[Rachael Van Helsing]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

What a hypocrite...


I've already refuted your argument. Your turn. Follow the instructions I gave you. Ask your father for help if you need it. We don't want that weak female brain to fail on you in your time of need.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! What a self-absorbed clod!
I'm currently at work and extremely busy, but when I get home I will reply to your idiocy.

But first.

You still have not provided me any evidence OUTSIDE the bible to support the bible.

You have claimed BEFORE I SAID ANYTHING ELSE TO YOU that the bible is *the* source of wisdom from what you claim the one true deity.

Therefore, the burden of proof lies on you. You have not provided one iota of proof, biblical quotes do not count.

And you say I need to be taught how to debate. I'm guessing you're one of those twenty-nothing year olds who thinks you know everything, right?

[Virginia Day Templeton]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

How did this picture get taken if they recently went extinct?

Liberals think that everything else is 675 gazillion years old, so why not cameras too?

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Again, floundering in your argument, you resort to insulting women. Damn, Freud would have a field day with you.

True Christians are not lazy porchmonkeys

Actually, that's exactly what they are.

What a hypocrite...

There are no cold hard facts in the bible. You have failed, time and time again, to provide me with a single piece of evidence outside of the bible, that supports the bible. You keep ignoring that, and pretending I'm the one who is at fault when I've provided countless examples, and all that you've provided are ad hominem attacks.

"Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials based on a knowledge of the decay rates of naturally occurring isotopes, and the current abundances."

Radiometric or carbon: It's all fallible and depends on making gross assumptions. I get my information from the Creator of the Universe Himself. Information that is infallible. Without that time machine to verify the original amount of a given element you have no case. Who knows what factors entered into play throughout time that could have effected the samples.

Whatever information they are gathering, it has to be indicating 6000ish years because that is how long ago the Creator said He created it. The claim that the results indicate 4.5 billion years would have to be an error on the part of the infallible so-called scientists. They simply don't know enough about God's creation to understand their own results. It's pretty sad actually.

Now I realize you are only a woman and don't fully comprehend the nature of debate. So allow me to spell it out for you.

Above is my counter argument to your statements concerning the reliability of radiometric and carbon dating.

You now have to explain WHY THAT ARGUMENT IS WRONG. You CANNOT just say "Nuh-uh" and completely ignore my argument. Until you explain why my counter-argument is wrong you are admitting I am right.

I realize you're just a dumb woman so let me give you an example.

Rachael: Old people have grey hair
Remy: No, old people have black hairs and white hairs giving the illusion of grey hair
Rachael: Nuh-uh, they have grey hair.

See, in the above example you didn't address my counter statement. Now let's see how things go if you weren't a feeble minded woman and could actually debate me.

Rachael: Old people have grey hair
Remy: No, old people have black hairs and white hairs giving the illusion of grey hair
Rachael: I have two hairs plucked from my husbands head and under a microscope they are definitely grey.
Remy: I would be grey haired if I was your husband.
Rachael: etc.etc.

See how it works. I'll even help you out.

Explain how you know 100% that no other factors transpired throughout the years to effect the decay rates of isotope or carbon.

Explain how you know 100% the original state and amounts of the said isotopes and carbon as it was thousands of years ago.

Explain how you know 100% that the laws of nature have been exactly the same for thousands of years straight. Seeing that your so-called science is relatively new you don't even know if Jesus has changed the laws of physics around after the flood, after His temporary death, etc. Back in the day people could genetically manipulate cattle by putting certain kinds of sticks in their water troughs.

Explain how your assumptions of absolute knowledge are all 100% correct even though you and your scientist false gods are infallible mortals.

Good luck.

ROFL. I'm going to get some popcorn, this is entertaining! [/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=black]You have said the same silly insults over and over. You could almost be a chat-bot, programmed to respond over and over with pre-worded replies.

I am not insulting anyone. You ARE a feeble minded woman. I've had to hold your hand and practically explain to you how to debate against me. You make a 10 year old nigra look like a certified Einstein. Van Hellbound, you have no business laughing at anyone but yourself.

Yet again you provide me only with biblical quotes and no actual evidence.

