Evolution and The Age Of The Earth

[westwall]

Not wiggling myself out of anything, though you are seriously intent on doing so yourself.
Again, read through and tell me specifically where I claimed the results are invalidated, just the opposite I said it didn't necessarily invalidate the processes but again how many have of you have traveled back to day zero to confirm what you believe you know today? I would hazard a guess and say none........ Are you absolutely positive you've discovered all the potential variables that may affect the results, again I would hazard a guess and say probably not.
Hell from the way you're approaching this discussion with me leads one to assume you think the Static Universe theory is true.........

Once again, you make this "day zero" claim and do it with a straight face. The rocks/minerals/soils themselves ARE time capsules. Once again, there is a very easy way to resolve this discussion. Take that geologic field trip with me. That's the only way you are going to understand the science. Come on, grasshopper. What are you afraid of?

Orogenicman, is that offer open to all comers? Don't doubt the the present dating systems, but, as an older student of geology, will take any free instruction in any aspect of the discipline I can get, LOL. The only crinoids I have ever collected was from Jim Bridger canyon in Montana. I used to check over a small limestone unit near John Day, Oregon, that a couple of young geologists stated had some messed up crinoids in it, but I never could find them.

I don't think that most people are aware of the number of radio isotopes that we now use, nor the depth of time that they are capable of resolving.

I am willing to entertain anyone who wants to learn about geology. I presently live in Georgia, and where I live, it is all weathered granite and schist with lots of Georgia clay soil (saprolite). All on the order of a billion years old. No fossils here, I'm afraid. But where I am from, Louisville, Kentucky, that place is a fossil heaven, with every outcrop loaded with them. And they range from upper Ordovician to Lower/middle Mississippian in age. Quite an age range, and lots of diversity. I can arrange a field trip there, but for me, it is an 8 hour drive just to get there (and another 8 hour drive back). So any trip would have to be planned well in advance so I can set aside time and expenses for the trip.

You forgot the Grenville gneisses, and there are Hadrosaur and Albertosaurus along with a bunch of other marine fossils present in the Cretaceous formations around Macon and Augusta.

The gneiss doesn't outcrop here where I live. I'm not interested in trying to collect marine fossils from the Cretaceous. I'm interested in Paleozoic invertebrates.

Well, there are trilobites in the area, but Georgia certainly doesn't enjoy anything like a Burgess Shale, that's for sure.

 

[orogenicman]

Once again, you make this "day zero" claim and do it with a straight face. The rocks/minerals/soils themselves ARE time capsules. Once again, there is a very easy way to resolve this discussion. Take that geologic field trip with me. That's the only way you are going to understand the science. Come on, grasshopper. What are you afraid of?

Orogenicman, is that offer open to all comers? Don't doubt the the present dating systems, but, as an older student of geology, will take any free instruction in any aspect of the discipline I can get, LOL. The only crinoids I have ever collected was from Jim Bridger canyon in Montana. I used to check over a small limestone unit near John Day, Oregon, that a couple of young geologists stated had some messed up crinoids in it, but I never could find them.

I don't think that most people are aware of the number of radio isotopes that we now use, nor the depth of time that they are capable of resolving.

I am willing to entertain anyone who wants to learn about geology. I presently live in Georgia, and where I live, it is all weathered granite and schist with lots of Georgia clay soil (saprolite). All on the order of a billion years old. No fossils here, I'm afraid. But where I am from, Louisville, Kentucky, that place is a fossil heaven, with every outcrop loaded with them. And they range from upper Ordovician to Lower/middle Mississippian in age. Quite an age range, and lots of diversity. I can arrange a field trip there, but for me, it is an 8 hour drive just to get there (and another 8 hour drive back). So any trip would have to be planned well in advance so I can set aside time and expenses for the trip.

You forgot the Grenville gneisses, and there are Hadrosaur and Albertosaurus along with a bunch of other marine fossils present in the Cretaceous formations around Macon and Augusta.

The gneiss doesn't outcrop here where I live. I'm not interested in trying to collect marine fossils from the Cretaceous. I'm interested in Paleozoic invertebrates.

Well, there are trilobites in the area, but Georgia certainly doesn't enjoy anything like a Burgess Shale, that's for sure.

Kentucky is nearly wall to wall with Paleozoic critters. And I know the geology there like the back of my hand. That is why if I do a field trip, it will be there.

