rza!!! Dude!!! It's LEVIATHAN!!!

[Claymore]

We always need to refer to evolution by using the word evolution and not science. I am ignorant and spiteful when it comes to evolution, and that is not going to change. Science is factual, and I have no problem with it.

LOL. There's a fair bit more scientific evidence for evolution than for the theory of gravity. Please won't you test some less-well supported scientific theories by jumping off a high building.

 

[alloytoo]

Evolutionistic geologists say it's billions of years old. Geologists say it's only thousands of years old.

Nope, reputable geologists agree on Billions of years.

 

[Nerfherder]

Let me correct you. There are millions of fossils, and all of them have nothing to do with evolution. Evolution has never produced even one fossil as evidence.

Funny though that the fossils show evolution, the older ones are different to the newer ones and show progressive change.

How many fossils prove anything in the bible ? None...

 

[w1z4rd]

Let me correct you. There are millions of fossils, and all of them have nothing to do with evolution. Evolution has never produced even one fossil as evidence.

Of course it has (you just lack the ability to see it), the fossil record is a result of evolution and proves it. Wanna know how it proves it?

There are layers in the rock/sediment below our feet.. the deeper the layer generally the older it is. Now in the most bottom of these layers are fossils of single cell organisms, jelly fish and other very early critters. There are no mammal or reptile fossils in these lower layers.

In a layer slightly higher up are jelly fish fossils, microbes and perhaps a couple of very funny looking early fish. There are no mammal or reptile fossils. Just some strange early fish and plants.

In a slightly higher level to that layer you find jellies, microbes, funny early looking fish and perhaps the first frog like fish critters. No mammals or reptiles yet.

In an even higher layer you have all of the above, except now there are reptile fossils in the fossil record that are not in the older and deeper layers.

Right towards the top you will find mammal and human bones and fossils. As well as all the above mentioned earlier.

If evolution was false you would find mammal fossils in all the records, not just the latest layers. You would find reptiles and amphibians fossils just as equally spread out.

Since theyre not evenly spread out, you know that at different time periods there are different types of creatures appearing. These layers are well defined and easy to distinguish. To prove the entire theory of evolution wrong is say finding a mammal bone (any mammal bone) in the precambrian layers of sediment.

Here is a childs diagram to help you understand what I mean: http://www.teachervision.fen.com/geology/printable/2644.html

 

[rza]

Nope. If only it were so easy eh?

*edit*

Are you seriously saying to me that you will be able to produce a geologist who does not have a literal interpretation to prove, who believes that the earth is a couple thousand years old?

I will eat my hat rza. I will also eat my socks (worn).

Andrew Snelling

 

[copacetic]

Andrew Snelling

I presume you missed the part where I said:

Nope. If only it were so easy eh?

*edit*

Are you seriously saying to me that you will be able to produce a geologist who does not have a literal interpretation to prove, who believes that the earth is a couple thousand years old?

I will eat my hat rza. I will also eat my socks (worn).

According to his many online biographies at creationist websites, Snelling received a Bachelor of Science with First Class Honours in Applied Geology from the University of New South Wales and a Ph.D. from the University of Sydney, for his thesis A geochemical study of the Koongarra uranium deposit, Northern Territory, Australia.[2] He worked for various mining companies for several years before leaving to pursue his creation "research" in 1983,[3] however he was retained as a consultant by Koongarra uranium project until 1992.[2]

His creation research has centred around dating methods, with his pet hobby horse being polonium halos, which according to Answers in Genesis, he has used to demonstrate that most rock layers and fossils were deposited by a global flood 4,300 years ago.[4] He has been repeatedly overlooked for a Noble prize despite the enormity of this discovery.

For his excellent publication record Snelling has became an Associate Professor of Geology at the Institute for Creation Research,[5] a title as meaningful as being a Discordian Pope.

 

[porchrat]

Andrew Snelling

He asked for someone who doesn't have a literal interpretation and you give him the Director of Research for Answers in Genesis?

