More scientists express doubts on Darwin

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | June 22, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern

[celmak]

We'll be back.

[OmahaFields]

How many times, say, just in the past 100 years, has the age of the earth changed?

Each second it grows one second older. Each millesecond, it grows one millesecond older. Each microsecond, it grows one microsecond older ...

[celmak]

Yes, it will happen with 1 more Conservative judge.

[celmak]

Each second it grows one second older. Each millesecond, it grows one millesecond older. Each microsecond, it grows one microsecond older ...

And each second, we get closer to proving the Bible right. LOL!

Manana

[OmahaFields]

And each second, we get closer to proving the Bible right. LOL!

Does the Bible say "Do not kill" or does it say "Do not murder"?

[Coyoteman]

I understand your dilemma, especially the understanding of the age of the earth. Before I go into depth about your findings, 2 questions:

How many times, say, just in the past 100 years, has the age of the earth changed? How many times has the age of the planet, during this 100 years, grown and shrunk?

The age of the earth has been refined several times over the last 100 years. It has gotten older, not younger. The changes are getting smaller, as the technology improves and the processes are refined. It is narrowing in on about 4.5 billion years. There has been less and less, and now pretty much no, support for the young earth scenario from this process.

How about all the points I raised in my post from my experience with western US archaeology? Are you going to ignore them all and try a subject switch? Or are you going to link a few refinements in the age of the earth over a century or so, narrowing in on 4.5 billion years, to somehow "proving" the earth is only 6,000 or so year old?

[andysandmikesmom]

Well, I do think that you are completely wrong about this, but we will see in the future...

[brytlea]

Well, I always have to remind myself that alot of people on the internet are only here to entertain themselves. Anyway, you have a nice night. Glad to have met you. I really didn't come onto this thread to get into any sort of religious discussion, I generally avoid these discussions like the plague!
susie

[b_sharp]

LOL.

How big was the barf bucket? (see tagline)

[OmahaFields]

They ARE winning. ToysRUs is now selling creationist toys Dinosaurs are a common obsession among kids and this dinosaur toy takes children back to the Mesozoic Era for unlimited play in a prehistoric time. Thunder, a replica of a Brontosaurus, is so named for the thundering footstep noises and roar he makes when kids pull the lever under his tail. In addition to movable stomping feet, this Brontosaurus moves vertically at the head, neck, and tail and also twists at the neck. Per Fisher-Price’s storyline for these beasts, kids can pretend that Thunder is the head of the Ecovores, a group of dinosaurs trying to protect their environment from the natural resource-hogging Predator dinosaurs. Or kids can challenge their imagination by creating their own stories and scenes with this gentle giant. Thunder comes with a saddle on his back and three raptor dinosaurs, who are prepared to follow his lead. Also included is a caveman figure with a saber tooth tiger skin wrap and a primitive weapon, which, although not exactly accurate for the time period , extends play possibilities a bit. Three "AAA" batteries are included to power the sound effects.

At least they have a disclaimer from a reviewer of the toy. --Cristina Vaamonde

[mgstarr]

Do you ever feel like you're stuck in some infinite loop of Inherit the Wind?

No clue how much bandwidth I've seen wasted by creation "scientists" over the past eight years on FR and to no end.

Personally I believe the earth is flat since that adhers to my narrow Biblical interpretation of Isaiah 11:12 and Revelation 7:1 . And no I don't want anyone's revisions on scripture - why should I listen to you when you ignore mine?

And if it isn't flat, how can it have edges, pillars, corners and ends?

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
--From Hamlet (I, v, 166-167)

[andysandmikesmom]

Yes, these threads can get downright ugly at times, and its really a shame that it happens...anyway, I am also glad to have met you, and you have a nice evening as well...

[AndrewC]

Sort of like praying for bank robbers to be successful so they can donate to the local church.

Again your viewpoint is rather perverted so that is to be expected from you. It is nothing like that. Thou shalt not steal is a commandment. Thou shalt not embryo transplant is not a commandment.

[OmahaFields]

Do you ever feel like you're stuck in some infinite loop of Inherit the Wind?

You put the beer in the coconut and throw the can away ...

[andysandmikesmom]

This reminds me of a comedy skit I saw recently on TV..I missed most of it, but just heard this one liner, something about creationists, that when they are watching 'The Flintstones', on TV, they think they are watching a documentary....

Dinosaurs, and humans all existing at the same time, side by side...saddle up, lets go for a 'Dino' ride...

[OmahaFields]

Thou shalt not embryo transplant is not a commandment.

4,589,038 (plus or minus) ducks and you still will not say whether embryo transplant is a morally acceptable procedure for Christians.

[OmahaFields]

This reminds me of a comedy skit I saw recently on TV..I missed most of it, but just heard this one liner, something about creationists, that when they are watching 'The Flintstones', on TV, they think they are watching a documentary....

Sad thing is it is probably as close as some get to reality.

[AndrewC]

You know that you are making un-substantiated claims about me.

No, it is substantiated. It is a conclusion drawn from your contention that the embryo transfer is definitely a sin. I'm sure Ann would side with me rather than you in this discussion.

[OmahaFields]

No, it is substantiated. It is a conclusion drawn from your contention that the embryo transfer is definitely a sin.

I made no contention that it was a sin. Please reread my posts.

[b_sharp]

"No, it means the Bible had it right first, it scientist who disregard this fact that waist time trying to disprove Creation."

This is not the question originally asked. You were asked for a science where creationism made a contribution. The Bible did not contribute to modern Cosmology. The BB was 'discovered' independently from religious beliefs.

I suspect that the Bible was not the first to state that the Cosmos had a beginning.