>^o.o^< >^..^< >^o.o^< >^..^< >^o.o^< >^..^< >^o.o^<
WOW Mitch, You
REALLY stuck your foot into it this time. For a man who 'claims' to believe in Darwinist evolution your ignorance stuns me. I said ignorance (ignorance is the lack of knowledge on a topic) I am
NOT calling you stupid.
Mitch sez:
"Bob I find myself a little confused about just what it is you do believe."
Bob sez:
I don't think I've made any secret of what I know to be truth according to Gods word. Would you like a statement of faith?
First you throw a bunch of non-names into the equation (hominin?) I'll presume you mean homini[d] that all mean the same thing and do nothing to throw any light on the subject as you haven't given me an example of a single actual hominid you wish to discuss. Nebraska man? Oh, that's right, that turned out to be a pigs tooth. Maybe you mean Peking man? DARN! that conveniently vanished like all evidences of evolution from China evaporate to when investigated too closely. Or Lucy? Have you actually seen the scraps of bone that they call Lucy-LOL! Or Neanderthal man? Recent evidence from mitochondrial DNA studies have been interpreted as evidence that Neanderthals were not a subspecies of H. sapiens. (A little aside here: Neanderthal man is estimated to be 40 to 60 THOUSAND years old and yet they are able to extract good DNA from them while they are unable to get good DNA from men known to be only a few thousand years old.
REMARKABLE! Neanderthal man must have had better embalmers.) Or is it where we find rare animals with an added chromosome? Unfortunately that is not only non-beneficial to the species, they are sterile (unable to reproduce) and STILL are the same species. (Biblical word: kind).
A burning desire to prove evolution or disprove God’s creation is what leads otherwise intelligent scientists and skeptics to fail to question evolutionary assumptions adequately. But faith in the Creator-God of the Bible and His Word, which tells us that man and all other major kinds of creatures were created— they did not evolve is the Creation antidote to being taken in by such astounding evolutionary claims.
There is no indisputable evidence that man has ever evolved from apelike creatures, and even less evidence that the earth is millions of years old.
Mitch sez:
"And anyone that has just a minuscule amount of scientific background knows that carbon dating is dead on."
Bob sez:
Oh my! You really, REALLY stuck your foot into it this time.
Even Darwinist scientists don't claim any accuracy in carbon 14 dating back beyond a few thousand years (not millions) As to the
accuracy of carbon 14 dating you have
GOT to be kidding. Carbon dating has been shown to be in error thousands of times over. Not only is it based on many erroneous assumptions. Live mollusks off the Hawaiian coast have had their shells dated with the carbon-14 method. These tests showed that the shells died 2000 years ago! This news came as quite a shock to the mollusks that had been using those shells until just recently. Some accuracy!
Many recently dead animals have been tested with differences of thousands of years difference in the age of the animal, sometimes from one end of the animal to the other. Many other recently live animals have been found dead for hundreds of years by carbon 14 dating. The same kinds of errors have been found with the other and supposedly more accurate dating methods. Mostly because they are based on wrong assumptions. Besides which, none of them goes back more than a few thousand years, not millions.
That tells me that you have no idea as to how Darwinists ascertain something to be millions of years old. Certainly not with your "
dead on" carbon 14 dating. See # 1 below
They claim:
1) Fossil dating is accurate since the method follows strict scientific guidelines: (NOT TRUE- They use many erroneous assumptions) Index fossils: The age of rocks around a fossil is used (The depth of the fossil in the strata indicates the strata's age and the depth of the strata indicates the fossils age. That is circular reasoning.)
2) Mathematical calculations are used (based on erroneous assumptions)
3) The state of decay, carbon-14, and isotopes figure in calculations (see above)
4) Tree of life relationships often help sort the dates (Mystical nonsense coming from the ancients and rehashed by Charles Darwin before carbon dating, still used today, and failing to account that the
KIND of tree doesn't change.)
Mitch sez:
"But I'm guessing you don't believe that being the Bible says that the earth is only 7 thousand years old..."
Bob sez:
I don't know where you find where the Bible
SAYS anything about the age of the earth. That is found by genealogies
within the Bible which I find no reason to doubt.
Mitch sez:
So are you saying that Adam and Eve were like cave people and God just changed them up every thousand years or so ??? Or are you saying that God just made those bones as a kinda joke for his own amusement ???
Bob sez:
You've lost me. Where does a bunch of monkey bones have any relationship to this discussion?_?_?
Mitch sez:
And what about those dinosaurs?
Bob sez:
Yah, how about them? Uh?
What about them?
Mitch sez:
And what about people getting taller ???
Bob sez:
What about them getting taller? Does that somehow change their species? I've visited my late great, great, great, grandfathers home in Germany. I had to nearly bend double to get my 6'4" frame through the doorway. I have no reason to believe gramps had to duck to get into it but I have reasonable assurances that gramps was still human. (Did you know that Jesus height was about 5'2").. You must have skipped reading where I wrote about microevolution, "where an organism adapts to its environment with the flexibility already built into its existing DNA."
Mitch sez:
But you don't believe in evolution, so why is God making us taller all of a sudden ???
Bob sez:
Again, I believe in
MICROEVOLUTION. It is scientific fact, where an organism adapts to its environment with the flexibility already built into its existing DNA.
"However it's obvious that God is making us taller so our feet will reach the floor." (Sorry I couldn't resist that)
MACROEVOLUTION, I'll leave to science fiction writers as faith based, (a religion) unproven, and unprovable. Remember, my objections in
THIS post were for scientific reasons.
If you would like me to illuminate you as to how "scientists" determine things are MILLIONS of years old it will take a much longer post than this one to explain the circular reasoning used (mostly having to do with strata), and the faulty assumptions leading to questionable results.
Oh heck, one quickie example. "Thousands of fossilized trees passing through "millions of years" of strata. In other words, that
proves that one end of the tree is millions of years older then the other. A-Freekin'-mazing!!!! Especially when you consider that many of the trees are inverted... Of course that could be
easily explained by some Jesus freak pointing out that that happened during a universal flood a few thousand years back, but that's too simple and not acceptable is it? Pity.
Believe it or not, using modern dating techniques, evolutionary scientists estimate that the Earth AND THE MOON are about 4.5 BILLION years old. That goes beyond stupid on so many counts it simply goes right back to 'A burning desire to prove evolution or disprove God’s creation is what leads otherwise intelligent scientists and skeptics to fail to question evolutionary assumptions adequately.' Now why would they have such a burning desire? Oh that's right, you don't believe in Satan. Then why?
Why indeed...
With Alacrity ~~~ 73 & God Bless ~ >"),Bob>< ~~~
