CARBON DATING UNDERCUTS EVOLUTION'S LONG AGES

ICR ^ | October, 2003 | John Baumgardner

[ETERNAL WARMING]

Prove that God exists.

Prove that He doesn't.

[TigersEye]

The only consistent way to interpret the geological record in light of this event is to understand that fossil-bearing rocks are the result of a massive global Flood that occurred only a few thousand years ago and lasted but a year. This Biblical interpretation of the rock record implies that the animals and plants preserved as fossils were all contemporaries. This means trilobites, dinosaurs, and mammals all dwelled on the planet simultaneously, and they perished together in this world-destroying cataclysm.

If all these animals lived together and all were killed in the same flood then why are trilobites only found in one layer of rock, dinosaurs in other layers, mammals in other layers and one kind is never found in a layer containing the other kind?

[HalfFull]

Perhaps this article will help you with your question:

[HalfFull]

As for HalfFull's silly insinuations, until he's willing to say what he means forthrightly, he will be ignored.

Missed your post

As I posted previously in this tread, there were many possible explanations of your attack on a respected scientist. Since then, AndrewC has posted the explanation to you. That you assume the worse does not surprise me, given your radical bias and automatic attacks.on those that disagree with your silly theory.

As far as ignoring me...please DO.

[Right Wing Professor]

As I posted previously in this tread, there were many possible explanations of your attack on a respected scientist.

Pointing out that papers he's put his name on in the last 5 years directly contradict each other is an 'attack'? And his 'explanation' is an ackowledgment that he published the paper believing it contained a fundamental flaw that he failed to acknowledge.

[js1138]

Two reasonable explanations: first he didn't read the paper prior to publication, and second, he allowed his name on the paper to bolster his credentials as a scientist. Both are probably true. The problem of allowing his name on a paper he disagrees with remains.

[.30Carbine]

Excxellent choice. This is my bookmarking bump.

[Right Wing Professor]

Two reasonable explanations: first he didn't read the paper prior to publication, and second, he allowed his name on the paper to bolster his credentials as a scientist.

Of course, both are considered examples of unethical behavior by major scientific organizations.

[TigersEye]

The explanations in the article defy reason and logic. There are also a number of outright lies in it along with a good helping of non-sequiturisms that appear to be a deliberate avoidance of the essential question. There is no meaningful conclusion to be drawn from it.

I was hoping you could show me something with substance not poorly constructed conjecture. I don't pretend to know what the truth of earth's origin and the specifics of plant and animal species origins but that article is a sad testament to the God given powers of analytical reason and critical thought.