To: trumandogz
==Less than 10,000 years old or millions or billions of years old?
I believe the rocks are less than 10,000 years old. And scientists who hold to this position should be allowed to present the evidence in support of a young earth and the evidence that falsifies an old earth. And the scientists on the opposite side of the debate should be allowed to do the exact same thing.
To: GodGunsGuts
Do you believe that man and dinosaur walked the earth at the same time?
To: GodGunsGuts
Oh, there “are no scientists” on the other side of the debate.
The evo/atheist/billions of years crowd defines them as “not scientists”, avoiding, therefore, any need to address the debate.
In dating rocks, what ASSUMPTIONS are made, fellas?
Are those assumptions valid? Do you know the starting conditions, absolutely?
34 posted on
08/18/2008 10:54:59 AM PDT by
MrB
(You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
To: GodGunsGuts
And scientists who hold to this position should be allowed to present the evidence in support of a young earth and the evidence that falsifies an old earth. And the scientists on the opposite side of the debate should be allowed to do the exact same thing. The issue has been debated and settled.
(Your side lost. You guys are worse than Al Gore! "Just one more recount, pretty please!")
36 posted on
08/18/2008 10:58:36 AM PDT by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: GodGunsGuts
I believe the rocks are less than 10,000 years old. And scientists who hold to this position should be allowed to present the evidence in support of a young earth and the evidence that falsifies an old earth. And the scientists on the opposite side of the debate should be allowed to do the exact same thing.Is there any evidence they haven't been allowed to present?
40 posted on
08/18/2008 11:04:23 AM PDT by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: GodGunsGuts
I believe the rocks are less than 10,000 years old. And scientists who hold to this position should be allowed to present the evidence in support of a young earth and the evidence that falsifies an old earth. ![](http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2001/03/18/kydino.jpg)
"I'm not a scientist, but I play one at Churchy Creation Seminars"
212 posted on
08/18/2008 5:33:11 PM PDT by
Oztrich Boy
(optional, printed after your name on post)
To: GodGunsGuts
I believe the rocks are less than 10,000 years old. And scientists who hold to this position should be allowed to present the evidence in support of a young earth and the evidence that falsifies an old earth. And the scientists on the opposite side of the debate should be allowed to do the exact same thing.
lol... what about that dastardly speed of light?
276 posted on
08/18/2008 9:06:42 PM PDT by
ketsu
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson