[Joo (Quarantined)]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

Notice the part I highlighted. Even paid scientists are now admitting that whales are only hundreds of years old—not millions like the crypto-Kabbalists behind evolutionary theory would have you believe. And those are the oldest ones. When will they just admit that their little fairy tale is full of holes and isn't worth its weight in dung?



Side note: yet again, Canuckistani racism rears its ugly head. Notice that ONLY smelly eskimos are allowed to kill whales, so that they can use their oil and blubber as a lubricant for anal sex; white Christians are forbidden from laying so much as a finger on one. Jesus is not pleased.

Uh no...they're saying that individual whales only live a few hundred years. The Whale as a species is in the millions of years.

[Shallow-izer (On Moderation)]

Re: More Clues That the Earth is Young

Evolution assumes that man dropped out of the trees 1 to 5 million years ago and became fully human approximately 100,000 years ago. Yet archeological records show civilization arising only about 5,000 years ago (based on evolutionary thinking). In other words, by evolutionary reasoning, it took mankind 95,000 years after becoming fully human to figure out that food could be produced by dropping a seed into the ground!

It takes humans time. Time to think. To create. To gather eachother into an organised society. To create language. And to create Gods and laws.

It has been estimated by evolutionary anthropologists that the earth could have easily supported 10 million hunter/gatherer type humans. To maintain an average of 10 million people, spread over the entire planet, with an average life span of 25 years, for the last 100,000 years . . . .would mean that 40 billion people had lived and died. Archeological evidence clearly shows that these "stone age" people buried their dead. Forty billion graves should be easy to find. Yet only a few thousand exist. The obvious implication is that people have been around for far less time.

Or maybe we've put up our civilization over the ancient burial grounds? Fact is archeologists don't have the kind of funding they need in order to go around digging up churches, buildings, universities, farms in order to find every stone age grave. You're also ruleing out mass graves, and cremation, and dying while at sea.

Another indication of both a young earth and a confirmation of the worldwide flood is the scarcity of meteors in sedimentary rock layers. Although some meteors have been found in sedimentary layers, they are relatively rare. Meteors are easily identifiable, and many thousands have been identified and recovered from recent impacts on the planet’s surface. If most of the rock layers were laid down rapidly during the one year period of a worldwide flood, you would not expect to find many meteorites buried in only one year. However, if the sediment was laid down over billions of years, there should be multiple billions of meteorites buried within this sediment. The fact that we find so few is another possible evidence for the rapid accumulation of the sedimentary layers and a young earth.

It is rare for a meteor to reach the surface of the Earth. Thousands of meteors enter the Earth's atmosphere everyday, and the majority of them are too small to make it to the surface.

Furthermore, those that are able to make it to the surface, are either too small to be diferienciated from other rocks, or are infact, even smaller then that, and the only way to tell them apart is by running a magnet over them. (Meteors are mostly iron and rock.)

Suppose you walked into an empty room and found a smoking cigar. You could assume that the cigar was very old and that it had only recently burst into flames, but the more logical conclusion would be that someone had recently been there to light it. The universe is full of similar "smoking cigars":

1. All planetary rings still exhibit intricacies which Should Have long ago disappeared.
2. All known comets burn up their material with each pass around the sun and Should Have a maximum life expectancy of 100,000 years.
3. The outer solar system planets should have long ago cooled off.
4. The spiral galaxies Should Have long ago un-spiraled, and the uneven dispersion of matter in the universe Should Have long ago dispersed.

Why do you think Jupiter's rings are almost completely gone? The same for Uranus, in which it's rings are also faint. The only rings that are truely notable are that of Saturn, in which some are caused by it's own moons coliding with larger debris and fragmenting, or other debris that get's caught in the orbit of the planet from passing comets.

Comets travel in a wide orbit around the solar system, and it is logical to say that the size we seem them as today, is much smaller then what they should have been when they first formed.

What evidence do you have that says they're still hot? Pluto's average surface tempurature is 43 K (-382 degrees F). (Source)

The spiral arms of Galaxies are held in place by they're on gravity, as they orbit around the much heavier center of the galaxy, which is populated by the most heaviest and oldest stars in the galaxy, and a super massive blackhole, which is responsible for the spiral shape to begin with.

