.
I never mentioned rocks at all. I said "elements". Organic materials are made up of the same elements.
heres what you said
There is no proof that the Earth is nearly that old, because carbon dating becomes irrelevant once you go far enough back, as any student of the
elements could tell you.
you claimed that carbon dating would be irrelevant when used to date the earth
thats completely right its totally irrelevant and no one who understoof it would make a silly claim like that
The most direct means for calculating the Earth's age is a Pb/Pb isochron age, derived from samples of the Earth and meteorites. This involves
measurement of three isotopes of lead (Pb-206, Pb-207, and either Pb-208 or Pb-204). A plot is constructed of Pb-206/Pb-204 versus Pb-207/Pb-204.
Ancient rocks exceeding 3.5 billion years in age are found on all of Earth's continents. The oldest rocks on Earth found so far are the Acasta
Gneisses in northwestern Canada near Great Slave Lake (4.03 Ga) and the Isua Supracrustal rocks in West Greenland (3.7 to 3.8 Ga), but well-studied
rocks nearly as old are also found in the Minnesota River Valley and northern Michigan (3.5-3.7 billion years), in Swaziland (3.4-3.5 billion years),
and in Western Australia (3.4-3.6 billion years).
and there is no such thing as a student of the elements, you made that up because you haven't heard of a student of geology obviously
trying to talk your way out of an earlier incorrect statement by making even more invalid claims is not permitted you know
Human evolution is still a theory, regardless of how much evidence is manipulated into being. "Theories" are not a valid basis for refuting other
theories. I don't completely refute the theory of human evolution because, though I certainly have another theory which I believe to be true, I
don't have irrefutable proof. However, as the theory of human evolution doesn't have irrefutable proof either, I wouldn't use it to discredit any
theory, in general.
human evolution is a proven theory
so whats your other theory
please share it all with us and of course the valid evidence that proves it a theory and not a wild unproven hypothesis
Actually, you don't know when Pangea broke up. A timeline cannot be established based on current continental drift rates, because that doesn't allow
for rapid shifting that almost certainly happened in a great cataclysm. Your Atlantis conspiratists and Great Flood advocates will like that idea.
Many cultures have tales of fleeing from a great cataclysm involving flooding, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc.
continents move at a set rate
they don't speed up to account for lost continents such as Atlantis which is described as sinking beneath teh sea 11,500 years ago.
no culture has a tale of fleeing from a great cataclysm involving flooding, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc.
if you think they do then perhaps you could name them
This is precisely the kind of thing that would have happened had something caused Pangea to suddenly break apart and drift at a high rate of speed,
drastically faster than what we experience today, to the point that it caused volcanoes, earthquakes, and tidal waves all over the planet.
see if you can find something out about a science called G-E-O-L-O-G-Y
I think if you studied it a little you would not be amazed at how little you already know of the subject
I'm not really saying that you're wrong about anything you say, regardless of what I think, I'm merely pointing out that you're not necessarily
right, either.
thats exactly what you are saying
you made a series of unqualified statements that were obviously wrong and when i provided credible links to sites that proved they were wrong you
disagreed
based on what knowledge I'd like to knowwhat is it that makes you think that you know more than the thousands upon thousands of qualifed people who
have actually studied these subjects which give us the information about the formation of the earth and human evolution
who have you been reading ?
Hancock or Sitchin Or Blavatsky ?
perhaps Edgar Cayce was your mentor ?
seriously
who have you been reading I think you owe us all that much of an explanation at least that way you won't be held accountable for your own ignorance
Xeven
I think there is no doubt that humans where there at some point if we existed at a time when it was habitable.
I agree
humanity has occupied every continent that was habitable in the time that we have been here
unfortunately in the time that we have been here the Antartic has not been habitable
so the doubt is extremely tangible
