Whats with Obama

[Darkhorse]

[quote="Dawg]Lots of stuff[/quote]

No one is denying evolution within a speices, it's one evolving into another that there is an issue.

[HappyHappy]

In the case of Archaeopteryx Lithographica we see a clear case of a bird
that is in transition from a Dromaeosaurid Dinosaur (Velociraptor) into a flying
bird complete with feathers.

The Human fossil record shows clear evidence of evolution from a common great ape
ancestor apparantly splitting off about 8,000,000 years ago.

HH

[fatman]

The Human fossil record shows clear evidence of evolution from a common great ape
ancestor apparantly splitting off about 8,000,000 years ago.

HH

Bullshit the earth is only a few thousand years old

[HappyHappy]

If you are firm in the belief that the Earth is a few thousand years old
I doubt this discussion is worth persuing.

In fact the Earth as we know it formed about 4.5 thousand thousand years ago.
That's 4.5 Billion years ago. 4,500,000,000 years before today.

From Wikki

"The oldest material of terrestrial origin that has been dated is a zircon mineral of 4,404 ± 8 Ma enclosed in a metamorphosed sandstone conglomerate in the Jack Hills of the Narryer Gneiss Terrane of Western Australia."

That's 4.4 Billion years before today.

HH

[Buzz]

In the future when they find the bones of HH. They will finally claim to have found the link between ape and man.

Of course it will be the only one they'll ever find, but we know why.

[Darkhorse]

If you are firm in the belief that the Earth is a few thousand years old
I doubt this discussion is worth persuing.

In fact the Earth as we know it formed about 4.5 thousand thousand years ago.
That's 4.5 Billion years ago. 4,500,000,000 years before today.

From Wikki

"The oldest material of terrestrial origin that has been dated is a zircon mineral of 4,404 ± 8 Ma enclosed in a metamorphosed sandstone conglomerate in the Jack Hills of the Narryer Gneiss Terrane of Western Australia."

That's 4.4 Billion years before today.

HH

Happy there are problems with the science used to date this material. Before you rest solely on the evidence that supports what you want to be true do some research. I myself spent a lot of time researching, not just the science but other areas that divide Creation and Evolution. This discussion is worth persuing, as in life and death!

A place to start>>http://www.icr.org/article/radioisotope ... other-dev/

[CUDA]

Conclusion

The radioisotope methods, long touted as irrefutably dating the earth's rocks as countless millions of years old, have repeatedly failed to provide reliable and meaningful absolute ages for Grand Canyon rock layers. Irreconcilable disagreement within and between the methods is the norm, even at the outcrop scale. This is a devastating "blow" to the long ages that are foundational to uniformitarian geology and evolutionary biology. Yet the discordance patterns are consistent with past accelerated radioisotope decay, which would also render these "clocks" useless. Thus there is no reliable evidence to dispute that these metamorphosed basalt lava flows deep in Grand Canyon date back to the Creation Week only thousands of years ago.

[callmeslick]

Slick was right it's origin of species that is so far unprovable, not evolution.

this will seem like a semantic quibble, but the difference is very important: I feel the Origin of Species is
UNPROVEN, but hardly unprovable. My point was that there is so much time to piece together, hundreds of thousands of years.
Another statement you made, Cuda, which isn't quite accurate, is that we cannot find record of human structures or the like before 8000 years ago. We have cave drawings, and similar collections of fragmented artifacts that go back far more than 6000 BC, I think you would find. As Dawg tried to point out, most stuff just doesn't undergo the proper conditions needed to fossilize, so the record will be both fragmented and skewed towards human life under certain climatic/environmental conditions.

[CUDA]

ya your correct the proper word should have been unproven. and it was my error on the structures as I just did a quick Google and that's one of the first sites listed.

[Darkhorse]

Another statement you made, Cuda, which isn't quite accurate, is that we cannot find record of human structures or the like before 8000 years ago. We have cave drawings, and similar collections of fragmented artifacts that go back far more than 6000 BC, I think you would find. As Dawg tried to point out, most stuff just doesn't undergo the proper conditions needed to fossilize, so the record will be both fragmented and skewed towards human life under certain climatic/environmental conditions.

The problem is the method of dating the collections of fragmented artifacts is suspect.