The Words of the Being who Created the Universe isn't evidence? So if you baked a pie your eyewitness account wouldn't serve as evidence as to what kind of pie you made?

Are you that unreliable, Rachael? How can we trust anything you say now?

Nope. The OT is an adaptation of Judaism. The NT and the Jesus myth is adapted from various Pagan sources, such as, for example, the dying and ressurected god of Mythraism, add a few Roman etc myths to the mix, and also the Gnostic idea of a divine being descending to Earth to enlighten the elect. I could provide you a whole list of books to read which will enlighten these and other such facts piece by piece.

You guys pick on me for being a Pagan. Were it not for Paganism, your religion would not exist.

Do I have to remind you... again? *sigh*

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth

The Bible begins before the world or mankind was even created so how can it be based on some false dogma that came after the world was formed? You are embarrassing yourself, Missy. Clearly your false pagan conjectures are stolen from God's word and not the other way around. Check and mate!!!


Actually, my ancestors were European who went overseas, who pretty much had nothing to do with the convicts, and those convicts were hardly serious criminals anyway, most of the poor souls did nothing more serious than steal a jacket to warm themselves.

A descendant of convicts WOULD be the one to justify criminal behavior. What next? It's OK for nigra to rape white women because they need to satisfy their desire to be with a beautiful woman?

As to neanderthals, they are long dead, I'm afraid, so unless you have a time machine, as you so often allude to, you can't tell if they were raped or not.

[ATTACH]2119[/ATTACH]
How did this picture get taken if they recently went extinct?

I notice you don't even attempt to rebut my point, rather you go straight for the ad hominem jab once more. *Yawn*

I've already refuted your argument. Your turn. Follow the instructions I gave you. Ask your father for help if you need it. We don't want that weak female brain to fail on you in your time of need.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

As to neanderthals, they are long dead, I'm afraid, so unless you have a time machine, as you so often allude to, you can't tell if they were raped or not.

So if you find a rock, you can instantly tell whether it's 6000 or a million trillion years old, but if you find the corpse of a Neanderthal schoolboy bent over with the corpse of a Catholic priest behind it, it's totally impossible to draw any conclusions whatsoever? You have a very strange mind, I must say.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

No, it's quick and efficient. Now I know you heathen bigots have problem with people who are ever so slightly darker than you are. Please don't badger us with your racist stereotypes. True Christians are not lazy porchmonkeys.

Actually, that's exactly what they are.

So it's what you and your so-called scientist would say? It's really simple, sinner. You have to assume the original state of an isotope, assume that no factors could increase or slow decay, assume, assume, assume. I prefer hard cold facts; NOT hair brained theories.

There are no cold hard facts in the bible. You have failed, time and time again, to provide me with a single piece of evidence outside of the bible, that supports the bible. You keep ignoring that, and pretending I'm the one who is at fault when I've provided countless examples, and all that you've provided are ad hominem attacks.

You can't be noticing anything seeing that I have never floundered. There you go again thinking you can flail your arms around claiming victory. I don't see you refuting any of my arguments. You just keep saying "Nuh-un", and repeating yourself over and over. Why is that?

I notice that everything you say here are actually relfections of yourself, and your arguments. You are describing yourself!

I'm not picking on the fact that you are a woman. I'm stating that facts about you as a woman. If I see someone clearly out of their league trying to swim from Miami to Cuba I'm going to let them know that if they don't accept the life vest I'm offering they are going to drown. I'm on a cruiser liner and you're an out of shape grandmother trying to swim the distance. Your brain has to be hurting, harlot.

ROFL. I'm going to get some popcorn, this is entertaining! You have said the same silly insults over and over. You could almost be a chat-bot, programmed to respond over and over with pre-worded replies.

The Bible is 100% consistently correct. Radiometric dating is 100% consistently wrong. Whatever information they are gathering, it has to be indicating 6000ish years because that is how long ago the Creator said He created it. The claim that the results indicate 4.5 billion years would have to be an error on the part of the infallible so-called scientists. They simply don't know enough about God's creation to understand their own results. It's pretty sad actually.

