. Most of their beliefs can be immediately discredited with facts, some personally visible.

Just not into argon and carbon 14 decay half life constants, huh? Don't feel bad, I had an uncle that didn't believe we landed on the moon.

Now, what I expect is for some dumbass NC fan to pipe in and say that Irving proves there is no benefit to attending class.

Oh and the dating thing, damn accurate, at least within statistical bounds. Not precise, but then they don't claim to be.

 

[morgousky]

Just not into argon and carbon 14 decay half life constants, huh? Don't feel bad, I had an uncle that didn't believe we landed on the moon.

Now, what I expect is for some dumbass NC fan to pipe in and say that Irving proves there is no benefit to attending class.

Oh and the dating thing, damn accurate, at least within statistical bounds. Not precise, but then they don't claim to be.

There are many, many scientist that theorize the earth isn't billions of years old with facts to support their theory. Guys a lot smarter than you and me. The department of education decides what settled science is and we get far too caught up in that.

I can take you back to the 70's and show you where scientist believed the ice age was approaching. I'm sure you are a firm believer in global warming err climate change. My point is we shouldn't just be so arrogant toward one way and be open to other theories. I don't care about state sanctioned group think.

And with that, we've got threads in the paddock for this.

 

[MegaBlue05]

Flat earthers are just wow.

I don't understand some of the crazy **** people believe like chem trails, Elvis lives or fluoride turns Americans in to Commies, etc., etc., etc.

 

[morgousky]

Flat earthers are just wow.

I don't understand some of the crazy **** people believe like chem trails, Elvis lives or fluoride turns Americans in to Commies, etc., etc., etc.

Gotta say, flat earthers are strange bunch. Up there with 9/11 conspirators. I mean, you SAW the planes hit the towers. You CAN SEE a boat on the horizon going down.

We had a rather large group of flat earthers at Memphis when I was there. Probably 200 or so. There's something called plate theory(?). Dunno. But yea they're pretty wild.

 

[kybassfan]

There are many, many scientist that theorize the earth isn't billions of years old with facts to support their theory. Guys a lot smarter than you and me. The department of education decides what settled science is and we get far too caught up in that.

I can take you back to the 70's and show you where scientist believed the ice age was approaching. I'm sure you are a firm believer in global warming err climate change. My point is we shouldn't just be so arrogant toward one way and be open to other theories. I don't care about state sanctioned group think.

And with that, we've got threads in the paddock for this.

LOL. You clearly don't know who you are talking to. And no, I don't subscribe to human driven global warming. Science is settled by peer review, at least the science I do for a living.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Flat for life...

 

[Panthur]

The earth isn't flat, but I don't buy for a minute that we can properly gauge the age.

I've looked into the flat earthers when I was in college. Most of their beliefs can be immediately discredited with facts, some personally visible.

Dude am I not the only creationist on here? Wow the Earth might not be flat but it's small!

 

[DCFseattle]

I like the flat earth people.
I can confidently say I'm smarter than them, and it makes me happy I'm not lowest on the brainometer.

 

[MegaBlue05]

Gotta say, flat earthers are strange bunch. Up there with 9/11 conspirators. I mean, you SAW the planes hit the towers. You CAN SEE a boat on the horizon going down.

We had a rather large group of flat earthers at Memphis when I was there. Probably 200 or so. There's something called plate theory(?). Dunno. But yea they're pretty wild.

Yeah man. I worked with a dude several years ago who was a flat earther AND 9/11 Truther. He was that guy everyone tried to avoid getting into a 1 on 1 conversation with because "Nice day, ain't it?" would run off the rails real quick.

 

[morgousky]

LOL. You clearly don't know who you are talking to. And no, I don't subscribe to human driven global warming. Science is settled by peer review, at least the science I do for a living.

Then you'll know there are many scientist, actually experts in the field globally, that believe the earth isn't billions of years old; and they have much evidence to point to their theory holding validity.

In an existence where it's possible nothing is real, and it is possible, nothing is guaranteed; even precious peer reviewed science.

btw, glad to know you're not into MMGW

 

[morgousky]

Yeah man. I worked with a dude several years ago who was a flat earther AND 9/11 Truther. He was that guy everyone tried to avoid getting into a 1 on 1 conversation with because "Nice day, ain't it?" would run off the rails real quick.

