Replies

Wow, is that the only mantra you know?

No, but when you've already demonstrated that you will ignore facts and post blatant lies to support your agenda, what's the point of trying to discuss with you?

You don't want rational discussion. You've arrogantly decided that evolution must be false even though you don't have the slightest bit of education in biology, and you don't care if you have to insult the reputations of good people, deny observed reality and outright lie, you're going to make everyone "know" that evolution is false.

You're a blatant, brazen and shameless liar. You've demonstrated that you're more than just ignorant, and you're far too incivil to be here for any kind of discussion. I don't post to discuss with you, because you've already made it clear that you don't care about reality. I'm just here to correct your blatant lies so that lurkers won't be suckered in by them.

Now I am convinced that you are either insane or just a disrupter.

I posted the link to the edition and page of the article that proves my point, yet you call me a liar?

You are definitely no different than a democrat.

What kind of mollusks? C14 dating is not used for aquatic life forms; any scientist who deals with dating techniques will tell you this.

You keep asking, so, I guess I have to keep proving it to you.

Shells from living snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old. Science vol. 224, 1984, pp.58-61

Living mollusk shells were dated up to 2300 years old. Science vol. 141, 1963, pp.634-637

A freshly killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1300 years ago! Antarctic Journal vol. 6, Sept-Oct. 1971, p211

“One part of the Vollosovitch mammoth carbon dated at 29,500 years and another part at 44,000.” Troy L. Pewe, “Quaternary Strigraphic Nomencature in Uniglaciated Central Alaska,” Geologic Survey Professional Paper 832 (U.S. Gov. Printing Office, 1975) p. 30

“Structure, metamorphism, sedimentary reworking, and other complications have to be considered. Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the geologic column had not been erected first.” J.E. O’Rourke, “Pragmatism vs. Materialism in Stratigraphy,” American Jouranl of Science, vol. 276 (January, 1976), p. 54

The geologic Column came many years BEFORE radiometric dating was conceived. Dates were initially established based on NOTHING. Radiometric dating aside, the geologic column is based upon the notion that it took alot of time to form the layers. Oddly enough, layer formation has not been observed at all over the years, except when you put dirt into a jar with water and shake it up. Strange thing about that test though, is that it only takes a matter of minutes for layers to form. Science can explain this phonomena too. It has to do with the particles themselves, as they sort out by density etc (they even teach this to 4th graders).