Nope, radiometric dating is consistent, and reliable, one of the branches of science that actually is. The statistics heavily support this. If the results/statistics were here, there and everywhere, then I'd agree with you, however, the results are consistent, whereas it is the bible which is here, there and everywhere.

Yes, as I am commanded least He have my wife raped for my offenses and then destroy me along with my servants, pets, property, and give the land to better more deserving True Christians like He says He will to godless traitors in His Holy Word.

Silly man.

Hello? Anybody there?

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Guess what? The Heavens and the Earth exist. Thank you very much.

Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Do you believe in light? I thought so. Feeling stupid yet?

Genesis 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Grass? Check! Herbs? Check! Seeds? Check! Fruits? Check! Trees? Check!
OK, I think I've made you look like a big enough fool for one day.

Yet again you provide me only with biblical quotes and no actual evidence.
Bravo, old chap, bravo.

First you claim to know the amounts and conditions of every piece of matter throughout all time, now you KNOW that the Bible is "made from bits and pieces which and twisted and copied and adapted from older religions". Fine. PROVE IT. If you KNOW something then you can demonstrate it to everyone so that we all can KNOW. You've really put your foot in your mouth this time, haven't you?

Nope. The OT is an adaptation of Judaism. The NT and the Jesus myth is adapted from various Pagan sources, such as, for example, the dying and ressurected god of Mythraism, add a few Roman etc myths to the mix, and also the Gnostic idea of a divine being descending to Earth to enlighten the elect. I could provide you a whole list of books to read which will enlighten these and other such facts piece by piece.
You guys pick on me for being a Pagan. Were it not for Paganism, your religion would not exist.

Trying to change the subject... again?

Nope, but I see that you are.

No... YOUR ancestors weren't colonials. They were dirty convicts exiled to Australia for being violent cutthroats, thieves, rapist, and anarchist. That is YOUR stock. We are not jail burg scoundrels so vile and twisted that they raped Neanderthals. Seriously, even a lonely, drunken, slightly retarded sailor who hadn't seen a white woman in years wouldn't mate with a Neanderthal. Have you seen them? They make negroidials appear merely ugly instead of the usual god-awful hideousness. And to think, YOUR ancestors were so fugly that THEY RAPED THE NEANDERTHALS AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

Actually, my ancestors were European who went overseas, who pretty much had nothing to do with the convicts, and those convicts were hardly serious criminals anyway, most of the poor souls did nothing more serious than steal a jacket to warm themselves.

As to neanderthals, they are long dead, I'm afraid, so unless you have a time machine, as you so often allude to, you can't tell if they were raped or not.

So you and StarFinder used to smoke the same stuff, eh? This explains why you are so idiotic even for a woman.

I notice you don't even attempt to rebut my point, rather you go straight for the ad hominem jab once more. *Yawn*

[Unsaved and Loving It]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Good one Brother Temperance. Let's see the Darwinists try and explain how the Earth extists without God.

Do we humans know every facet of how our brains work? Did our ancestors understand the source of wind? Do we yet understand the true intelligence of animals? Have we discovered if there is life on other planets? That's right. We don't/didn't. But somehow, they work. We humans are smart bags of meat, but we don't yet know everything. There are many theories on how planets are formed, and as far as I'm aware of, it would take thousands, if not, millions of years for a planet to form. Since we humans are still pretty much bound to the rock solid Earth, and have been before all the countless years before last century. We've only had... What, 12,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age? Before and during those 12,000 years, we humans barely knew how to use basic tools. We've had about 1,000 or so years of being able to see the Universe around us. So the chances of us knowing precisely the method of star formation, are low. But after all, there's more proof of that happening as opposed to something like this:

<God> uses "Summon Planet"
<God> has created Earth
DM kicks <God> from server

Brilliant, how when you guys have no argument, you resort to silly insults <insert sarcarsm>.

So you and StarFinder used to smoke the same stuff, eh? This explains why you are so idiotic even for a woman.

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

There’s a word for what you’re doing here: LAZY!

No, it's quick and efficient. Now I know you heathen bigots have problem with people who are ever so slightly darker than you are. Please don't badger us with your racist stereotypes. True Christians are not lazy porchmonkeys.

