The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old

[Statler Waldorf]

THis is Nonsense and the beginning to the end of religion - which is falling apart around the world

Religion is falling apart? 2.3 Billion Christians.

There is NO question that the earth is far older than 10,000 years

Assertion.

For those who do not accept modern dating methods - one can prove it by counting Yearly layers in ice core samples

“For those who do not accept modern dating methods I will now appeal to another dating method.”

WE have ice core samples that show the earth is over 750,000 years from several places [quote]

How do they show this?

[quote] THere is NO possibility that the earth is 10,000 years old - none at all.

Another assertion.

Knowing that the earth's poles have shifted several times over the years - we know that this is only a partial amount from what would be if they never did.

How do you know this?

As we learn more about the earth - we have learned that there was NO worldwide flood like the great flood of the bible - even just in the Middle east.

Another assertion.

The Hebrew [sic] bible dating of the flood would place it AFTER the building of the Great Pyramid - and a column of water the height claimed would have pulverized every man made structure - yet there is NOT ANY water damage showing in the great pyramid.

No, the pyramids were built after the flood.

OF course - the story of the ark is nonsense to begin with - since they had NO fish onboard - and the mixing of fresh and salt water would have killed all the fish living them [sic]

This assumes that oceanic saline concentrations were the same as they are now, which would not have been the case.

- but then of course - a layer of salt would have prevented the growth of plants for thousands of years –

What layer of salt and why?

and where would they come from –

Most plants come from seeds.

- where did they keep the bacteria on the ark.

The bible says that only land animals that breathed through nostrils were brought upon the Ark.

Why are YOU even considering believing the nonsense of the bible –

I value deduction.

which is clearly the superstitions and MYTHS of a bunch of ancient cave dwellers and sheep herders from an insignificant place in the middle east?

Clearly? To whom?

YOU may as well believe in the tooth fairy!

The tooth fairy does not exist.

What a good question. Thanks for raising your hand in Biology class today. This is shot in the dark, since I didn't publish the book, but it seems like Dawkins and his publishers would think that readers conversant in the English language would understand the meaning of the word "illusion." The entire book is written to discuss how we are prone to seeking pattern and attributing meaning to it, and yet can be fooled by this tendency (like the 3-year-old who has just learned the alphabet and keeps finding sticks shaped like letters).

If life has the illusion of being designed then can the Universe also have the illusion of being billions of years old?

You now have an issue where you quote-mined Dawkins to make it appear as if he disagrees with his own conclusion. The problem is that you didn't quote-mine with enough panache. A better way to make it seem as you want it to would be this:

Dawkins clearly believes that life presents the illusion of being designed. Are you arguing that he is wrong? Why is it fair for Dawkins to dismiss contrary evidence as being illusory but not for creationists to? I smell special pleading.