Questions about Evolutionism vs. Creationsim

[pocaracas]

What did I tell you guys? Statler Wadorf! He's back!
Hey man!! How's your eye?

To answer your other question, here is what I believe concerning the questions I asked.
2) How old is the earth and why do you think so?
 
Around 6000 years. Though radiometric dating does give us dates of millions of years, these dates are based on multiple assumptions that have not been proven.

BUHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Two of these assumptions are:
a)   We assume that the earth started off with no decay at all. Based on this assumption, we measure the rate of the half-life of decaying element, measure how much daughter isotope there is, and do the math. However, it’s possible the earth began with some decay already having progressed.

You know why we assume that?!
One word: volcanoes!!

b)   We assume the rate of the decay is the constant. Though the rate may be constant now, that doesn’t mean the decay was constant throughout all of time.

Sure! Right!
Elements with a low half-life follow the rule logarithmic decay to the tee.... but long lived elements wouldn't. SURE!
Time flowed differently back then, you suppose, right?

Also, we get different rates from radiometric dating (Uranium to lead, 4.5 billion years; potassium to argon, 1.3 billion years; carbon to nitrogen, 5730 years). These can’t all be right if the assumptions we base them off are true.

Because of those differences, those transitions are probed for different expected ages of the material being tested.

For instance, if we measure the rate of decay of uranium to lead using these assumptions, we get a date of around 4.5 billion years. However, this decay also creates helium, which easily slips away from the rock or whatever substance it is trapped in since it’s a light element and chemically inert (a noble gas). Measuring the rate of the helium diffusion based on the amount helium left in the substance gives a date of around 6000 years.

Care to provide a citation for that experiment?
Like you said, Helium can easily slip through.... could it have not come from some other source to the sample under consideration? Or is this a phenomenon measured systematically around the globe?
I can't tell.... you didn't provide anything to back it up.

Also, amounts of carbon 14 left in diamond and other hard substances formed over millions of years lead me and others to believe in a young age for the earth. As previously mentioned, the half-life for carbon 14 is only 5730 years. After 90,000 years, it would be undetectable—yet, we find it in diamond that formed billions of years ago. If this was the case, there should no longer be any carbon 14 left in the diamond.

Care to tell me how you can tell how long ago that diamond was formed?
Again, is this a phenomenon that happens with every diamond stone, or only a particular one?

3) Do humans and apes share commons ancestors and why do you think so?
 
No. While we can find bits of skeletons that almost appear to be transitional creatures, they are often found to be either fake or something else. For instance, many argued that the Toumai skill was a transitional form, since it had an ape size brain but more human-like features. However, upon further investigation, it really was more characteristic of a female gorilla. Other finds have been faked such as the Piltdown man, a skull that was fabricated with both human and orangutan parts.

Every fossil is a fake!!!!!! Scream it! Science if bogus!!
Scientists are false, lying, scum, humanoids!!!!


FFS, dude. Stop reading your creationist propaganda.
Read instead about how propaganda works. I like to know about psychology. Do you like it, too? I find it useful to know how my mind can be manipulated by others, so I can try to counter it.

Yes, the Piltdown man was a fabrication by some idiot pseudo-scientist.... in 1912!!
Get over it!
That doesn't mean that every other fossil is an equal fabrication.
Scientists, nowadays, go to great lengths to make sure they produce pure artifacts. Can you imagine the years it takes for a person to get to the level of archeologist? The work required to get funding to go some place and excavate? And then that person goes there and produces a phony... of course, only to have the whole world discover it, and see his sources of funding dwindle to nothing and then be forced to change profession.... spend a lifetime working for one career, only to destroy it for a few minutes of glory?
Not worth it.
And, frankly, your assumption of fraud in archeology is insulting to the whole academic body, me and AlexK included.

4) Was Adam of Genesis 2 a real historical person and why do you think so?
 
Yes, because I believe the Bible and what it says. Since the existence of Adam cannot be proven through empirical science but rather historical science (as forensics and evolution itself), we must rely on eyewitness accounts and hypotheses that can explain the most data. The Bible is our most historically consistent work of literature that we have, and I have no reason to believe that it was falsified.

Why? Why do you believe what is written in the bible?
Why have you no reason to think it was falsified? Many biblical scholars (christians included) admit that much of the bible is fabricated.
The pope himself will tell you to read Genesis (and most of the OT) metaphorically.

When I ask "why", here... I'm looking for your own personal path.... since your birth, what happened to you, to your mind (I like psychology, remember?).... what path did your mind take since the moment you were born to now, that led you to this belief, to this implicit trust in what was written long ago?