Why do people deny evolution?

Please give me some evidence of a "Universal Flood", "Sudden Appearance" A creationists view of the fossil record, and your basis for denial of radiometric dating besides some BS about variable decay rates .


Do you work in the same Starbuck's as misteak and Dobby?

So youre saying that all those giant animals lived together?? and the Bigass Flood wiped em out (is there any reason that Noah denied them access to his boat?)

So when all these animals died in the Flood how come they are found in different stratigraphic layers separated by ages that are proven by many lines of evidence. (And please dont say thatdenser animals sank becaue at the bottom of the fossil record all over the wold are the water bag animals like annelids or jellyfish and echinoderms and fossil elephants ppear in terrestrial deposits only(except for a few who sunk into thawing pingos .
Are you gungasnake?? Hes a science loony too

look up inanity and youll see why you richly deserve the sobriquet of "INANITYMAN.com

I dont think they were. They were just a blind acceptance of intellectual garbage based on religious based tribalism.

Too bad, your mother always wanted you to become something more than a barista

Well, hell if that's all it takes lets just get some C12 clumps, throw them in a bucket of warm water with some mud, leave it out in a lightning storm and make an amoeba. I know there are a lot of details to fill-in here but, **** Farmer you're a scientific genius that understands all this chemistry so let's get her done .

Heck, the hardest thing to do will be protecting the weather so we can get struck by lightning.

you dooo understand how science interprets evidence dont you??? I wonder.

That bit of analyses is like Leadfoots "Algorithm" hard-on.

Well, I’ve explained before how ppl conclude ‘old ages’ for things like tree rings, ice cores, radiometric dating...which boils down to Assumptions.
Assuming tree rings and ice core layers are annual, despite observational science which demonstrates otherwise...Likewise with radioactive decay rates and other assumptions related to radiometric dating techniques.
https://www.icr.org/article/excess-argon-archilles-heel-potassium-argon-dating/

As for fossil ‘organization’ ...Here:

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Liquefaction5.html
*****liquefaction*****
....simply sorted organisms based on their already existing natural variations, Darwin’s explanation is irrelevant.

Two Faulty “Principles.” Early geologists learned that fossils found above or below another type of fossil in one location were almost always in that same relative position, even many miles away. This led to a belief that the lower organisms lived, died, and were buried before the upper organisms. Much time supposedly elapsed between the two burials, because sediments—at least today—are usually deposited very slowly. Each horizon became associated with a specific time, perhaps millions of years earlier (or later) than the horizon above (or below). Finding so many examples of “the proper sequence” convinced early geologists they had found a new principle of ***interpretation***, which they soon called the principle of superposition.

Evolutionary geology is built upon this and one other “principle,” the principle of uniformitarianism, which states that all geological features can be explained by today’s processes acting at present rates.22 For example, today, rivers deposit sediments at river deltas. Over millions of years, thick layers of sediments would accumulate. This might explain the sedimentary rocks we now see.

After considering liquefaction, the flaws in both “principles” become obvious. Sediments were sorted and deposited throughout a tall liquefaction column almost simultaneously by a large-scale process not occurring today. (These “principles” are really ***assumptions.***Calling them “principles” gives them undeserved credibility.)



So Yes, Giant creatures lived all at the same Time.😎

Sure, there is more to fossil organization.
But keep in mind the big key is that creatures were buried according to where they live not when they lived.
As the floodwaters rose up, Sea creatures were buried first For the most part, But not always is the fossil record consistent.
This is why geologists came up with terms like stratigraphic leaks and reworked specimens....To put a fancy name(s) to anomalies which contradicts the old earth interpretation of things.

Interesting. That is the first time I've heard you admit that Neo Evolutionists are afraid of it.

are you making up words on me Dobby?

A "belief" is a word that is used for something that you,
1. want to be a fact
2. have no evidence to help it be a fact
3. is based upon a mountain of previous beliefs
4. has no way to gather evidence for it to be fact or not to be fact


Im nowhere near that end, so you and the "guys" are on yers own. (Flood? science? really?= you support that kinda bullshit??)

so excess argon is our problem eh? You really have nothing going on up there in the meat computer do you?

AND Liquifaction "lensing" caused ALL the worlds fossils to be sorted exactly in the same stratigraphic locations as others of thir clade eh??
Whatya gotta say about conodonts and how their color helps define oil ONLY in one geologic age??


Have your "CREATION SCIENTISTS" found any Pre Cambrian Easter Bunnies yet??.

I will bet you a s much as you can afford, that you cannot find me any resources based on your "Flood Geolohy". Henry Morrison and "Hayseed" tried and failed miserably, (yet Henry Morrison was the guy who eveloped the entire concept of Flood Geology) Just in case ya wanna know who's the founder of it.


Ive made a really good living at developing resources based upon REAL geology, (not the BS you guys are pushing as fact). Using micropaleontology and geophysics, our petroleum "hit rate" went up to about 91%.(The only reason for the 9% misses is because more than half of the "miss" holes were based on Creation and other bogus science used to defraud investors. In Pa, geologists long ago said that the Lower Devonian formations contained specific foraminiferans that were petroleum indicators, and the geophysics determined that these units could have their permeability improved to actually catch the gas and oil in their.

Your Bible tract based geology is just like the Bible, its a story book of a deity who supposedly lives out there and you believe is responsible for all things. You believe that, I respect that belief. I just dont accept it as scientific FACT and I wish youd quit demonstrating your scientific ignorance thats based upon belief.

