Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (23506)	3/26/2012 10:42:06 PM
From: average joe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 69300

Just thank the stars gregoree is not in charge of any education department. Message 14648049 Hi Gus, you asked; "how come scientific dating testifies that life popped up several billion years ago?" Good question! Maybe if you date the fossils by the rocks they are found in and then date the rocks by the fossils found in the rocks that the fossils are found in, then you could just pick any date you felt like. Since it's completely circular and self contained, it could be 50 million or 50 thousand years. Any system of dating is only going to be accurate as the Presuppositions it is based on. Not only that but a small miscalculation, extrapolated and multiplied millions of times, simply compounds the error. How do you think they missed Mars last time out. Garbage in garbage out? "how would you expect a jellyfish to fossilize --it's made of 99% water?" I don't, but then it's not my theory, just don't try to have things both ways. If gradualism is how evolution works then there should be some kind of predecessors to the vertebrate fossils but there is not. Soooooo how did they get there? Santa? Gould's theory amounts to just that. "The day some archeologist digs up a bespectacled skull that belongs to a 50,000-year old caveman then, maybe, we might reconsider "evolution" --even more so if the caveman wears a wrist watch" Well, if that's the level of proof you demand, then I think you are establishing an unattainable standard. We can't even figure out how the pyramids were engineered. Not liking the alternative does not in any way prove evolution to be true. If you say evolution must be true because it is not possible that God exists, then the whole thing sounds more like philosophy than science to me. Have a good day Greg