(May 21, 2012 at 4:08 pm)Alter2Ego Wrote: And where did the scientists get the 3.5 billion years? They just pulled a number out of one of their hats?

The date comes from the oldest know stromatolite fossils.

Controls on development and diversity of Early Archean stromatolites

They were found at the 3.4 billion year old Strelley Pool Formation in Western Australia. The formation they are found in was dated using U–Pb zircon method.

THE 3426–3350 Ma STRELLEY POOL FORMATION IN THE EAST STRELLEY GREENSTONE BELT: A FIELD AND PETROGRAPHIC GUIDE

If you are interested in how that works please read Dr. Roger Wiens’ article Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective.

So the answer to your question is no; They didn't just pull a number out of their hats.

Quote:Oh that's right, magic. So you've explained nothing.

These morons think "magic" explains everything.

Childish, really.

She is here purely to burnish, in her own mind, her credentials as a totally subsumed devotee to her holy book. She has no interest whatsoever in having the very value of those credentials challenged. This is why she is an exhibit, not a debating partner.

(May 22, 2012 at 7:42 pm)Chuck Wrote: She is here purely to burnish, in her own mind, her credentials as a totally subsumed devotee to her holy book. She has no interest whatsoever in having the very value of those credentials challenged. This is why she is an exhibit, not a debating partner.

Ha, thats one cold, calculated put down. I just gained a whole new respect for ya Chuck.

(May 22, 2012 at 4:56 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: ... can I put it away now?
I mean... I don't know if it shows but its kind of cold in here.

---

(May 22, 2012 at 12:31 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Thanks for using one color!

What th-... was that a crack at me?
I was just making a point. :S

Um, no. I appreciated and understood your point.

(May 23, 2012 at 2:01 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(May 22, 2012 at 4:56 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: ... can I put it away now?
I mean... I don't know if it shows but its kind of cold in here.

---

What th-... was that a crack at me?
I was just making a point. :S

Um, no. I appreciated and understood your point.

Ah, fair enough. Its just that rainbow paragraph took alot of effort.
I'm very proud of it.

I feel sorry for this person because she's obviously been brainwashed. She's probably gone to Creationist propaganda websities like answersingenesis.org to try and find rebuttals of all the evidence we provided. I've tried to explain to her in the most simple way possible how evolution works but to no avail. People put so much time and money into debunking science as evidenced by all these creationist organizations. They claim to be pro-science and then try to debunk science with science and replace it with some pseudoscientific and supernatural explanation, like "God did it!" or they may as well just say "a wizard did it!" They clearly have an ideological agenda and lack the healthy scepticism needed for science. They REALLY don't want evolution to be true, but evolution is the truth, and the truth isn't always what people want to hear. Unlike the Christian God, evolution is not a sentient, vengeful being and could care less if these people that belonged to a finite species that will one day become extinct believed it was true or not. Evolution has happened, and will still continue to happen if these people like it or not.

(May 23, 2012 at 3:06 pm)Jovian Wrote: I feel sorry for this person because she's obviously been brainwashed. She's probably gone to Creationist propaganda websities like answersingenesis.org to try and find rebuttals of all the evidence we provided. I've tried to explain to her in the most simple way possible how evolution works but to no avail. People put so much time and money into debunking science as evidenced by all these creationist organizations. They claim to be pro-science and then try to debunk science with science and replace it with some pseudoscientific and supernatural explanation, like "God did it!" or they may as well just say "a wizard did it!" They clearly have an ideological agenda and lack the healthy scepticism needed for science. They REALLY don't want evolution to be true, but evolution is the truth, and the truth isn't always what people want to hear. Unlike the Christian God, evolution is not a sentient, vengeful being and could care less if these people that belonged to a finite species that will one day become extinct believed it was true or not. Evolution has happened, and will still continue to happen if these people like it or not.

She just has a very small and rigidly calcified mind. She offers no rebuttals, just assertions to the contrary, back by well poisoning. A very small mind stuffed full of biblical crap, and lacking the flexibility to expand even a tiny little bit, even in defense of her bible. My dog can come up with better trick to get his food.

If you think god couldn't work a miracle and make a creationist dumber than Statler Wordorff, you are proven wrong.