And why would THEY lie, right? I hate to break it to you...but scientists are a LOT like the government. POLITICAL. "Global Warming" was a "standard theory" if I recall, wasn't it?
Btw, as I've mentioned, the various Dating methods are inaccurate because the criteria and field conditions are inconsistent, contaminated, the entire planet and atmosphere and level of radiation changed with the Flood, and thus make these methods inaccurate. Oddly, dating methods seem to work better (if at all) since the time of the Great Flood.
FWIW "millions of years" isn't proven in any case; Nor especially the comically arbitrary "billions" of years tossed around and added on every 20 years of so since the early 1900s.
Millions, hundreds of thousands, I don't care: the point is, scientists say it took evolution a looong time to accomplish something that those who would posit a single cat kind on the Ark say took only 4,000 years.
"Single cat-kind"? Is that verbatim? Or did Kimtom post that there were indeed "two of every cat "kind." Altogether different context.
Either all 37 extant species of cats were represented on the Ark, or some lower number of "kinds" were. If the latter, then it necessarily follows that multiple species descended from the same common ancestor.
Yes, the term "37 extant species of cats" is posted all over the interwebs. How do you know they are all THE "original" breed? Did you happen to analyze how many Lynxes are included? Or how similar Jaguars, Leopards, and Cheetahs are? Or the various smaller cats which DO breed rather easily. You know what's odd? The human race is comprised of extremes of Blue-Black, lily-White, Red, and Yellow. And all shades in between. It's called "variation." For all we know, Adam was Black and Eve was White. Are you really going to die on this Cat Hill? Or a Doggie Hill for that matter? Ever see a Beagle-German Shepherd mix? (Worst attitude and ugliest dog I've ever seen. God's a funny guy sometimes.)
You say that seemingly without realizing that the advent of these methods pre-dates the claimed occurrance of the flood. There is no comparative data in existence upon which to base that assesment.
You apparently have no shame or sense of ethics or in the statements you make - the end us justifying the means.
If you believe that thousands of scientists in dozens of different fields have all gotten together to lie about how old things are, then you'll be able to wave away anything you don't like. As you appear to be willing to do.
Yes, the term "37 extant species of cats" is posted all over the interwebs.
Really? I looked up a list of cat species, counted them, and wrote the phrase myself.