:joy:

 

[Noxium]

 

[morgousky]

 

[BigKari]

I would feel bad for these people but they are just so pseudo-intellectual. They really think they are just smarter and see what others cannot. Then they try to make you feel dumb and call you names like "sheep" because "you just believe what your told and what you see in the media".

 

[BigKari]

Then you'll know there are many scientist, actually experts in the field globally, that believe the earth isn't billions of years old; and they have much evidence to point to their theory holding validity.

In an existence where it's possible nothing is real, and it is possible, nothing is guaranteed; even precious peer reviewed science.

btw, glad to know you're not into MMGW

Please provide a link from a reputable source that shows evidence that the earth isn't billions of years old. I genuinely would like to see if it can plausibly be refuted.

 

[Panthur]

LOL. You clearly don't know who you are talking to. And no, I don't subscribe to human driven global warming. Science is settled by peer review, at least the science I do for a living.

You may well be adept at your own branch of science but if so you need to point that sharp mind toward the propaganda you've been sold. The carbon 14 you mentioned is no friend at all to deep-timers. Its half life is so short that no amount of it at all could persist more than a hundred thousand years. Which is a serious problem for long agers since diamonds everywhere are chock of it in situ, to the point where attempts to explain it all away by sample contamination have become outright hilarious. Potsssium-argon analysis on the other hand only gives old-Earth results if you interpret the measured proportions using old-Earth assumptions about the starting ratios. It's highly circular and is of no value whatsoever in "proving" the interpretive framework under which it is used.

What's even more useful and critical though it to examine the history of what passes for secular origins science. For example, did LeMaitre begin with any scientific observations when he set up his Big Bang model, or did he just give mathematical form to Teilhard's heretical fantasy that so inspired him, and then adjust the numbers for that post-hoc until the laughter quieted down a bit and a younger, more naive generation of scientists started to give him public credence? Did Charles Darwin actually get any ideas from looking at finches, or did he simply republish and repackage his grandfather's (Erasmus Darwin) ridiculously impluasible atheist's wet dream Zoonomia with the Biblical creationist Edward Bylthe's idea about natural selection crammed into it?

The whole thing's a ridiculous house of mirrors and the closer you look at absolutely any part of it with authentic scientific thinking--especially if you look at the history of thinking behind it--the more it will unravel.

 

[Goingfor9]

That Duke education hard at work. Makes you wonder if they have some fake science classes

 

[BlueThruAndThru_rivals115784]

I hope this gets pushed to the Paddock where we can really go at it.

Please provide a link from a reputable source that shows evidence that the earth isn't billions of years old. I genuinely would like to see if it can plausibly be refuted.

Agreed.

Morgousky, how old do you believe the earth to be?

 

[morgousky]

Please provide a link from a reputable source that shows evidence that the earth isn't billions of years old. I genuinely would like to see if it can plausibly be refuted.

A link to the research behind the theory? no way. I'm too drunk and not interested in doing your research.

I studied the topic to death for over a year in college at Union University, a bible school, and had a excellent professor who invited lots of discussion and thought provoking discussion on the topic. Very busy classes.

I'm not totally sold on anything, but I've seen enough and learned enough through the years to say - I've got no idea but I don't believe in the broad consensus of "billions" of years old.

As far as refuting, anything can be refuted. Believe it or not there are flat earth scientist.

One thing that always intrigued me was the math behind supernovas. If the earth was billions of years old we should see more of them in the visible universe. Just so happens the number comes to about 7,000 years worth. But anyway, there's a good start for ya! Let me know how it goes.

 

[Panthur]

Please provide a link from a reputable source that shows evidence that the earth isn't billions of years old. I genuinely would like to see if it can plausibly be refuted.

Honestly, he could provide many many links--I could too--but if you want to get a handle on this you're much better off doing your own digging, especially into the history of the thinking behind current ideas, than asking for someone else's prepackaged ideas on someone's web site. Otherwise anyone on either side of the origins debate is fully capable of finding a web site that makes whatever side they already favor look unassailably correct and then going back to sleep--as long as they ignore the man behind the green curtain.

 

[morgousky]

I hope this gets pushed to the Paddock where we can really go at it.



Agreed.

Morgousky, how old do you believe the earth to be?

