Posts: 1985
Threads: 12
Joined: October 12, 2010
Reputation:
24
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 3, 2013 at 4:29 pm
(April 2, 2013 at 10:49 pm)justin Wrote: Statler i actually have to study for a biology test tonight so i will respond in detail when i get a chance. test is in the morning so kinda need to focus. just didn't want you to think i am ignoring you. and summer thank you i will try to make it thursday looking foward to meeting people around here.
Best of luck on your exam.
Posts: 473
Threads: 31
Joined: February 2, 2013
Reputation:
7
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 10, 2013 at 3:29 pm
(This post was last modified: April 10, 2013 at 3:36 pm by justin.)
hey statler sorry this last week or so has been chaotic (sick, couple test, couple papers, kids, etc) lol. thanks for your wishes i did well for the test. i got a 98 message me on here and i would love to talk evolution and stuff
summer unfortunatly due to change in schedule i can not make it to the meeting my neighbor is a cop and offered a ride along with him and the guys to see if a job in the PD would intrest me. i said yes and what originally what was suppose to be friday night had to be moved to thursday. I am sad that i won't be able to attend and meet all of y'all sorry i will try to go to the next one. he has been very helpful so i owe it to him to honor my word ya know? this is a chance i don't want to pass up to look at jobs and with three babies i try to think about them first. i hope this doesn't give you a bad impression on my part. i am sorry
Posts: 1985
Threads: 12
Joined: October 12, 2010
Reputation:
24
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 12, 2013 at 6:06 pm
Posts: 12586
Threads: 397
Joined: September 17, 2010
Reputation:
96
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 15, 2013 at 9:42 am
Hey, it's no worries dude - I almost didn't go myself because I was in a bad mood, and only did because a good buddy of mine announced he was attending. There will be other events. If you ask to join the Facebook group, you should get notified about them. Also, we have a youth secular organization that tries to get non-religious kids together that you can check out.
Posts: 30673
Threads: 2117
Joined: May 24, 2012
Reputation:
71
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 15, 2013 at 10:12 am
What did you expect from Creationists? Those morons think the earth is 10 thousand years old and that the earth was created in 6 days.
Posts: 473
Threads: 31
Joined: February 2, 2013
Reputation:
7
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 15, 2013 at 12:09 pm
(April 15, 2013 at 10:12 am)Brian37 Wrote: What did you expect from Creationists? Those morons think the earth is 10 thousand years old and that the earth was created in 6 days.
No I knew she was crazy but I was talking about the homology thing she saying I got the answer and I explained it to her but she just had her answer and agenda and was worried about the truth. If people wanna believe stone age myths and refuse any other position go for it but I don't have to live like that. I can be apart of the generation that contributes society.
Posts: 1985
Threads: 12
Joined: October 12, 2010
Reputation:
24
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 15, 2013 at 7:38 pm
(April 15, 2013 at 10:12 am)Brian37 Wrote: What did you expect from Creationists? Those morons think the earth is 10 thousand years old and that the earth was created in 6 days.
Morons? Are you really suggesting that everyone who disagrees with you about the age of the Earth is a moron? Why?
Posts: 2882
Threads: 132
Joined: May 8, 2011
Reputation:
31
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 15, 2013 at 8:22 pm
(April 15, 2013 at 7:38 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: (April 15, 2013 at 10:12 am)Brian37 Wrote: What did you expect from Creationists? Those morons think the earth is 10 thousand years old and that the earth was created in 6 days.
Morons? Are you really suggesting that everyone who disagrees with you about the age of the Earth is a moron? Why?
If you limit everyone to the group of people that use a literal interpretation of the Bible to determine the age of the Earth then moron no.
Brainwashed fucktard yes.
Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.
Posts: 13900
Threads: 262
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 16, 2013 at 1:54 pm
(April 15, 2013 at 7:38 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: (April 15, 2013 at 10:12 am)Brian37 Wrote: What did you expect from Creationists? Those morons think the earth is 10 thousand years old and that the earth was created in 6 days.
Morons? Are you really suggesting that everyone who disagrees with you about the age of the Earth is a moron? Why?
The age of the earth is confirmed by so many pieces of evidence that you would have to be a blinkered moron to still believe in a young earth if you have any science knowledge at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_ag...t_creation
http://www.amnh.org/education/resources/...nolgy.html
My favorite has to be zircon crystals that form deep in the earth mantle, then are raised by mountain forming, eroded down by weathering then by subduction at plate boundries taken back into the earth mantle where each time this happens leaving a new layer of zircon is added, like a very slow growing onion. Some of them have a lot of layers.
Quote:Originally formed by crystallization from a magma or in metamorphic rocks, zircons are so durable and resistant to chemical attack that they rarely go away. They may survive many geologic events, which can be recorded in rings of additional zircon that grow around the original crystal like tree rings. Like a tiny time capsule, the zircon records these events, each one of which may last hundreds of millions of years. Meanwhile, the core of the zircon itself remains unchanged, and preserves the chemical characteristics of the rock in which it originally crystallized.
Zircon contains the radioactive element uranium, which Dr. Mueller calls “the clock within the zircon” because it converts to the element lead at a specific rate over a long span of time. According to Mueller, this makes zircons “the most reliable natural chronometer that we have when we want to look at the earliest part of Earth history.” He goes on to explain that there are two ways to tell time in geology. “One is a relative time, meaning if there’s a mineral of one kind, and growing around it is a mineral of a second kind, you know the inner mineral formed first, but you don’t know how much time elapsed between the two.” Henry evaluates these kinds of mineral relations in rocks. From the types of minerals and their distributions in the rocks he reconstructs a relative sequence of events that reflects the change over time of parameters like pressure, temperature, and deformation. “If I have a metamorphic rock,” elaborates Dr. Henry, “I can use the types of minerals and their chemistry to determine the conditions that the rock had experienced at some point in its history. For example, a temperature of 700°C and high pressure of several thousand times atmospheric pressure imply that it had been deep in the crust at some time during its geologic history.” He infers what has happened to the rocks, but not how long ago it happened. That’s where the second kind of time comes in: absolute as compared to relative. “We try to supply the when,” explains Mueller. “My job is to look at the chemistry of the rock, including its isotopes, and try to derive the absolute times for events that are recorded in the rock and its zircons.”
How precise are those actual numbers? “Depending on the history of the rock, we can date things nowadays down to something on the order of a few hundredths of a percent of its age,” answers Mueller. That translates, for example, to plus or minus a million years out of three billion. Carbon-14 dating can go no further back than about 70,000 years, because the half-life of carbon-14 is only 5,730 years. (The half-life is the time it takes for half of the original radioactive isotope to change to another element.) In comparison, the half-life of the radioactive uranium 238 isotope is 4.5 billion years, which makes it useful for dating extremely old materials.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 12586
Threads: 397
Joined: September 17, 2010
Reputation:
96
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
April 16, 2013 at 2:27 pm
The answer, while brilliant, DBP, wasn't necessary, as Brian didn't at all say what Statler was trying to accuse him of saying.
|