Uhh, nope, that’s only what someone with no scientific knowledge of dating would say.

So it's what you and your so-called scientist would say? It's really simple, sinner. You have to assume the original state of an isotope, assume that no factors could increase or slow decay, assume, assume, assume. I prefer hard cold facts; NOT hair brained theories.

I notice that every time you flounder in an argument you start picking on the fact that I’m a woman. That’s kinda pathetic, dude

You can't be noticing anything seeing that I have never floundered. There you go again thinking you can flail your arms around claiming victory. I don't see you refuting any of my arguments. You just keep saying "Nuh-un", and repeating yourself over and over. Why is that?

I'm not picking on the fact that you are a woman. I'm stating that facts about you as a woman. If I see someone clearly out of their league trying to swim from Miami to Cuba I'm going to let them know that if they don't accept the life vest I'm offering they are going to drown. I'm on a cruiser liner and you're an out of shape grandmother trying to swim the distance. Your brain has to be hurting, harlot.

Of course you need knowledge of decay rates to understand radiometric dating. How else would you know? But the fact that the results are so consistent (look at the statistics) speaks for itself? Consistency. The one thing the bible is greatly lacking.

The Bible is 100% consistently correct. Radiometric dating is 100% consistently wrong. Whatever information they are gathering, it has to be indicating 6000ish years because that is how long ago the Creator said He created it. The claim that the results indicate 4.5 billion years would have to be an error on the part of the infallible so-called scientists. They simply don't know enough about God's creation to understand their own results. It's pretty sad actually.

You’d rather read about all the killings and rapings in the bible, no doubt.

Yes, as I am commanded least He have my wife raped for my offenses and then destroy me along with my servants, pets, property, and give the land to better more deserving True Christians like He says He will to godless traitors in His Holy Word.

There is no evidence to support biblical creation.

Hello? Anybody there?

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Guess what? The Heavens and the Earth exist. Thank you very much.

Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Do you believe in light? I thought so. Feeling stupid yet?

Genesis 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Grass? Check! Herbs? Check! Seeds? Check! Fruits? Check! Trees? Check!
OK, I think I've made you look like a big enough fool for one day.

There is evidence to support the scientific ages of the Earth (like the Jurassic, Carboniferous etc). The only thing that supports biblical creation is the bible! A book which was made from bits and pieces which and twisted and copied and adapted from older religions. That doesn’t count as evidence, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves is more reliable. At least that story has remained relatively unchanged.

First you claim to know the amounts and conditions of every piece of matter throughout all time, now you KNOW that the Bible is "made from bits and pieces which and twisted and copied and adapted from older religions". Fine. PROVE IT. If you KNOW something then you can demonstrate it to everyone so that we all can KNOW. You've really put your foot in your mouth this time, haven't you?

Again, floundering in your argument, you resort to insulting women. Damn, Freud would have a field day with you.

Trying to change the subject... again?

Bwaha, I used to live in the US. But for your information, all the colonials (Aus, the US, NZ etc) come from the same stock: English.

No... YOUR ancestors weren't colonials. They were dirty convicts exiled to Australia for being violent cutthroats, thieves, rapist, and anarchist. That is YOUR stock. We are not jail burg scoundrels so vile and twisted that they raped Neanderthals. Seriously, even a lonely, drunken, slightly retarded sailor who hadn't seen a white woman in years wouldn't mate with a Neanderthal. Have you seen them? They make negroidials appear merely ugly instead of the usual god-awful hideousness. And to think, YOUR ancestors were so fugly that THEY RAPED THE NEANDERTHALS AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

Actually, if you know your astronomy, there's a good explanation there. Clouds of 'stardust', so to speak, would be the candidates for the building blocks. We're technically 'children of the stars', so to speak.

So you and StarFinder used to smoke the same stuff, eh? This explains why you are so idiotic even for a woman.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Someone's been putting LSD in their tea again, I see.

*Sigh*
Planetary matter. Clouds of stardust. Planetary matter formed from thus. Brilliant, how when you guys have no argument, you resort to silly insults <insert sarcarsm>.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Actually, if you know your astronomy, there's a good explanation there. Clouds of 'stardust', so to speak, would be the candidates for the building blocks. We're technically 'children of the stars', so to speak.