 

[westwall]

Orogenicman, is that offer open to all comers? Don't doubt the the present dating systems, but, as an older student of geology, will take any free instruction in any aspect of the discipline I can get, LOL. The only crinoids I have ever collected was from Jim Bridger canyon in Montana. I used to check over a small limestone unit near John Day, Oregon, that a couple of young geologists stated had some messed up crinoids in it, but I never could find them.

I don't think that most people are aware of the number of radio isotopes that we now use, nor the depth of time that they are capable of resolving.

I am willing to entertain anyone who wants to learn about geology. I presently live in Georgia, and where I live, it is all weathered granite and schist with lots of Georgia clay soil (saprolite). All on the order of a billion years old. No fossils here, I'm afraid. But where I am from, Louisville, Kentucky, that place is a fossil heaven, with every outcrop loaded with them. And they range from upper Ordovician to Lower/middle Mississippian in age. Quite an age range, and lots of diversity. I can arrange a field trip there, but for me, it is an 8 hour drive just to get there (and another 8 hour drive back). So any trip would have to be planned well in advance so I can set aside time and expenses for the trip.

You forgot the Grenville gneisses, and there are Hadrosaur and Albertosaurus along with a bunch of other marine fossils present in the Cretaceous formations around Macon and Augusta.

The gneiss doesn't outcrop here where I live. I'm not interested in trying to collect marine fossils from the Cretaceous. I'm interested in Paleozoic invertebrates.

Well, there are trilobites in the area, but Georgia certainly doesn't enjoy anything like a Burgess Shale, that's for sure.

Kentucky is nearly wall to wall with Paleozoic critters. And I know the geology there like the back of my hand. That is why if I do a field trip, it will be there.

Too much plant life in the way. I prefer Utah and California. Desert is a geologists best friend.

 

[orogenicman]

I am willing to entertain anyone who wants to learn about geology. I presently live in Georgia, and where I live, it is all weathered granite and schist with lots of Georgia clay soil (saprolite). All on the order of a billion years old. No fossils here, I'm afraid. But where I am from, Louisville, Kentucky, that place is a fossil heaven, with every outcrop loaded with them. And they range from upper Ordovician to Lower/middle Mississippian in age. Quite an age range, and lots of diversity. I can arrange a field trip there, but for me, it is an 8 hour drive just to get there (and another 8 hour drive back). So any trip would have to be planned well in advance so I can set aside time and expenses for the trip.

You forgot the Grenville gneisses, and there are Hadrosaur and Albertosaurus along with a bunch of other marine fossils present in the Cretaceous formations around Macon and Augusta.

The gneiss doesn't outcrop here where I live. I'm not interested in trying to collect marine fossils from the Cretaceous. I'm interested in Paleozoic invertebrates.

Well, there are trilobites in the area, but Georgia certainly doesn't enjoy anything like a Burgess Shale, that's for sure.

Kentucky is nearly wall to wall with Paleozoic critters. And I know the geology there like the back of my hand. That is why if I do a field trip, it will be there.

Too much plant life in the way. I prefer Utah and California. Desert is a geologists best friend.

Actually, there are thousands of road cuts and rock quarries from which to choose.

The quality and quantity of fossils available along the roadside make it well worth the effort. And Louisville proper has some of the best Middle Silurian and Middle Devonian marine fossil collecting localities on the continent.

devonian in louisville - Google Search

 

[orogenicman]

More origins research:

Geochemical process on Saturn s moon linked to life s origin

New work from a team including Carnegie's Christopher Glein has revealed the pH of water spewing from a geyser-like plume on Saturn's moon Enceladus. Their findings are an important step toward determining whether life could exist, or could have previously existed, on the sixth planet's sixth-largest moon.

Enceladus is geologically active and thought to have a liquid water ocean beneath its icy surface. The hidden ocean is the presumed source of the plume of water vapor and ice that the Cassini spacecraft has observed venting from the moon's south polar region. Whenever there's the possibility of liquid water on another planetary body, scientists begin to ask whether or not it could support life.

The present team, including lead author Glein, John Baross of the University of Washington, and J. Hunter Waite Jr. of the Southwest Research Institute, developed a new chemical model based on mass spectrometry data of ice grains and gases in Enceladus' plume gathered by Cassini, in order to determine the pH of Enceladus' ocean. The pH tells us how acidic or basic the water is. It is a fundamental parameter to understanding geochemical processes occurring inside the moon that are considered important in determining Enceladus' potential for acquiring and hosting life. Their work is published in the journal Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta.