Yeah they gather evidence. They develop a thesis from the evidence that "most importantly" doesn't involve an intelligence as the author for all the order we observe as information. And then they fill in the holes in the narrative they develop to explain how the order we observe as information came into existence with faith that they'll figure out the (up until now) "unexplainable process" in the future. Even If we have multiple examples of human intelligence filling in similar holes in similar situations as a pattern we currently can observe.

It's a good thing (for you and the scientific Establishment anyway) all these processes happened so far in the past that we will never know how they happened and we can make up anything we want as long as it doesn't involve intelligence. ( with capabilities greater than ours anyway )According to you and your cohorts in the current scientific establishment anyway.

you angry because a that?

I seem to recall the converse of what you're accusing me .

Hoc sit DOBBY
"How do you know you werent there to see it happen"
(therefore I assume you guys are saying that it didnt happen)

We know that volcanoes erupted at a certain time in the past because we can date the type of radioactivity in Hafnium minerals and Ar40/Ar39 and look at overlapping data of remnant magnetism and thermoluminescense as well as overlying nd underlying lahars and lavas. We know that Yellowstone erupted about 680K Ybp but there werent any peopl around for another670K years. Do we just say WTF e are wrong or do you think we should try to tie down the Yellowstone dates by overlapping methodologies??


Rather than being atotal ignoramus about all this I think you should attempt to larn some more and see how fucked up the Creation "Scientists " are and how they purposely just lie to their flocks.
I know Steve Austen's work and he was just waiting to come up with som arguments sufficiently lasen with secret jargon and presented in a fashion that folks lik you will buy it (orta like H&G's rad nuclide "Assumptions" spiehl. He doesnt know that the assumptions we use for radioisotopic dating are the very same "assumptions" that make nuke power work . You think that stopper rods and sizes of reactors are just built by some road crew? The energy budget for a nuke plant needs very precise design parameters based on the wattage need and for how long per charge and the plant's life-cycle. You knew this right??? How can you deny the engineering and nuke physics involved?

Im stumped at your periodic descents into "obtusity".

We agree there. I believe in science based intelligent design and an Earth that is millions of years old.



You brought this up this time not me. The last time I tried to bring quantum mechanics into the discussion about biology you said it was unnecessary.

They know that nuclear physics works but they don't know why. The reason they don't know why is because the Standard Model of physics is incomplete and Stellar nucleosynthesis is bogus. The reason it is bogus is you need basic order in the Higgs field and matter for stellar nucleosythesis to work and there is none in there Big Bang Inflation models. There has to be a creation of order event (quantum creation event) to establish the order.

The completion of the standard model will require the addition of more particles inside the Higgs boson (It is not an elementary particle. It cannot be or it would be a naked singularity and that is impossible in nature) It must be a composite boson consisting of a "Higgs gluon" and four entangled unnamed particles( lets call them higgs electrons for now).

These extra particles and the corresponding entanglements will add an extreme amount of complexity to the model and the narrative describing the establishment of matter thus making stellar nucleosynthisis by a chance happening is an impossibility. the reason is there will be too much information in matter in the Higgs field and in matter.



Until you and the rest of the established scientific world provide solutions for these last two paragraphs on the Standard Model, I suggest we quit acting like you are talking about established science because you are not. As a matter of fact it will make your established science even more improbable than it already is.

If science is properly and objectively pursued, it will inevitably be the case that science will conclude that the Hindu Trimurti is the source of all existence.

I like religion because it gets where science cannot go. For example, in the traditional tongue of the Maori, the vagina is referred to as "the black hole of death". That demonstrates how religion gets right the truth in a jiffy while science mucks uselessly about in the world.

You are full of more sh*t than a Kansas feed lot. You bang on about quantum mechanics, and especially the Higgs boson (because some idiot reporter called it "the god particle") and demonstrate that you know no more about those topics than you do about evolution. If you want to drag your magic sky daddy into the discussion, you need to demonstrate the existence of your imaginary friend. That's a simple standard of evidence that you have not met, and cannot meet.

PRECISE AND CONCISE PHRASES ONLY.
"POOTY TANG" IS THAT FOR WHICH YOU SEARCH GRASSHOPPER.


WAX ON, WACK OFF

I would be more inclined to give the God thesis more credibility if anthropologists were to find footprints that were 2000 miles long and 500 miles wide.

You know they provided evidence for the Higgs Boson from data obtained at the LHC. I will agree that they did not actually create a Higgs boson in the Higgs field but something very similar to one. (It was a naked composite particle that looked like one in their data) It quickly decayed into four electrons and decayed 1.5 times faster than it theoretically should have. The reason it decayed faster than it should have in the entanglement of the four Higgs electrons caused them to actually combine into a Higgs Boson and disappear back into higgs field as they entangled with it. I know nothing about a God particle, but I do know about the Higgs Boson. It is just an entangeld part of the Higgs field that is impossible to dectect. But, something similar to one can be created by colliding two hydrogen nuceli. The two real quarks and two anti quarks (actually they are more than likely two neutrinos and two anti neutrinos) can be left over from some of those collisions giving the "signature" of four electron decaying from higgs boson. Not a Higgs Boson but close enough.

My pop referred to Saturday night as "pooty duty". Or perhaps it was my mom. Whichever, I sensed some conflict.