Someone's been putting LSD in their tea again, I see.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

If your feeble little female brain cannot handle the sensory overload of my posts then maybe you should take a nap before you die. It isn't healthy for the inferior mind of a woman to attempt to keep up with a man.

There’s a word for what you’re doing here: LAZY!

Silly, woman, you don't know what you are watching. What do you see? Some fancy lights flashing? A computer generated chart? Some beeping noises? You have got to be the most gullible and feeble minded wench I've ever had the misfortune to encounter.

Uhh, nope, that’s only what someone with no scientific knowledge of dating would say.

Of course I CAN. You seem to think that just by making wild claims your idiotic so-called science will be true. As if you can nag your way to victory. Typical female.

I notice that every time you flounder in an argument you start picking on the fact that I’m a woman. That’s kinda pathetic, dude.

"Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials based on a knowledge of the decay rates of naturally occurring isotopes, and the current abundances."

Radiometric or carbon: It's all fallible and depends on making gross assumptions. I get my information from the Creator of the Universe Himself. Information that is infallible.

Of course you need knowledge of decay rates to understand radiometric dating. How else would you know? But the fact that the results are so consistent (look at the statistics) speaks for itself? Consistency. The one thing the bible is greatly lacking.

Not interested in reading some sodomite's works. Who knows what kind of demons are in those pages.

You’d rather read about all the killings and rapings in the bible, no doubt.

Reliably wrong. Consistently being wrong does not make something right. God Almighty makes it clear in His Holy Words that the universe is 6000ish years old. Could you imagine building a house 20 years ago and some scientist shows up claiming the house is 3 trillion years old because of some goofball test? Clearly, whatever data said scientist retrieved would HAVE to indicate 20 years. Pulling out numbers like 3 trillion would have to be an error on the part of the fallible man.

There is no evidence to support biblical creation. There is evidence to support the scientific ages of the Earth (like the Jurassic, Carboniferous etc). The only thing that supports biblical creation is the bible! A book which was made from bits and pieces which and twisted and copied and adapted from older religions. That doesn’t count as evidence, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves is more reliable. At least that story has remained relatively unchanged.

It's common sense to believe in anything some stranger tells you no matter how ridiculous? That's how Eve got in so much trouble over that apple in the first place. When will you simple minded females learn your lesson?

Again, floundering in your argument, you resort to insulting women. Damn, Freud would have a field day with you.

I'm aware that all Austrailians are descended from criminals and neaderthals. That has not been desputed.

Bwaha, I used to live in the US. But for your information, all the colonials (Aus, the US, NZ etc) come from the same stock: English.

What about the Earth? The Bible states that God created the Earth; and, lo and behold, the Earth exists. You can't argue with that, now can you?

Actually, if you know your astronomy, there's a good explanation there. Clouds of 'stardust', so to speak, would be the candidates for the building blocks. We're technically 'children of the stars', so to speak.

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

What about the Earth? The Bible states that God created the Earth; and, lo and behold, the Earth exists. You can't argue with that, now can you?

Good one Brother Temperance. Let's see the Darwinists try and explain how the Earth extists without God.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Well, if a single part of the bible's claims of the world's age was supported by dated artefacts, I wouldn't say these things.
But there is *not* *one* *single* *piece* of archaeological evidence to support the bible's dates and times.

What about the Earth? The Bible states that God created the Earth; and, lo and behold, the Earth exists. You can't argue with that, now can you?

Sorry, dude, but we're all descended from apelike creatures.

Talk about trying to drag everyone else down to your level.

And apparently, the Godly Americans are descendant of the Heathen English. O noez!

No, they're descendants of the Christian English. The Heathen English are, by and large, the ones who stayed over here in the hopes of finding some Frenchmen to fornicate with.

[Unsaved and Loving It]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

I'm aware that all Austrailians are descended from criminals and neaderthals. That has not been desputed.

And apparently, the Godly Americans are descendant of the Heathen English. O noez!

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Do you HAVE to reply in the original quote box??? Would it be so hard to add a couple extra tags?