Scientists working from the preconception that the universe is 10-20 billion (It's calculated to be 12.8 +/- 1.1 billion years old. Source.)years old have suggested controversial and complicated possibilities for how these types of transient phenomena could still exist but their explanations are based more on faith, not science. The simpler explanation is that these "smoking cigars" are smoking because they are young.

Again, it takes time. Stars, near the end of their lifetimes, actually go through other forms of nuclear fusion. At first, for most of their life, they convert hydrogen into helium. Then near the end, convert helium into other elements found in the universe. The fact that Earth has many elements naturally, implies as to the age of the universe coincides with the calculations.

What about dating methods which do seem to indicate that things are very old ? As seen in the first article on dating methods, assumptions are everything. For instance, carbon-14 generation rate has never significantly changed. This method does not date the age of the earth but understanding it can have a profound effect on our interpretation of the "ice age" and the "stone age". A recent worldwide catastrophe would have caused an enormous change in the total amount of carbon on earth's biosphere. This event would completely invalidate one of the basic assumptions of the carbon-14 dating method (a known carbon-14 to carbon-12 ratio throughout the measurement period) and lead to excessively old dates for organisms alive shortly after this flood. This problem with carbon-14 dating assumptions will be described in detail in another article.

Radio carbon dating is only used for natural materials of an approximate age of 60,000 years or less. For anything older, they use other forms od radio dating. For samples 1 million years or more, they use Uranium-Lead radioactivity dating. Information about this type of dating is linked in another post. If you seek knowledge, go look for it.

If you bothered to do research, you'd find answers to your claims. Heck, if you paid attention during science class, you'd find answers to your claims.

In conclusion, if a 16 year old can approprietly dismantle your arguements, what chance do you have of getting your ridiculous hypothesis taught in schools?

Be sure to state your sources.

Did you know that cutting and pasting other people's work and then posting it as your own is a federal and international crime? Do you think we are that stupid?

And if I may answer this Pastor.

Yes, yes I do think so. Else, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

Did you know that cutting and pasting other people's work and then posting it as your own is a federal and international crime? Do you think we are that stupid?

More Clues That the Earth is Young

Evolution assumes that man dropped out of the trees 1 to 5 million years ago and became fully human approximately 100,000 years ago. Yet archeological records show civilization arising only about 5,000 years ago (based on evolutionary thinking). In other words, by evolutionary reasoning, it took mankind 95,000 years after becoming fully human to figure out that food could be produced by dropping a seed into the ground!

It has been estimated by evolutionary anthropologists that the earth could have easily supported 10 million hunter/gatherer type humans. To maintain an average of 10 million people, spread over the entire planet, with an average life span of 25 years, for the last 100,000 years . . . .would mean that 40 billion people had lived and died. Archeological evidence clearly shows that these "stone age" people buried their dead. Forty billion graves should be easy to find. Yet only a few thousand exist. The obvious implication is that people have been around for far less time.
Another indication of both a young earth and a confirmation of the worldwide flood is the scarcity of meteors in sedimentary rock layers. Although some meteors have been found in sedimentary layers, they are relatively rare. Meteors are easily identifiable, and many thousands have been identified and recovered from recent impacts on the planet’s surface. If most of the rock layers were laid down rapidly during the one year period of a worldwide flood, you would not expect to find many meteorites buried in only one year. However, if the sediment was laid down over billions of years, there should be multiple billions of meteorites buried within this sediment. The fact that we find so few is another possible evidence for the rapid accumulation of the sedimentary layers and a young earth.
Suppose you walked into an empty room and found a smoking cigar. You could assume that the cigar was very old and that it had only recently burst into flames, but the more logical conclusion would be that someone had recently been there to light it. The universe is full of similar "smoking cigars":

1. All planetary rings still exhibit intricacies which Should Have long ago disappeared.
2. All known comets burn up their material with each pass around the sun and Should Have a maximum life expectancy of 100,000 years.
3. The outer solar system planets should have long ago cooled off.
4. The spiral galaxies Should Have long ago un-spiraled, and the uneven dispersion of matter in the universe Should Have long ago dispersed.