Let me ask you a more important question?

 

[morgousky]

Honestly, he could provide many many links--I could too--but if you want to get a handle on this you're much better off doing your own digging, especially into the history of the thinking behind current ideas, than asking for someone else's prepackaged ideas on someone's web site. Otherwise anyone on either side of the origins debate is fully capable of finding a web site that makes whatever side they already favor look unassailably correct and then going back to sleep--as long as they ignore the man behind the green curtain.

Such a great post it took my breath away. You can always tell the ones that were only exposed to Bill Nye as a kid and become absolutely mind blown when there's evidence that shatters their little safe world.

There are countless articles and research done on the topic. Yet I'm going to spend my friday night doing someones research? I'm a methodist, we drink on Fridays.

 

[BigKari]

A link to the science behind the theory? no way. I'm too drunk and not interested in doing your research.

I studied the topic to death for over a year in college at Union University, a bible school, and had a excellent professor who invited lots of discussion and thought provoking discussion on the topic. Very busy classes.

I'm not totally sold on anything, but I've seen enough and learned enough through the years to say - I've got no idea but I don't believe in the broad consensus of "billions" of years old.

As far as refuting, anything can be refuted. Believe it or not there are flat earth scientist.

One thing that always intrigued me was the math behind supernovas. If the earth was billions of years old we should see more of them in the visible universe. Just so happens the number comes to about 7,000 years worth. But anyway, there's a good start for ya! Let me know how it goes.

It's cool I didn't need four paragraphs for you to tell me you don't have ****

 

[morgousky]

It's cool I didn't need four paragraphs for you to tell me you don't have ****

Are you too stupid to google search WELL researched topics? I just made an observation from MY education on the topic, and what conclusions (or not) that I've drawn based on the experience. It was a statement of opinion, not an invitation to spend the next hour researching for you.

Arguing on the forum is much more fun.

Do it yourself.

 

[BigKari]

Are you too stupid to google search WELL researched topics? I just made an observation from MY education on the topic, and what conclusions (or not) that I've based on the experience.

Do it yourself.

I just asked if you could produce something to back up your "logic". You couldn't do it and that's fine. As for me, this isn't the first time I've pondered this topic so I have previously done my own research on it. By the way, you can call me stupid all you want, but you're the fucktard who thinks earth is 7000 years old. Turn your ****** brain on Dingus

 

[Pygmy Sasquatch]

Well, if the universe is really a hologram, then Irving would be right, but for the wrong reasons.

 

[morgousky]

I just asked if you could produce something to back up your "logic". You couldn't do it and that's fine. As for me, this isn't the first time I've pondered this topic so I have previously done my own research on it. By the way, you can call me stupid all you want, but you're the ****tard who thinks earth is 7000 years old. Turn your ****in brain on Dingus

So you're too stupid to do your own research? Am I allowed to use your logic?

When you were asked to write a paper in college did you tell the instructor to show you the citations? I find it comical you think because I don't want to spend the next 15-20 minutes citing readily available evidence (that you'll ignore anyway) it somehow means I have nothing to go on. No sir BigK, it means I don't care enough to even open another page for you.

Never claimed I knew the answeres to the earths age. I'll leave that to ignorant "pseudo-intellectuals" such as yourself, since you like that word so much. Big one eh?

 

[UKCAT5FAN]

I'm sure you are a firm believer in global warming err climate change. My point is we shouldn't just be so arrogant toward one way and be open to other theories. I don't care about state sanctioned group think.

And with that, we've got threads in the paddock for this.

I'm going to remind you that you said this next time someone disagrees with you and you drop a bomb on them. :smiley:

 

[morgousky]

I'm going to remind you that you said this next time someone disagrees with you and you drop a bomb on them. :smiley:

Do not use my own hypocrisy against me.

 

[UKCAT5FAN]

A link to the research behind the theory? no way. I'm too drunk and not interested in doing your research.


One thing that always intrigued me was the math behind supernovas. If the earth was billions of years old we should see more of them in the visible universe. Just so happens the number comes to about 7,000 years worth. But anyway, there's a good start for ya! Let me know how it goes.

That is interesting. Never thought about that actually. Makes sense that we should see more of them visible.

 

[BigKari]

So you're too stupid to do your own research? Am I allowed to use your logic?