The team's model, constrained by observational data from two Cassini teams, including one led by coauthor Waite, shows that the plume, and by inference the ocean, is salty with an alkaline pH of about 11 or 12, which is similar to that of glass-cleaning solutions of ammonia. It contains the same sodium chloride (NaCl) salt as our oceans here on Earth. Its additional substantial sodium carbonate (Na2CO3) makes the ocean more similar to our planet's soda lakes such as Mono Lake in California or Lake Magadi in Kenya. The scientists refer to it as a "soda ocean."

"Knowledge of the pH improves our understanding of geochemical processes in Enceladus' 'soda ocean,'" Glein explained.

The model suggests that the ocean's high pH is caused by a metamorphic, underwater geochemical process called serpentinization. On Earth, serpentinization occurs when certain kinds of so-called "ultrabasic" or "ultramafic" rocks (low in silica and high in magnesium and iron) are brought up to the ocean floor from the upper mantle and chemically interact with the surrounding water molecules. Through this process, the ultrabasic rocks are converted into new minerals, including the mineral serpentine, after which the process is named, and the fluid becomes alkaline. On Enceladus, serpentinization would occur when ocean water circulates through a rocky core at the bottom of its ocean.

"Why is serpentinization of such great interest? Because the reaction between the metallic rocks and the ocean water also produces molecular hydrogen (H2), which provides a source of chemical energy that is essential for supporting a deep biosphere in the absence of sunlight inside moons and planets," Glein said. "This process is central to the emerging science of astrobiology, because molecular hydrogen can both drive the formation of organic compounds like amino acids that may lead to the origin of life, and serve as food for microbial life such as methane-producing organisms. As such, serpentinization provides a link between geological processes and biological processes. The discovery of serpentinization makes Enceladus an even more promising candidate for a separate genesis of life."

Even beyond the search for life-hosting conditions on other planetary bodies, the team's work demonstrates that it is possible to determine the pH of an extraterrestrial ocean based on chemical data from a spacecraft flying through a plume. This may be a useful approach to searching for habitable conditions in other icy worlds, such as Jupiter's moon Europa.

"Our results show that this kind of synergy between observations and modeling can tell us a great deal about the geochemical processes occurring on a faraway celestial object, thus opening the door to an exciting new era of chemical oceanography in the solar system and beyond." Glein added.

Explore further: Researchers study methane-rich plumes from Saturn's icy moon Enceladus

 

[usfan]

This is a thread for me to document massive amounts of evidence for evolution and the age of the earth, both indisputable facts.
The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years.
The universe is 13.82 billion years old.
Evolution is simply: A change in heritabletraits of biological populations over successive generations.[1] Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution.[2]
Now, onto the evidence:
The earth is not 6000-10,000 years old, for any nutjobs who actually believe that, educate yourself:
How we know the age:
- Radiometric dating
- The distant starlight and how long light takes to reach us
- Amino acid racemization
- Continental drift
- Geomagnetic reversals
- Human chromosomal ancestry
- Ice Layers
- Lack of DNA in fossils
- Perma frost
- Seabed plankton layering
- Stalactites
- Uranium lead dating
- Weathering rinds
- A million other things.
Now, on to the big one... Evolution.
- Remains of ancient organisms
- Fossil layers
- Similarities among living organisms
- Similarities of embryos
- Transitional fossils
- DNA similarities
- Universal common descent
Much more to add, but none the less, I'm in the mood to debate those who deny facts.. Bring it on.
Observed evolution:
Observed Evolutionary Changes
Now, onto the controversial one, human evolution.
human evolution evidence - Google Scholar - Plenty of papers to read, although...
Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution s Human Origins Program

All i see is massive amounts of assertions.

Dating methods are rife with assumptions, speculations, & unverifiable data. To dance around saying this is all 'proven, settled science' is the height of absurdity, & reflects religious devotion, not scientific analysis.

There is NO WAY to estimate, verify, or measure the age of the universe, much less the earth. This is a philosophical exercise, not a scientific one. It assumes everything happened, with no deviation from our assumptions, along a uniform time line, following natural laws that we only know the surface of, in the face of the infinite universe. It is arrogance & bravado, to make such dogmatic statements about the vastness of the universe.

