Posted by bad_luck on 1/15/2013 12:06:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 1/15/2013 11:14:00 AM (view original):
Oh, so you want me to post exactly what you wrote and my exact response. OK, here you go:
On the 24 you wrote:
Posted by bistiza on 12/24/2012 9:21:00 AM (view original):
Evidence please.
All you have to do is run a search for "young earth theory" or "young earth creationism" and read the information to find many scientists who support the hypothesis in whole or in part. I'm not going to bother listing all the names for you - you can go read them yourself if you want to take the time.
Keep in mind I truly am completely neutral on this one. I can see both sides.
Bistiza, could you give one - 1! - piece of "evidence" that the earth is NOT billions of years old? You claimed that there is evidence on both sides. And can you show me any evidence that any scientists believe that?
The first and second laws of thermodynamics.
The fact that carbon-14 should break down to virtually nothing past a certain point in terms of dates and yet it is difficult to find carbon without carbon-14, which with an old earth model should be virtually non-existent much of the time.
The fossil record shows many strata of rock which are thought to be formed over "millions of years" can actually form quite quickly. Sometimes there are fossils, including petrified trees, which span straight through several layers indicating they may have formed quite suddenly.
Adding to these and other evidence, there are MANY things older universe theory fails to explain, so there is every reason for me to be neutral on the issue and not simply accept one theory over another because it is the feeling of the majority. I make no apology for thinking for myself and making a determination that there isn't enough evidence on either side at this point in time, and both sides have many failings.
On the 27th I wrote:
Posted by bad_luck on 12/27/2012 11:40:00 AM (view original):
The first and second laws of thermodynamics.
Not sure what that has to do with the age of the earth.
The fact that carbon-14 should break down to virtually nothing past a certain point in terms of dates and yet it is difficult to find carbon without carbon-14, which with an old earth model should be virtually non-existent much of the time.
dahs already covered this. Carbon 14 is produced in the atmosphere. Not sure why you would think it would be non-existent.
The fossil record shows many strata of rock which are thought to be formed over "millions of years" can actually form quite quickly. Sometimes there are fossils, including petrified trees, which span straight through several layers indicating they may have formed quite suddenly.
Can you explain this further?
See?
Exact quotes.
Verbatim.
Word for word.
No, this is what happened:
You talked out of your asshoIe. You had nothing to back it up. Your quick google search gave you some questionable "evidence." You posted it anyway. Multiple people responded directly. You were unable to back anything up. You deleted your original "evidence" post. You hid from the debate. But you keep the threads alive for whatever reason. Which is great for everyone else.