When you were asked to write a paper in college did you tell the instructor to show you the citations? I find it comical you think because I don't want to spend the next 15-20 minutes citing readily available evidence (that you'll ignore anyway) it somehow means I have nothing to go on. No sir BigK, it means I don't care enough to even open another page for you.

Never claimed I knew the answeres to the earths age. I'll leave that to ignorant "pseudo-intellectuals" such as yourself, since you like that word so much. Big one eh?

I mean you have the time to write 96 paragraphs about how you don't have time to support your argument...sooooo who's the real Schmitty here?

 

[morgousky]

I mean you have the time to write 96 paragraphs about how you don't have time to support your argument...sooooo who's the real Schmitty here?

Because we are arguing. I enjoy it, especially in my state of mind. "Creationism vs. everyone else" research is work. That's not fun, especially when you had to do it for grades in college. Just yesterday someone denied that the NCAA had grounds to remove UCLA's titles. Then ask me top cite the evidence to support UCLA was running a pro team in college. After many books (and a movie) on the subject, as well as players and boosters own admissions, I'm not spending the time. It was easier to put him on the ignore list and let him remain ignorant.

You're not bad so there's no need to do that. However I'm not doing your research in this thread. Catch me on a day when I'm in the mood. That's not now.

 

[BigKari]

That is interesting. Never thought about that actually. Makes sense that we should see more of them visible.

Supernova remnants disperse, therefore evidence of them fades away. The remnants can only be visible for approx. 10,000 years or so. You have to think beyond the simplicity of young earth theorists. It's so very easy to pokes holes in their "logic".

 

[BigKari]

Because we are arguing. I enjoy it, especially in my state of mind. "Creationism vs. everyone else" research is work. That's not fun, especially when you had to do it for grades in college. Just yesterday someone denied that the NCAA had grounds to remove UCLA's titles. Then ask me top cite the evidence to support UCLA was running a pro team in college. After many books (and a movie) on the subject, as well as players and boosters own admissions, I'm not spending the time. It was easier to put him on the ignore list and let him remain ignorant.

You're not bad so there's no need to do that. However I'm not doing your research in this thread. Catch me on a day when I'm in the mood. That's not now.

I told you, I've already researched it. I know the young earth theory is just goofy ********. I don't need you to research anything for me.

 

[morgousky]

I told you, I've already researched it. I know the young earth theory is just goofy ********. I don't need you to research anything for me.

Well if you had already made up your mind on the subject then why ask me to research it for you?

It's not goofy at all btw, and some of those scientist would absolutely own you and leave you looking like a 2nd grader.

Bill Nye the science guy is so much more believable. Even when working with vinegar and baking soda!

 

[morgousky]

Supernova remnants disperse, therefore evidence of them fades away. The remnants can only be visible for approx. 10,000 years or so. You have to think beyond the simplicity of young earth theorists. It's so very easy to pokes holes in their "logic".

[laughing]

Are you seriously trying to pretend you understand or actually comprehend anything you just said? The worst part is you believe whatever BS you just googled in the last 5 minutes without any counter.

Queston - why are there not anymore supernovas in the visible universe?

progressive scientist - uh let me check

one year later and thousands of wasted research dollars.

Well since there's no way we could possibly make a concrete claim, it's obvious they must disperse over time. Say, 10,000 years?

That how it went bigK?

 

[BigKari]

Well if you had already made up your mind on the subject then why ask me to research it for you?

It's not goofy at all btw, and some of those scientist would absolutely own you and leave you looking like a 2nd grader.

Bill Nye the science guy is so much more believable. Even when working with vinegar and baking soda!

You're like a broken record. I don't need you to research anything for me. I've researched my side of the argument and your side years ago. It just so happens that your side of the argument isn't widely accepted by the scientific community. You floated your "smoking gun" supernova theory out there, which even a 7th grader could disprove, and that's really all you have.

 

[morgousky]

You're like a broken record. I don't need you to research anything for me. I've researched my side of the argument and your side years ago. It just so happens that your side of the argument isn't widely accepted by the scientific community. You floated your "smoking gun" supernova theory out there, which even a 7th grader could disprove, and that's really all you have.

"smoking gun" lmao.

We both know you haven't researched much of anything. I don't buy it for a second. But you keep on keepin on.