NONE of your dating methods prove your premise. They are all over the place, & don't provide any compelling conclusion. Half lives? Just the magnetic half life of the earth refutes your absurd claim of 4.5 billion years. Radiometric dating? it would all have burnt out millennia ago, based on your assumptions.

How does human chromosomal ancestry show 4.5 billion years?

No, this list is just science as decree.. the popular religion of the day. This is not science.. not even a good theory.

The massive fraud of evolution was fine as a religious view from the 19th century, but modern genetics has updated our views quite a bit. Anthropology & genetics shows that we have not 'evolved' at all. We are the same as our mitochondrial mother.

Someday, evolution will be looked back at like we do flat earth theories, leeches taking bad blood, & the 4 humors. Until then, as always, the status quo scientific establishment fights tooth & nail to defend their ideological turf, regardless of the facts.

 

[Hollie]

This is a thread for me to document massive amounts of evidence for evolution and the age of the earth, both indisputable facts.
The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years.
The universe is 13.82 billion years old.
Evolution is simply: A change in heritabletraits of biological populations over successive generations.[1] Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution.[2]
Now, onto the evidence:
The earth is not 6000-10,000 years old, for any nutjobs who actually believe that, educate yourself:
How we know the age:
- Radiometric dating
- The distant starlight and how long light takes to reach us
- Amino acid racemization
- Continental drift
- Geomagnetic reversals
- Human chromosomal ancestry
- Ice Layers
- Lack of DNA in fossils
- Perma frost
- Seabed plankton layering
- Stalactites
- Uranium lead dating
- Weathering rinds
- A million other things.
Now, on to the big one... Evolution.
- Remains of ancient organisms
- Fossil layers
- Similarities among living organisms
- Similarities of embryos
- Transitional fossils
- DNA similarities
- Universal common descent
Much more to add, but none the less, I'm in the mood to debate those who deny facts.. Bring it on.
Observed evolution:
Observed Evolutionary Changes
Now, onto the controversial one, human evolution.
human evolution evidence - Google Scholar - Plenty of papers to read, although...
Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution s Human Origins Program

All i see is massive amounts of assertions.

Dating methods are rife with assumptions, speculations, & unverifiable data. To dance around saying this is all 'proven, settled science' is the height of absurdity, & reflects religious devotion, not scientific analysis.

There is NO WAY to estimate, verify, or measure the age of the universe, much less the earth. This is a philosophical exercise, not a scientific one. It assumes everything happened, with no deviation from our assumptions, along a uniform time line, following natural laws that we only know the surface of, in the face of the infinite universe. It is arrogance & bravado, to make such dogmatic statements about the vastness of the universe.

NONE of your dating methods prove your premise. They are all over the place, & don't provide any compelling conclusion. Half lives? Just the magnetic half life of the earth refutes your absurd claim of 4.5 billion years. Radiometric dating? it would all have burnt out millennia ago, based on your assumptions.

How does human chromosomal ancestry show 4.5 billion years?

No, this list is just science as decree.. the popular religion of the day. This is not science.. not even a good theory.

The massive fraud of evolution was fine as a religious view from the 19th century, but modern genetics has updated our views quite a bit. Anthropology & genetics shows that we have not 'evolved' at all. We are the same as our mitochondrial mother.

Someday, evolution will be looked back at like we do flat earth theories, leeches taking bad blood, & the 4 humors. Until then, as always, the status quo scientific establishment fights tooth & nail to defend their ideological turf, regardless of the facts.

Yeah. It will great when the Jerry Falwell Ministries take the lead in education.

 

[orogenicman]

This is a thread for me to document massive amounts of evidence for evolution and the age of the earth, both indisputable facts.
The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years.
The universe is 13.82 billion years old.
Evolution is simply: A change in heritabletraits of biological populations over successive generations.[1] Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution.[2]
Now, onto the evidence:
The earth is not 6000-10,000 years old, for any nutjobs who actually believe that, educate yourself:
How we know the age:
- Radiometric dating
- The distant starlight and how long light takes to reach us
- Amino acid racemization
- Continental drift
- Geomagnetic reversals
- Human chromosomal ancestry
- Ice Layers
- Lack of DNA in fossils
- Perma frost
- Seabed plankton layering
- Stalactites
- Uranium lead dating
- Weathering rinds
- A million other things.
Now, on to the big one... Evolution.
- Remains of ancient organisms
- Fossil layers
- Similarities among living organisms
- Similarities of embryos
- Transitional fossils
- DNA similarities
- Universal common descent
Much more to add, but none the less, I'm in the mood to debate those who deny facts.. Bring it on.
Observed evolution:
Observed Evolutionary Changes
Now, onto the controversial one, human evolution.
human evolution evidence - Google Scholar - Plenty of papers to read, although...
Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution s Human Origins Program

All i see is massive amounts of assertions.

