I really don't get the debate over evolution. You can't prove or disprove it. I accept it as a theory. One of many.

Originally posted by BetweenMyths
Did you know that the geological column ... The dates of these time periods were just pulled out of thin air.

I'd like to say thats wrong.
The dates are of course an estimation, but based on fact.

Imagine say, the delta of the River Nile. Sediment is being slowwwwwly deposited there, just as it has for the last few thousand years. Constantly the same, but not - just changing very slowly.
Anyways - within this sediment, every now and again, maybe a leaf, or a small creature, like a shellfish, will die and its body become encased in sediment.

The only way this sediment will turn into rock is through compaction over millions of years. Squashed, subjected to enormous pressures, heat, et al. Eventually it will become rock, deep within the earths crust.

Tectonic activity, and things related to densities of surrounding rock/landmass/ocean could mean that a few million years later the rock is back at the surface (this process is called uplift).
And if the right bit of rock becomes exposed to the elements, someone might find the fossil.

Obviously, we don't know how long that has taken. What we can look at though, is the rate at which sediment is being deposited today - and from the composition of this fossil we just found, we can have a good go at deciding the environment in which it was deposited.
Find a similar environment in existance today, look at the rate of deposition. Do a few sums, work out how much mass would need to be above it for the relevant compaction to work, then look how much rock is visible above and below the fossil - and how similar compositions are being deposited today and at what rate.

Then take your data, and trace back, very carefully, and you get a reasonable estimation at the age of the rock.
Fossil formation is something that takes a long time - very little, if any, organic material remains, it has instead been replaced by certain minerals contained within the sediment (that turns into the rock.. eventually).
Some of this is guesswork, but it doesnt take a genius to figure out that for a rock to get heavy enough to sink into the earth, then move to an area of denser material to allow for uplift to occur, then exposation of the rock and subsequent discovery of the fossil - it won't happen in less than 6,000 years, I promise you that.

Its impossible for a fossil to be formed in anything less than a few million years... and all this is the same reason for gaps in the fossil record - not all of them make it back up to the surface.


Read through that again, slowly. It makes sense. Its based on scientific fact (I can't be bothered finding sources - I learned it myself by slogging out a long, tedious geology course - and also have a basic understanding of physics, which helps) - but, of course, if you believe a 2000 year old book thats been fiddled constantly over the ages as opposed to reason and verifiable fact, then feel free.


EDIT TO ADD:
PS - Carbon dating can't tell you how old a rock is. It tells you how long since something died. However, if theres not enough carbon left for that to work, then other radioactive methods can be used - but on something completely fossilised, or mineralised if you prefer (as the original material has been replaced in the same structure by non-organic minerals), it is impossible, and you have to work back as described above, to figure out how old the rock could be.

[edit on 10/8/09 by selfisolated]

You scared me at first, I thought I'd made a thread and not remembering it !

I am glad more people see this grose lie,scam and coverup by the Powers that rules..

I say this here also, the evolutionists are hiding behins this 'we will find the missing link' deception, which ofcourse they will not find.

Simple reason for this; the link is in Iraq and near the river Tigris and in S.Africa etc..

Even the religions around the world reviels the 'link', it is only to be accepted as history and not religion...

AND THEN!!

Petrification and fossilisation are NOT the same thing.
I could go on and explain, but if your that stuck in religious fanaticism, then you're not going to listen anyway.

I won't waste my energy, look up the two words yourself.

See how kids are being lied to in an effort to perpetuate the myth of evolution.

It's not taught as fact hence why it's still called the theory of evolution.

Near enough everything they teach you at school is total bull. I know cos I'm a product of our educational system, been working a few years and I've barely had to use any of it.

Funny thing is, 'religious education' was the most boring, unwarranted, unprovable lesson out of all of em yet it was rammed down your throat.. much as still goes on now

Carbon-14 is a very flawed dating method. Scientists have a good idea of how much carbon-14 can be expected in normal living tissue TODAY, but have no way of knowing what a normal amount was, say, 5,000 years ago. There are many factors that can affect how much carbon-14 is found in organic material from different periods of time.

About 99% of the carbon found on Earth today is carbon-12, about 1% of it is carbon-13, and just a fraction of a percent is carbon-14. Carbon-14 is produced in the atmosphere by atomic radiiation from the sun. Has the atmosphere on Earth always been exactly as it is today? No, the Bible says that there was a firmament that separated the waters from the waters. The waters below the firmament was the water here on Earth, and the water above the firmament (sky) was in orbit around the Earth, which was a very effective shield against the suns atomic radiation, therefore there was VERY little if any carbon-14 being produced. Therefore, when scientists find fossils of an animal that lived before the flood of Noah and find almost no traces of carbon-14, due to it's half-life, make the assumption this fossil must be millions of years old because they assume it once contained as much carbon-14 as would be expected today.

If we put a fraction of an ounce of carbon-14 in a jar, and tell someone it originally contained half a pound, they would then believe the jar must have been there for millions of years.

Has anyone watched the video 'Lies in the textbooks' that I posted (OP).

I am aware that evolution is only a theory, but what is taking place in schools regarding evolution is 'indoctrination', not education. Evolution may only be a theory, but when you hear many people talk about it, they do so in a manner that suggests they believe evolution is fact.

By the way, I'm not convinced that god exists or that god is responsible for the creation of everything. What I'm saying is that the video provides lots of evidence that the scientific data on which the theory of evolution is based is mainly lies and deception.

Fossils and their formation are covered in the video, so I'll remind people once again to take time to watch the video.

Originally posted by BetweenMyths
Has anyone watched the video 'Lies in the textbooks' that I posted (OP).

Yes. Kent Hovind has been roundly shown to be full of it. he has only his "faith" to sustain him, nand he rejects anything that is scientific if it conflicts with his "beliefs". I don't think the man has any credibility, and it's not just my opinion, there are plenty of others who have made videos refuting him point-by-point.

I am aware that evolution is only a theory...

Please, not that same old canard, again.

Gravity is "onlya theory", electricity is "only a theory", etc, etc. It would be useful to, once again, research the word theory in the scientific context. It does NOT mean "guess"!!!

...but what is taking place in schools regarding evolution is 'indoctrination', not education.

No! The teaching of religion, THAT is 'indoctrination'. Teaching a well-established concept that has been repeatedly demonstrated to be consistent IS education.

..but when you hear many people talk about it, they do so in a manner that suggests they believe evolution is fact.

Because, evolution as a principle and a fact is indisputable. Its status as a "theory" simply means that it is not COMPLETELY described, in every aspect, down to the last detail. Probably never will be. Like the "theory" of star formation. Or plate tectonics.

Originally posted by BetweenMyths
Has anyone watched the video 'Lies in the textbooks' that I posted (OP).

I am aware that evolution is only a theory, but what is taking place in schools regarding evolution is 'indoctrination', not education. Evolution may only be a theory, but when you hear many people talk about it, they do so in a manner that suggests they believe evolution is fact.

By the way, I'm not convinced that god exists or that god is responsible for the creation of everything. What I'm saying is that the video provides lots of evidence that the scientific data on which the theory of evolution is based is mainly lies and deception.

Fossils and their formation are covered in the video, so I'll remind people once again to take time to watch the video.

They should teach both evolution and creation or teach none of them in school. That way their will be a choice at school.