Are you retarded?

:wtf:

 

[undesign]

Andrew Snelling

Interesting tidbit for you -

Will the Real Dr Snelling Please Stand Up?

 

[rza]

He asked for someone who doesn't have a literal interpretation and you give him the Director of Research for Answers in Genesis?

Are you retarded?

:wtf:

Snelling was once an evolutionist, he's now a geologist.

 

[porchrat]

Snelling was once an evolutionist, he's now a geologist.

Yes, but he has a literal interpretation. Look back and check what you were asked to do. There is nothing more literal than Answers in Genesis.

He wants to see someone that is unbiased that has reached the conclusion of a 6000 year old Earth.

Preferably someone non-religious. Surely you can understand the reasons for this.

 

[rza]

Yes, but he has a literal interpretation. Look back and check what you were asked to do. There is nothing more literal than Answers in Genesis.

He wants to see someone that is unbiased that has reached the conclusion of a 6000 year old Earth.

Preferably someone non-religious. Surely you can understand the reasons for this.

An ex-evolutionist who has published evolutionistic findings before is not qualified to be a fair geologist? Who else has published findings in both sides of the argument, and is as experienced as Snelling?

 

[copacetic]

An ex-evolutionist who has published evolutionistic findings before is not qualified to be a fair geologist? Who else has published findings in both sides of the argument, and is as experienced as Snelling?

What is an evolutionist? I don't get it. Am I a 'gravitationist' because I 'believe' in gravity? :wtf:

Anyway, I asked you to find a non-creationist who supports the idea that the earth is young. You did precisely the opposite of that and yet, somehow, you are still arguing with us.

Very odd.

 

[porchrat]

An ex-evolutionist who has published evolutionistic findings before is not qualified to be a fair geologist? Who else has published findings in both sides of the argument, and is as experienced as Snelling?

You don't understand what is being asked of you. I fear it is beyond you.

copa has demonstrated something very important to you. That this 6000 years number is potentially coming from the bible and not from the evidence itself.

If there is a geologist out there who isn't a creationist but still arrived at the number 6000 then it shows that there is some sort of evidence separate from the biblical claims that is allowing that scientist to arrive at that exact number.

 

[mo_mia]

Challenge to rza: You used the word 'publish' in both sentences above. Do you know the difference between the two types of publication you mention?

 

[luxe]

that No Answers in Genesis site is pretty epic..i especially enjoyed this:

"...be on guard against giving interpretations of Scripture that are far fetched or opposed to science, and so exposing the Word of God to the ridicule of unbelievers."
--Saint Augustine

 

[undesign]

that No Answers in Genesis site is pretty epic..i especially enjoyed this:

"...be on guard against giving interpretations of Scripture that are far fetched or opposed to science, and so exposing the Word of God to the ridicule of unbelievers."
--Saint Augustine

I liked this one -

"Creationism is not the alternative to Evolution - ignorance is"

 

[rza]

Challenge to rza: You used the word 'publish' in both sentences above. Do you know the difference between the two types of publication you mention?

Snelling wrote a Ph.D paper on evolution, and that's what I was referring to.

 

[rza]

that No Answers in Genesis site is pretty epic..i especially enjoyed this:

"...be on guard against giving interpretations of Scripture that are far fetched or opposed to science, and so exposing the Word of God to the ridicule of unbelievers."
--Saint Augustine

Good quote, unfortunately Roman Catholic leadership didn't listen to Augustine before they persecuted Galileo.

 

[luxe]

i will now have a new signature.

"Creationism is not the alternative to Evolution - ignorance is"

 

[porchrat]

Snelling wrote a Ph.D paper on evolution, and that's what I was referring to.

You were asked to provide a non-biblical-literalist geologist who arrived at the same conclusion of 6000 years. Snelling does not qualify for this because he is a creationist that believes in the literal 6 day creation. Either comprehend that or go away.