Dating methods are rife with assumptions, speculations, & unverifiable data. To dance around saying this is all 'proven, settled science' is the height of absurdity, & reflects religious devotion, not scientific analysis.

There is NO WAY to estimate, verify, or measure the age of the universe, much less the earth. This is a philosophical exercise, not a scientific one. It assumes everything happened, with no deviation from our assumptions, along a uniform time line, following natural laws that we only know the surface of, in the face of the infinite universe. It is arrogance & bravado, to make such dogmatic statements about the vastness of the universe.

NONE of your dating methods prove your premise. They are all over the place, & don't provide any compelling conclusion. Half lives? Just the magnetic half life of the earth refutes your absurd claim of 4.5 billion years. Radiometric dating? it would all have burnt out millennia ago, based on your assumptions.

How does human chromosomal ancestry show 4.5 billion years?

No, this list is just science as decree.. the popular religion of the day. This is not science.. not even a good theory.

The massive fraud of evolution was fine as a religious view from the 19th century, but modern genetics has updated our views quite a bit. Anthropology & genetics shows that we have not 'evolved' at all. We are the same as our mitochondrial mother.

Someday, evolution will be looked back at like we do flat earth theories, leeches taking bad blood, & the 4 humors. Until then, as always, the status quo scientific establishment fights tooth & nail to defend their ideological turf, regardless of the facts.

Well, I hate to break it to you, but none of that rant is true. Nada.

 

[HUGGY]

This is a thread for me to document massive amounts of evidence for evolution and the age of the earth, both indisputable facts.
The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years.
The universe is 13.82 billion years old.
Evolution is simply: A change in heritabletraits of biological populations over successive generations.[1] Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution.[2]
Now, onto the evidence:
The earth is not 6000-10,000 years old, for any nutjobs who actually believe that, educate yourself:
How we know the age:
- Radiometric dating
- The distant starlight and how long light takes to reach us
- Amino acid racemization
- Continental drift
- Geomagnetic reversals
- Human chromosomal ancestry
- Ice Layers
- Lack of DNA in fossils
- Perma frost
- Seabed plankton layering
- Stalactites
- Uranium lead dating
- Weathering rinds
- A million other things.
Now, on to the big one... Evolution.
- Remains of ancient organisms
- Fossil layers
- Similarities among living organisms
- Similarities of embryos
- Transitional fossils
- DNA similarities
- Universal common descent
Much more to add, but none the less, I'm in the mood to debate those who deny facts.. Bring it on.
Observed evolution:
Observed Evolutionary Changes
Now, onto the controversial one, human evolution.
human evolution evidence - Google Scholar - Plenty of papers to read, although...
Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution s Human Origins Program

How do you know how old the earth is? Were you there?

As for evolution. Have you ever witnessed a species change?

I rest my case!

 

[orogenicman]

This is a thread for me to document massive amounts of evidence for evolution and the age of the earth, both indisputable facts.
The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years.
The universe is 13.82 billion years old.
Evolution is simply: A change in heritabletraits of biological populations over successive generations.[1] Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution.[2]
Now, onto the evidence:
The earth is not 6000-10,000 years old, for any nutjobs who actually believe that, educate yourself:
How we know the age:
- Radiometric dating
- The distant starlight and how long light takes to reach us
- Amino acid racemization
- Continental drift
- Geomagnetic reversals
- Human chromosomal ancestry
- Ice Layers
- Lack of DNA in fossils
- Perma frost
- Seabed plankton layering
- Stalactites
- Uranium lead dating
- Weathering rinds
- A million other things.
Now, on to the big one... Evolution.
- Remains of ancient organisms
- Fossil layers
- Similarities among living organisms
- Similarities of embryos
- Transitional fossils
- DNA similarities
- Universal common descent
Much more to add, but none the less, I'm in the mood to debate those who deny facts.. Bring it on.
Observed evolution:
Observed Evolutionary Changes
Now, onto the controversial one, human evolution.
human evolution evidence - Google Scholar - Plenty of papers to read, although...
Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution s Human Origins Program

How do you know how old the earth is? Were you there?

