Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How many times did your mother drop you on your head as a child? There are reams of evidence showing that the stones are a complete hoax and yet you still continue to believe that they're real? I dare you to go out and Google "Ica stones hoax" and read the first ten links that come up. I know you won't, because you don't want to learn anything, and you certainly don't want to admit out loud that your crazy fundie hallucinations aren't real.
Well, I guess somebody has to be at the bottom of the IQ bell-curve and you're filling that position quite handily.
There are reams of evidence showing us fake fossils coming out of China, does this now mean all fossils are fakes? There are thousands of Ica burial stones, do you assume because of some poorly carved fakes, that now all must be fakes?
And you still have not answered my question. If those Ica burial stones are all fakes. Why do we have a Spainish priest asking what are those strange animals found on those Ica burial stones? And his statement was made in 1525 A.D. Well, I guess somebody has to refuse to answer pointed questions.
And I don't have to look up fake Ica burial stones. I know there are fakes out there, just as I know there are fake fossils out there. Yet, I understand not everthing is a fake, and there is supportive evidence for valid finds.
Actually I'm beginning to wonder if we are all the victims of a hoax here...C34 just may not be real, but is in fact a web bot, programmed to repeat the same nonsense over and over again. It seems that the programming cannot be changed. I have noticed that he has made the exact same responses on other forums that he makes here, and it has been going on for a number of years.
That's because it hard for me to understand how some who proclaim such a belief in science and evolution, never seem interested in applying the scientific method when new evidence is found that refutes evolution. And it appears, the only thing they need to refute this new evidence, is their personal opinion. Why is that?
My questions often go unanswered, because there is no scientific review that would answer them. So I keep asking the same questions with the hope that someday, science will consider this great body of evidence, rather then ignore it.
That's because it hard for me to understand how some who proclaim such a belief in science and evolution, never seem interested in applying the scientific method when new evidence is found that refutes evolution. And it appears, the only thing they need to refute this new evidence, is their personal opinion. Why is that?
My questions often go unanswered, because there is no scientific review that would answer them. So I keep asking the same questions with the hope that someday, science will consider this great body of evidence, rather then ignore it.
Well if you hope that it will be accepted by science why present it here? Send it off for review....The questions that you ask here in most cases have not been ignored, but have been answered, and some in great detail, thanks to Rifleman, and others. Regarding the hoaxes you have presented, they have been investigated by scientists and found to be hoaxes....You really can't expect science to re-evaluate proven hoaxes.
Why not let's start afresh here? I'm sorta confused about which questions some are referring to as un-answered. I surely know which ones of mine that you've conscientiously avoided, but I'm willing to let those go for now.
Tom, why not re-state, fresh, two or three questions and we'll investigate and answer them from our perspective.
Some limitations: No more mention for now about the El Toro figurines. By anyone. Until the city of Acambaro, MX, decides to respond or not, amidst it's current Swine Flu concerns, no-one can say that science isn't interested. I've been eagerly awaiting the opportunity, Tom, but they won't (at least, haven't yet..) responded.
If they do, I'll have them aged properly, if that's still possible (they've been handled so much and, apparently, very improperly if they are to be properly aged...) (see my other new thread about the methodologies & limitations of thermoluminescent dating, circa 2009, not 1972, when it hadn't even been invented yet, though the YEC folks claim to have used it.... Odd, huh?)
I'm ready to look at your Ica stones; the one quicky-look I took noted that these were considered to be a hoax, but you seem to think otherwise because of some old priest's knowledgeable statements. Back in the scientifically enlightend 1500's. Wow!
Fair enough.
State your two or three specific questions. I'll get right on it.
My simple rejoinder question though: if I find and post goodinfothat might refute or at the least question it, what will you do? You can't just then say anything about "science's lack of interest", or "science won't accept results that don't fit their pre-determined objectives"; I can always prove my qualifications to some external adjudicator. San, you out there?
For my part, as always, if your stuff peaks my curiosity and there's a positive point to be made for the YEC-Creationist perspective, I'll happily make it for your side, right here, "up front" on International C-D! Then, there'd be no more claims from you of biases or attempts to hide behind the curtain. OK?
You willing?
Last edited by rifleman; 05-06-2009 at 11:05 AM..
Reason: typos
Well if you hope that it will be accepted by science why present it here? Send it off for review....The questions that you ask here in most cases have not been ignored, but have been answered, and some in great detail, thanks to Rifleman, and others. Regarding the hoaxes you have presented, they have been investigated by scientists and found to be hoaxes....You really can't expect science to re-evaluate proven hoaxes.
How can science prove a hoax, when science refuses to do a scientific review on the evidence presented? Personal opinion is not proof of anything, except a bias view that ignores the evidence. El Toro Mountain figurines have not been investigated by science, Ica burial stones have not been investigated by science, and now the city west of Cuba, and a half mile below the surface has not been investigated by science either. THIS EVIDENCE HAS ALL BEEN IGNORED. If I am wrong, can you direct me to the scientific review of this evidence?
Why not let's start afresh here? I'm sorta confused about which questions some are referring to as un-answered. I surely know which ones of mine that you've conscientiously avoided, but I'm willing to let those go for now.
Tom, why not re-state, fresh, two or three questions and we'll investigate and answer them from our perspective.
Some limitations: No more mention for now about the El Toro figurines. By anyone. Until the city of Acambaro, MX, decides to respond or not, amidst it's current Swine Flu concerns, no-one can say that science isn't interested. I've been eagerly awaiting the opportunity, Tom, but they won't (at least, haven't yet..) responded.
If they do, I'll have them aged properly, if that's still possible (they've been handled so much and, apparently, very improperly if they are to be properly aged...) (see my other new thread about the methodologies & limitations of thermoluminescent dating, circa 2009, not 1972, when it hadn't even been invented yet, though the YEC folks claim to have used it.... Odd, huh?)
I'm ready to look at your Ica stones; the one quicky-look I took noted that these were considered to be a hoax, but you seem to think otherwise because of some old priest's knowledgeable statements. Back in the scientifically enlightend 1500's. Wow!
Fair enough.
State your two or three specific questions. I'll get right on it.
My simple rejoinder question though: if I find and post goodinfothat might refute or at the least question it, what will you do? You can't just then say anything about "science's lack of interest", or "science won't accept results that don't fit their pre-determined objectives"; I can always prove my qualifications to some external adjudicator. San, you out there?
For my part, as always, if your stuff peaks my curiosity and there's a positive point to be made for the YEC-Creationist perspective, I'll happily make it for your side, right here, "up front" on International C-D! Then, there'd be no more claims from you of biases or attempts to hide behind the curtain. OK?
You willing?
I myself do not know how many Ica burial stones show pictures of dinosuars. I am aware that some stones are fakes. Yet I do not believe they are all frauds. It is my understanding that there are thousands of Ica burial stones. My questions would be. 1. How many burial stones show pictures of dinosaurs. And 2. What years were these stones discovered? I'm not sure if those questions would be easy to answer, yet it would be interesting to know. As for my part, my faith is not built on this evidence. I have had personal encounters with God, and demons. So what I believe goes much deeper then what these discoveries reveal. Still in all, it is the truth that I care most about. And if such discoveries are but frauds, then I would really have no intrest in supporting them. The fact that a priest from the 1500s had knowledge of strange animals found on those Ica burial stones, tells me there is something that was not normal. And it tells me, that even an unenlightened priest found strange.
The saga continues, the El Toro figurines, the ICA burial stones and the undersea city near Cuba.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A Rational Suggestion