If your feeble little female brain cannot handle the sensory overload of my posts then maybe you should take a nap before you die. It isn't healthy for the inferior mind of a woman to attempt to keep up with a man.

Nope, that's pretty much the accepted approximation of the Earth's age.

One does not need to be a geologist. You can watch, step by step, things being dated. Dinosaur bones etc. A basic understanding of the process will enable you to understand and see it for yourself.

Silly, woman, you don't know what you are watching. What do you see? Some fancy lights flashing? A computer generated chart? Some beeping noises? You have got to be the most gullible and feeble minded wench I've ever had the misfortune to encounter.

Factors, shmactors. Carbon dating may not be foolproof but you can't, I notice, say anything about radiometric dating. Why? Because you can't say anything. Radiometric dating is very reliable. And it is used to date older things, older things which don't have carbon-14 in them to date anymore.

Of course I CAN. You seem to think that just by making wild claims your idiotic so-called science will be true. As if you can nag your way to victory. Typical female.

"Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials based on a knowledge of the decay rates of naturally occurring isotopes, and the current abundances."

Radiometric or carbon: It's all fallible and depends on making gross assumptions. I get my information from the Creator of the Universe Himself. Information that is infallible.

Read the works of a man named Brent G. Dalrymple, he explains quite well about radiometric dating,and which is one of the most reliable parts of science.

Not interested in reading some sodomite's works. Who knows what kind of demons are in those pages.

Compare all the statistics of radiometric dating, it IS reliable.

Reliably wrong. Consistently being wrong does not make something right. God Almighty makes it clear in His Holy Words that the universe is 6000ish years old. Could you imagine building a house 20 years ago and some scientist shows up claiming the house is 3 trillion years old because of some goofball test? Clearly, whatever data said scientist retrieved would HAVE to indicate 20 years. Pulling out numbers like 3 trillion would have to be an error on the part of the fallible man.

See above about radiometric dating.

See what I said above about fossils and evidence and dating. When they were handing out common sense, were you ordering a milkshake?

It's common sense to believe in anything some stranger tells you no matter how ridiculous? That's how Eve got in so much trouble over that apple in the first place. When will you simple minded females learn your lesson?

Sorry, dude, but we're all descended from apelike creatures.

I'm aware that all Austrailians are descended from criminals and neaderthals. That has not been desputed.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Do you HAVE to reply in the original quote box??? Would it be so hard to add a couple extra tags?

That's a bold faced lie and you know it. They poop out numbers from 12 billion down to 3 billion.

Nope, that's pretty much the accepted approximation of the Earth's age.

Are you a geologist? If not, then you blindly believe whatever they tell you because you don't have the ability to verify their supposed findings for yourself.

One does not need to be a geologist. You can watch, step by step, things being dated. Dinosaur bones etc. A basic understanding of the process will enable you to understand and see it for yourself.

Too many assumptions have to be made to buy into that carbon dating crapfest. Without that time machine to verify the original amount of a given element you have no case. Who knows what factors entered into play throughout time that could have effected the samples.

Factors, shmactors. Carbon dating may not be foolproof but you can't, I notice, say anything about radiometric dating. Why? Because you can't say anything. Radiometric dating is very reliable. And it is used to date older things, older things which don't have carbon-14 in them to date anymore.
Read the works of a man named Brent G. Dalrymple, he explains quite well about radiometric dating,and which is one of the most reliable parts of science.
Compare all the statistics of radiometric dating, it IS reliable.

None of them are over 6000 years old so it doesn't matter to me.

See above about radiometric dating.

There is no physical proof that the world is over 6000 years old. All evidence points to 6000ish. You need to read your Bible, heathen. Woman was deceived by satan to begin with and here you are again being deceived and damning yourself, your dogs, your sissy husband, and any future children you might have to Hell right along with you.

LOL!
See what I said above about fossils and evidence and dating. When they were handing out common sense, were you ordering a milkshake?

I'm not an Australian so I don't have any Neanderthal(aka aboriginal) ancestors who are apelike. It has got to suck being a convict and a caveman.

Sorry, dude, but we're all descended from apelike creatures.