Scientists Strengthen Case for Life on Earth More Than 3.8 Billion Years Ago

UCLA News ^ | 20 July 2006 | Staff (press release)

[Stultis]

"humans" here 40 million years ago

Um, no.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Isn't it possible that the layer of rock was inhabited later, possibly much later, than its original formation and that this later habitation produced the carbon isotope differential?

Not likely.

You have to make the assumption that an undisturbed layer of rock (found under more recent rocks) could not get even layers (deposits of carbon) inserted into it with disruptions or other detectable events. And of course, most insertion events (Lava, upthrusts, faults, etc.) would be observable. And most "insertion" events would destroy the (apparently smooth) layers of carbon they have observed.

So if the rock is xxx million years old, then what's in the rock should be that many million years old.

[Just mythoughts]

"To disprove the Bible and faith in a creator is to suggest that an infinite God cannot, in an instant, create a rock that is at once billions of years old."

Interesting that both sides of this debate are fully described in the Bible. Many creationists have been trained to believe despite the earth filled evidence this planet is a mere 6,000 years old, although they do give its creation as an act of the Heavenly Father.

On the other hand the evolutionists, majority are atheist love to claim a 'Christian' handle when it serves their purpose, yet flat out reject what it is that makes one Christian.

Some of these evolutionists know full well the Bible does NOT tell us exactly how old this earth/heavens are but gives ample instruction that this earth is ancient. Man in the flesh however, can be dated fairly closely Biblically and what is Written is not in dispute with actual skeletal remains. Course some can take one tooth and draw divine art work.

[kellynch]

I'm sorry, I believe in God, but to postulate that, 5,000 or so years ago, God put rocks on this earth that were billions of years old, is just silly.

I have no problems believing in God and believing that the Earth is billions of years old. I don't see a contradiction here. I've paraphrased Clarence Darrow before -- how are we to know what God considers a day? All we know are 24-hour days. God created the Heavens and the Earth, but I don't think he did it a few thousand years ago.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"On the other hand the evolutionists, majority are atheist..."

No, the majority are Christians.

[Robert A Cook PE]

At this age, doesn't it begin to overlap the age of the earth-moon formation?

[Just mythoughts]

Since the Bible NOWHERE gives a 6,000 year old beginning why don't the evolutionists point out to these YEC's where they are wrong???

Could it be that to do that would require the evolutionists to acknowledge the Creator of flesh just as He inspired Moses to pen. After all the OLD Testament is alll about that creation of man in flesh, and the protection of that seed line to Christ. Now who was it that was out to destroy that seed line to Christ????

[Just mythoughts]

"No, the majority are Christians."

Got a Biblical flash for you to be Christian one must follow Christ not Darwin.

[Rodm]

If you believe in evolution, you think you have come to know the accidental meaninglessness of your existence. This thread matters not a wit in your world.

[Quark2005]

No, the majority are Christians.

Erratum: The majority of those who acknowledge the science pointing to evolution in America are Christians - this is quite definitely not the case worldwide, however.

(I'm sure this is what you meant, though!)

[b_sharp]

What does Umoonasaurus have to do with Homo sapiens?

You said human fossils found in Australia have been dated to 40 mys.

[MHGinTN]

That's a really good one!... there should be an award or somethin' for making such a great pun.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[MHGinTN]

"... wow more articles that disprove alot of what is said in the bible." Perhaps you would enlighten me as to how this information 'disproves' what is in the Bible? Or were you merely trolling for a food fight?

[Quark2005]

Got a Biblical flash for you to be Christian one must follow Christ not Darwin.

Nobody "follows" Darwin in the sense you are describing. Plenty of people who worship Christ acknowledge the scientific validity of Darwin's theories, however.

[Element187]

Perhaps you would enlighten me as to how this information 'disproves' what is in the Bible? Or were you merely trolling for a food fight?

I rather not ... trying to show logic to a bible thumper does no good, their religion has been indoctrinated into their heads too strongly ... kind of like the muslims brainwash their children into hating America.. you'll never get it out of their heads.

[MHGinTN]

No offense, but could you provide a link for me to follow to the source for this assertion ... I'm curious not confrontational: "In Australia, digs have shown "humans" here 40 million years ago."

[Just mythoughts]

"Nobody "follows" Darwin in the sense you are describing. Plenty of people who worship Christ acknowledge the scientific validity of Darwin's theories, however."


HA, peel back those acceptance layers of transition, if Christ was born at a specific time to a specific virgin as foretold hundreds of years before the event, then the randomness of evolution is a hoax.

[b_sharp]

"If you believe in evolution, you think you have come to know the accidental meaninglessness of your existence. This thread matters not a wit in your world."

Why does our evolution remove meaning from our lives?

[muleskinner]

"...the evolutionists, majority are atheist... yet flat out reject what it is that makes one Christian."

Sez you.