As for evolution. Have you ever witnessed a species change?

I rest my case!

Really? I can only conclude based on your response that you are either 10 years old or 110 years old. Because to post such a lame response as that one, you would necessarily have to be either just starting out in life, or laying in your death bed. Either way, facepalm.

 

[HUGGY]

This is a thread for me to document massive amounts of evidence for evolution and the age of the earth, both indisputable facts.
The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years.
The universe is 13.82 billion years old.
Evolution is simply: A change in heritabletraits of biological populations over successive generations.[1] Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution.[2]
Now, onto the evidence:
The earth is not 6000-10,000 years old, for any nutjobs who actually believe that, educate yourself:
How we know the age:
- Radiometric dating
- The distant starlight and how long light takes to reach us
- Amino acid racemization
- Continental drift
- Geomagnetic reversals
- Human chromosomal ancestry
- Ice Layers
- Lack of DNA in fossils
- Perma frost
- Seabed plankton layering
- Stalactites
- Uranium lead dating
- Weathering rinds
- A million other things.
Now, on to the big one... Evolution.
- Remains of ancient organisms
- Fossil layers
- Similarities among living organisms
- Similarities of embryos
- Transitional fossils
- DNA similarities
- Universal common descent
Much more to add, but none the less, I'm in the mood to debate those who deny facts.. Bring it on.
Observed evolution:
Observed Evolutionary Changes
Now, onto the controversial one, human evolution.
human evolution evidence - Google Scholar - Plenty of papers to read, although...
Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution s Human Origins Program

How do you know how old the earth is? Were you there?

As for evolution. Have you ever witnessed a species change?

I rest my case!

Really? I can only conclude based on your response that you are either 10 years old or 110 years old. Because to post such a lame response as that one, you would necessarily have to be either just starting out in life, or laying in your death bed. Either way, facepalm.

Here is a clue for you all. The Walrus is Paul. AKA don't believe everything you read.

 

[usfan]

All i see is massive amounts of assertions.

Dating methods are rife with assumptions, speculations, & unverifiable data. To dance around saying this is all 'proven, settled science' is the height of absurdity, & reflects religious devotion, not scientific analysis.

There is NO WAY to estimate, verify, or measure the age of the universe, much less the earth. This is a philosophical exercise, not a scientific one. It assumes everything happened, with no deviation from our assumptions, along a uniform time line, following natural laws that we only know the surface of, in the face of the infinite universe. It is arrogance & bravado, to make such dogmatic statements about the vastness of the universe.

NONE of your dating methods prove your premise. They are all over the place, & don't provide any compelling conclusion. Half lives? Just the magnetic half life of the earth refutes your absurd claim of 4.5 billion years. Radiometric dating? it would all have burnt out millennia ago, based on your assumptions.

How does human chromosomal ancestry show 4.5 billion years?

No, this list is just science as decree.. the popular religion of the day. This is not science.. not even a good theory.

The massive fraud of evolution was fine as a religious view from the 19th century, but modern genetics has updated our views quite a bit. Anthropology & genetics shows that we have not 'evolved' at all. We are the same as our mitochondrial mother.

Someday, evolution will be looked back at like we do flat earth theories, leeches taking bad blood, & the 4 humors. Until then, as always, the status quo scientific establishment fights tooth & nail to defend their ideological turf, regardless of the facts.

Well, I hate to break it to you, but none of that rant is true. Nada.

If you are talking about the OP, i agree. There is no scientific evidence for any of his outlandish claims. If you are dismissing my skeptical rebuttal, it will be up to you to prove your wild theories. Until then, i will keep my skepticism.

 

[orogenicman]

This is a thread for me to document massive amounts of evidence for evolution and the age of the earth, both indisputable facts.
The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years.
The universe is 13.82 billion years old.
Evolution is simply: A change in heritabletraits of biological populations over successive generations.[1] Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution.[2]
Now, onto the evidence:
The earth is not 6000-10,000 years old, for any nutjobs who actually believe that, educate yourself:
How we know the age:
- Radiometric dating
- The distant starlight and how long light takes to reach us
- Amino acid racemization
- Continental drift
- Geomagnetic reversals
- Human chromosomal ancestry
- Ice Layers
- Lack of DNA in fossils
- Perma frost
- Seabed plankton layering
- Stalactites
- Uranium lead dating
- Weathering rinds
- A million other things.
Now, on to the big one... Evolution.
- Remains of ancient organisms
- Fossil layers
- Similarities among living organisms
- Similarities of embryos
- Transitional fossils
- DNA similarities
- Universal common descent
Much more to add, but none the less, I'm in the mood to debate those who deny facts.. Bring it on.
Observed evolution:
Observed Evolutionary Changes
Now, onto the controversial one, human evolution.
human evolution evidence - Google Scholar - Plenty of papers to read, although...
Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution s Human Origins Program

How do you know how old the earth is? Were you there?

