Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seriously, tell me what method have they used to date bones to 65 or 75 million years?
They are not dating bones. Geologists determine the age of the strata in which the bones occur. The bones have been fossilized through permineralization. YOu might take a look at this page for an explanation of various radiometric dating methods.
Evolutionary theory doesn't state that humans are one variety of the species of apes from which we supposedly "evolved". It states that we are an entirely different species. I think that it is easy enough to see how humans are quite different from gorillas, although there are plenty of similarities.
Evolutionary theory does state that all primates evolved from a common ancestor and branched out into a number of new species. Let me ask you this, if you have a scientific background and believe in the scientific method, what viable process is responsible for the diversity of life on this planet if it's not evolution? I know of no other explanation other than evolution that has solid scientific evidence to support it.
I love radiometric dating. Its incredible how useful mathematics can be. You use logic to get a simple first order differential equation and then *bang* once solved we get a beautiful formula
Har. At least these people have a good sense of humor, while most atheists do not. Way to create something unique all by yourself! Oh, wait. You just posted a youtube video done by someone else. Oh well, it was funny anyway
First the link you had me look at was showing us mans evolutionary predecessors. I pointed out to you that Rhodesia man was simply a human, and not a transional.
Your source said it had a mix of human and pre-human characteristics. Why do you say it was human?
Quote:
Then I showed you that Neandertals were not human at all.
Obviously, a transitional fossil isn't going to be a modern human.
Quote:
Then I show you Australopithecus is now believed to be simply an ape, and again not a transional.
Gracile australopithecines shared several traits with modern apes and humans, and were widespread throughout Eastern and Northern Africa by a time between 3.0 and 3.9 million years ago.
Looks like you're wrong again.
Quote:
The ones that say they are Transionals, or the Evolutionist that say they are not transionals.
Please provide references to the literature showing that these are not transitional fossils. Everything you and I have posted shows that they are.
And does this mean you're changing your mind yet again on whether or not these are fakes and frauds?
Carbon dating can only be used to date bones up to 50,000 years. Not bones you claim are 65 million years old. So that arguement does not hold water.
How come no dinosaur fossils are able to be dated with carbon dating while lots of human remains can be? In other words, why are no dinosaur remains found that are young enough to support your assertion that they existed at the same time as humans?
Evolutionary theory does state that all primates evolved from a common ancestor and branched out into a number of new species. Let me ask you this, if you have a scientific background and believe in the scientific method, what viable process is responsible for the diversity of life on this planet if it's not evolution? I know of no other explanation other than evolution that has solid scientific evidence to support it.
MontanaGuy, since you ask, the answer to your question is CREATION.
Adaptation is responsible for some of the diversity, such as the diversity amongst human beings. The psychopathic racists of today's society would like to have us believe that people with certain skin colors and physical traits are somehow less human than people with certain other skin colors and physical traits... but that's a crock of bull. We're all human... and the genetic differences between the races are a comparatively small percentage. That doesn't make us different species.
A perfect example of adaptation is found in the weather patterns people prefer. Look in the "Weather" forum to see examples of this. You'll find people who love hot weather, people who love cold weather, and people in between. I think that the only thing that really matters is people's likes/dislikes, and what they're used to. For instance, where I live right now in northwest PA, it's May 12th and the high temperature is expected to be 50 degrees. I think that's absolutely ridiculous. It's cold from October through May out here, and residents have told me of years when there has been a freeze every month except July. They say this with SMILES on their faces. Somehow, they like it. Do you think that many Floridians or Southern Californians would like that? On the other side of the spectrum, I've heard Minnesotans complain when their January days are too warm! "I'm used to it being 20 below in January... these 15-degree days feel downright balmy to me!". I know that I am physically adapted to cold weather... my metabolism is sky-high and I've been called "the human furnace".
Now, I've come to dislike cold weather for many other reasons and I'm going to be moving south. Who knows what will happen to me there? I have a local music student who lived in Arizona before moving here. In the end of the summer, his Arizonan grandparents came up to stay with his family for about a month. When it was in the 60s up here, I and the locals were all wearing T-shirts and shorts. The Arizonans were wearing sweaters and complaining about how cold it was. Adaptation is a real thing.
However, creation is even more real. As a physicist, I can even explain how the Big Bang (as commonly defined by the scientific community) was impossible. A "big bang" of sorts was practically necessary in the beginning... but it's not the one that the scientific community talks about.
Adaptation is responsible for some of the diversity, such as the diversity amongst human beings.
Sure, if you redefine adaption to mean evolution then adaption is also responsible for the observed instances of new species appearing in the lab and in nature. It's also responsible for the evolution, uh, I mean adaption of new strains of diseases, development of new types of crops, and serves as a pretty good explanation for the mechanism behind the common descent of all species. If you'd rather call it adaption rather than evolution, that's great, but the two words mean the same thing.
Quote:
Now, I've come to dislike cold weather for many other reasons and I'm going to be moving south. Who knows what will happen to me there? I have a local music student who lived in Arizona before moving here. In the end of the summer, his Arizonan grandparents came up to stay with his family for about a month. When it was in the 60s up here, I and the locals were all wearing T-shirts and shorts. The Arizonans were wearing sweaters and complaining about how cold it was. Adaptation is a real thing.
This isn't the same mechanism as the one you were talking about at the start of your post. Evolution, uh, adaption as you initially described it talks about inherited traits, not changes in a person's preference over the course of their life. Unless you're claiming some retrovirus infected you and changed your DNA to prefer warmer weather, I think what you are describing is just called "getting old".
Quote:
However, creation is even more real.
Let's see some references to peer reviewed literature demonstrating this claim.
Quote:
As a physicist, I can even explain how the Big Bang (as commonly defined by the scientific community) was impossible.
Feel free. Again, be sure to back up your explanation with references to peer reviewed literature.
Quote:
A "big bang" of sorts was practically necessary in the beginning... but it's not the one that the scientific community talks about.
The how to you explain the fact that the steady state theory was a viable alternative to the big bang until enough evidence was gathered to rule out the idea of a static universe?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
