reply to post by OEAOHOO
I understand now, thank you for the clarification, and you are 100% correct.
1. Nothing is clear. You refute any argument you make just by saying this, but i will continue anyway.....
2.Bulsh!t. Fossils are dated by the rock layer they are in. Rocks are not dated by the fossils in the rock. Rocks are dated by : RADIOMETRIC
AGE-DATING (that's only one way by the way)
Some elements have forms (called isotopes) with unstable atomic nuclei that have a tendency to change, or decay. For example, U-235 is an unstable
isotope of uranium that has 92 protons and 153 neutrons in the nucl eus of each atom. Through a series of changes within the nucleus, it emits several
particles, ending up with 82 protons and 125 neutrons. This is a stable condition, and there are no more changes in the atomic nucleus. A nucleus with
that number of protons is called lead (chemical symbol Pb). The protons (82) and neutrons (125) total 207. This particular form (isotope) of lead is
called Pb-207. U-235 is the parent isotope of Pb-207, which is the daughter isotope.
Many rocks contain small amounts of unstable isotopes and the daughter isotopes into which they decay. Where the amounts of parent and daughter
isotopes can be accurately measured, the ratio can be used to determine how old the rock is, as shown in the following activities.
Part 2a Activity — At any moment there is a small chance that each of the nuclei of U-235 will suddenly decay. That chance of decay is very small,
but it is always present and it never changes. In other words, the nuclei do not "wear out" or get "tired". If the nucleus has not yet decayed,
there is always that same, slight chance that it will change in the near future.
Atomic nuclei are held together by an attraction between the large nuclear particles (protons and neutrons) that is known as the "strong nuclear
force", which must exceed the electrostatic repulsion between the protons within the nucleus. In general, with the exception of the single proton
that constitutes the nucleus of the most abundant isotope of hydrogen, the number of neutrons must at least equal the number of protons in an atomic
nucleus, because electrostatic repulsion prohibits denser packing of protons. But if there are too many neutrons, the nucleus is potentially unstable
and decay may be triggered. This happens at any time when addition of the fleeting "weak nuclear force" to the ever-present electrostatic repulsion
exceeds the binding energy required to hold the nucleus together.
Very careful measurements in laboratories, made on VERY LARGE numbers of U-235 atoms, have shown that each of the atoms has a 50:50 chance of decaying
during about 704,000,000 years. In other words, during 704 million years, half the U-235 atoms that existed at the beginning of that time will decay
to Pb-207. This is known as the half life of U- 235. Many elements have some isotopes that are unstable, essentially because they have too many
neutrons to be balanced by the number of protons in the nucleus. Each of these unstable isotopes has its own characteristic half life. Some half lives
are several billion years long, and others are as short as a ten-thousandth of a second.
Here's the link I'm quoting from. (Try Googling stuff, it's neat
3.Never heard of a fossil created in hours. Show us a link, or tell me how.
4.True, but I've never heard anyone state that DNA is used for proving evolution, aside from the fact that all living things on Earth have DNA that
has similiarities, which is to be expected from things that all developed in the same general environment, which is hardly what I'd call refuting
5.Correct, we did not evolve from apes, and that was never implied.