As for evolution. Have you ever witnessed a species change?

I rest my case!

Really? I can only conclude based on your response that you are either 10 years old or 110 years old. Because to post such a lame response as that one, you would necessarily have to be either just starting out in life, or laying in your death bed. Either way, facepalm.

Here is a clue for you all. The Walrus is Paul. AKA don't believe everything you read.

I'm a geologist. So of course, I don't believe everything I read. That's why I've spent my life finding the actual physical evidence. What about you?

 

[orogenicman]

All i see is massive amounts of assertions.

Dating methods are rife with assumptions, speculations, & unverifiable data. To dance around saying this is all 'proven, settled science' is the height of absurdity, & reflects religious devotion, not scientific analysis.

There is NO WAY to estimate, verify, or measure the age of the universe, much less the earth. This is a philosophical exercise, not a scientific one. It assumes everything happened, with no deviation from our assumptions, along a uniform time line, following natural laws that we only know the surface of, in the face of the infinite universe. It is arrogance & bravado, to make such dogmatic statements about the vastness of the universe.

NONE of your dating methods prove your premise. They are all over the place, & don't provide any compelling conclusion. Half lives? Just the magnetic half life of the earth refutes your absurd claim of 4.5 billion years. Radiometric dating? it would all have burnt out millennia ago, based on your assumptions.

How does human chromosomal ancestry show 4.5 billion years?

No, this list is just science as decree.. the popular religion of the day. This is not science.. not even a good theory.

The massive fraud of evolution was fine as a religious view from the 19th century, but modern genetics has updated our views quite a bit. Anthropology & genetics shows that we have not 'evolved' at all. We are the same as our mitochondrial mother.

Someday, evolution will be looked back at like we do flat earth theories, leeches taking bad blood, & the 4 humors. Until then, as always, the status quo scientific establishment fights tooth & nail to defend their ideological turf, regardless of the facts.

Well, I hate to break it to you, but none of that rant is true. Nada.

If you are talking about the OP, i agree. There is no scientific evidence for any of his outlandish claims. If you are dismissing my skeptical rebuttal, it will be up to you to prove your wild theories. Until then, i will keep my skepticism.

I was referring to your 4th grade level bible school rant.

 

[usfan]

I was referring to your 4th grade level bible school rant.

What you claim by assertion, i can dismiss by assertion... along with your middle school insults.

 

[Steven_R]

I'm a geologist. So of course, I don't believe everything I read.

A geologist who can read. Well there's something you don't see everyday.

 

[usfan]

I'm a geologist. So of course, I don't believe everything I read.

A geologist who can read. Well there's something you don't see everyday.

An old friend who was an archaeologist used to call them 'arguologists', since they were so defensive of their pet theories..

 

[usfan]

I'm a geologist. So of course, I don't believe everything I read. That's why I've spent my life finding the actual physical evidence. What about you?

Rather than make arguments of authority, why not post ONE fact that proves the earth is 4.5 billion years old?

You can source it if you want. But it has to be a verified, empirically proven fact, not just someone's opinion. I'll wait.

 

[orogenicman]

I'm a geologist. So of course, I don't believe everything I read.

A geologist who can read. Well there's something you don't see everyday.

An old friend who was an archaeologist used to call them 'arguologists', since they were so defensive of their pet theories..

Which are usually right. In fact, archaeology students are required to take geology these days while the reverse is not true.

 

[orogenicman]

I'm a geologist. So of course, I don't believe everything I read. That's why I've spent my life finding the actual physical evidence. What about you?

Rather than make arguments of authority, why not post ONE fact that proves the earth is 4.5 billion years old?

You can source it if you want. But it has to be a verified, empirically proven fact, not just someone's opinion. I'll wait.

Dumbass, we are on page ten of this thread. I suggest you go back and read all the posts (and the links provided), starting with page one.