Scientists working from the preconception that the universe is 10-20 billion years old have suggested controversial and complicated possibilities for how these types of transient phenomena could still exist but their explanations are based more on faith, not science. The simpler explanation is that these "smoking cigars" are smoking because they are young.
What about dating methods which do seem to indicate that things are very old ? As seen in the first article on dating methods, assumptions are everything. For instance, carbon-14 generation rate has never significantly changed. This method does not date the age of the earth but understanding it can have a profound effect on our interpretation of the "ice age" and the "stone age". A recent worldwide catastrophe would have caused an enormous change in the total amount of carbon on earth's biosphere. This event would completely invalidate one of the basic assumptions of the carbon-14 dating method (a known carbon-14 to carbon-12 ratio throughout the measurement period) and lead to excessively old dates for organisms alive shortly after this flood. This problem with carbon-14 dating assumptions will be described in detail in another article.

[Shallow-izer (On Moderation)]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

Oppinions are not threats.

Therefore, I'm let free.

But, back to the topic.

Anything you wish to say?

Or are you too lazy to use google and try to find arguements?

[Virginia Day Templeton]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

I guess he'll have to tell that to the judge!

[Andrew Shaw]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

A threat would be ' And i'll make sure you dont live to one hundred!'

He just said that he hopes you dont. It was just a statement on how he feels not a threat.

[Shallow-izer (On Moderation)]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

Correct. You took the fact that I probably won't live past 100 on Earth and made it a threat by saying that you hoped I wouldn't. And you are indeed a moron!

And you took the fact that I hoped you didn't live that long, and made it a threat.

Making you Baka^2.

[Virginia Day Templeton]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

Because only a moron can take a fact, and make it a threat.

Correct. You took the fact that I probably won't live past 100 on Earth and made it a threat by saying that you hoped I wouldn't. And you are indeed a moron!

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

Because only a moron can take a fact, and make it a threat.

Stop persecuting innocent Christians!

[Shallow-izer (On Moderation)]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

The rest of your post is gibberish (you live in Soviet Canuckistan yet you haven't heard of it?!), but this sentence nearly stopped my heart:



The DOF will be be notified about your death threat.

Because only a moron can take a fact, and make it a threat.

[Virginia Day Templeton]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

The rest of your post is gibberish (you live in Soviet Canuckistan yet you haven't heard of it?!), but this sentence nearly stopped my heart:

You live to, I hope, no more then 100 years.

The DOF will be be notified about your death threat.

[Shallow-izer (On Moderation)]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

Notice the part I highlighted. Even paid scientists are now admitting that whales are only hundreds of years old—not millions like the crypto-Kabbalists behind evolutionary theory would have you believe. And those are the oldest ones. When will they just admit that their little fairy tale is full of holes and isn't worth its weight in dung?



Side note: yet again, Canuckistani racism rears its ugly head. Notice that ONLY smelly eskimos are allowed to kill whales, so that they can use their oil and blubber as a lubricant for anal sex; white Christians are forbidden from laying so much as a finger on one. Jesus is not pleased.

Okay.

First off.

The spiecies commonly known as "whale" has been around for millions of years.

INDIVIDUEL whales live to a maximum of two hundred years.

Now, what you can't seem to diferenciate, is the idea behind ONE member of a spiecies, and the spiecies itself.

Let me explain it this way.

You're a human.

You are ONE human.

You live to, I hope, no more then 100 years.

Does this mean that humanity has been around for only 100 years?

Heck no!

And as for that "Canuckistan" remark.

Where on this earth is Canuckistan?

If you actually mean CANADA, we are nowhere near racist. ATLEAST not as much as the US.

We allow our Inuit folk to hunt as they've always done for thousands of years. Why?

Because, originally, it was THEIR land. They got there first. We have no right to tell them what they can, and cannot do on their land.

[Andrew Shaw]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

As a Child I used to have a Pet Turtle.
Those lying Evil-Loo-shunaries say that Turtles are 200 Million years old.
Now my Turtle hatched out of an Egg while I watched it. That was only erm.....erm.....a couple of years ago.
Can they explain that?

No, of course they can't!!

What they meant was turtles have existed for 200 million years, the race, not an individual turtle..and your turtle isent the first turtle or anything although i dont think turtles have been around for that long..but then again if they werent..how could they be here now?

-just showing some constructive criticism.

[Andrew Shaw]

Re: Another nail in the Darwinist coffin

Yes, but how can they know if whales existed for millions of years if no million-year-old whales are around to prove it?

Generally they would carbon date whatever it is to tell the age of the item
but theres obviously no 'million year old whales' because theirs not million year old whale bones to carbon date.