Look at page 14 of the Price reading, from "Agustine's own reasons..." to "...However..."

Agustine's argument (or the argument Price attributes to Agustine here) is not really a defense of the moving spotlight theory of time, but a different theory. But here's a similar line of thought that does aim to support the moving spotlight theory:

"We say such things as 'No dinosaurs are present' and 'No Martian expeditions are present; only things that are happening at 11am, 9/9/14 are present' (you may need to insert a different date into this last statement to get something that sounds true). But the block universe theory says that all these statement are false! The block universe theory is insane. We shouldn't believe it."

As best you can, extract from this paragraph a deductively valid argument against the block universe theory. You should number the premises and the conclusion should start with "Therefore."

Do you think this is a good argument? If not, which premise(s) of your argument do you think a defender of the block universe theory should reject, and why?