Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If you need to believe "the gods did it", that's fine. But to claim that logic derives from supernaturalism dismantles your argument. There's nothing logical about supernaturalism. Supernaturalism defies logic.Your assessment is naive. The theories you post are taken from creationist websites. As we have seen repeatedly, these theories are not theories at all but "quotes" that have been modified, altered and parsed of relevant portions of the commentary.Well many times I have put up my theory and you can't seem to follow along or do a rebuttal to anything I post except with an ideological response. I get on the subject of genetics and mutations and the conversation kinda dries up,why ? I have given you simple explanations as to why genetics is a problem for your theory so simple you could understand the explanation. Still no real rebuttal just your copy and paste rhetoric or conjecture.
In connection with a number of your recent "quotes", I spent not an insignificant amount of time researching what you posted only to find that the "quotes" were falsely attributed or simply manufactured to suit the goal of promoting fundamentalist Christian religious views. You have created the circumstances where so much of your "quoted" material is lies and falsehoods, why should anyone be bothered? No one has unlimited time to spend here and it becomes frustrating to be required to spend time not addressing issues but correcting falsified quotes. Other than not, I have little interest in being met with links to Harun Yahya as a valid source.
It is similar maybe,but I have formed my own views. A creationist believes 6,000 years I believe between 6,000 and 12,000 years. These views are based from the bible because I don't trust dating methods used by science.
Well if you like we can discuss the current mutation rate and see how long your theory would have actually taken.
I have already given the observed reason why genetics is a problem for the theory. I have also pointed out that many organisms fossils were dated back millions of years ago are the same today. They showed no change at all,if evolution is always happening and all organisms experience mutations why did the evolution process stop ?
Most of my views are based in logic and observed evidence and that is the problem you are having because you know that is what is observed. Logic is more credible in science over imagination.
can you rationalize any harder? fact is you're getting your ass handed to you again.....The fact of the matter is it doesn't matter where the info comes from. You are not open to any real scientific evidence, because like I said before, you were raised in a Christian home and when you began to struggle with same sex attraction, you abandoned your religion and now cling to the Darwinist religion. Since Darwinism is a religion for you, it wouldn't matter what I posted. You simply aren't open to science.
show some dignity.
Maybe Hollie is Daws.
still trying to rationlize your ass beating....really I think you went looking for dirt and it got thrown back in your face.Daws, did you read the responses to Hollie from the other forums? I think your statement is backwards and you are a little bias in your perspective. I think the evidence from other websites, even Islamic ones no less, show that I am not the only person that feels like Rugged doesn't listen to anything being said, or presenting a rebuttal argument, but only responds with attacks.
when you say juvenile shit like this : "you were raised in a Christian home and when you began to struggle with same sex attraction, you abandoned your religion and now cling to the Darwinist religion."
what did you expect, a conversion?
Thrown back in my face? I don't think so!!! I was dead right. Hollie is attracted to women!!! Because Hollie is a man. Did you miss that? Funny thing, he never responded to my accusation because my guess he is banned from this website, and re-signed in as a female to avoid detection. Be careful who you align yourself with.
another dodge .I was trying very hard to read through this latest part of the thread without comment,butThe bible is not asking the questions I am, a rational person of science. Not someone with a vivid imagination. The problem is you don't have a clue on how to respond.
as always
(see above)
1.YOUR CLAIM OF RATIONALITY IS AT BEST SUBJECTIVE.
THE REALITY IS YOU are the least rational person I've had this displeasure to encounter online. (with all the nut jobs on the web that's no mean feat)
2. you are by even the most liberal gage NOT A PERSON OF SCIENCE.
Well many times I have put up my theory and you can't seem to follow along or do a rebuttal to anything I post except with an ideological response. I get on the subject of genetics and mutations and the conversation kinda dries up,why ? I have given you simple explanations as to why genetics is a problem for your theory so simple you could understand the explanation. Still no real rebuttal just your copy and paste rhetoric or conjecture.
another dodge .I was trying very hard to read through this latest part of the thread without comment,but
as always
(see above)
1.YOUR CLAIM OF RATIONALITY IS AT BEST SUBJECTIVE.
THE REALITY IS YOU are the least rational person I've had this displeasure to encounter online. (with all the nut jobs on the web that's no mean feat)
2. you are by even the most liberal gage NOT A PERSON OF SCIENCE.
Well many times I have put up my theory and you can't seem to follow along or do a rebuttal to anything I post except with an ideological response. I get on the subject of genetics and mutations and the conversation kinda dries up,why ? I have given you simple explanations as to why genetics is a problem for your theory so simple you could understand the explanation. Still no real rebuttal just your copy and paste rhetoric or conjecture.
when you post something not based on your intentional miss interpretation of genetics and mutation you might have a response.
why is it you miss the most obvious evidence to why your misinformation is overlooked?
as to this:"Still no real rebuttal just your copy and paste rhetoric or conjecture."ywc
people who live in glass petri dishes ....
YWC had to make one of his world famous hubris ridden false declarations!
still trying to rationlize your ass beating....really I think you went looking for dirt and it got thrown back in your face.
when you say juvenile shit like this : "you were raised in a Christian home and when you began to struggle with same sex attraction, you abandoned your religion and now cling to the Darwinist religion."
what did you expect, a conversion?
Thrown back in my face? I don't think so!!! I was dead right. Hollie is attracted to women!!! Because Hollie is a man. Did you miss that? Funny thing, he never responded to my accusation because my guess he is banned from this website, and re-signed in as a female to avoid detection. Be careful who you align yourself with.
did you check with the mods about this alleged banning?
if you didn't your making false accusations and talking out your ass.
since you do that all the time, it's no suprise.
bullshit! Type Number6000 to 10.000 years is not a long time in the age of the earthwell my money is on they existed for a very long time. Remember the coelacanth supposedly went extinct around 70 million years ago and we found them alive and doing well ?
You don't know for sure how old the earth is. 6,000 TO 10,000 years is a very long time in mans year. Long enough to produce almost 8 billion humans on the planet.
no. it exists.total bullshit ...nope, i'm shooting holes in yours.
You see early man was created perfect and it took time for mutations to do their job. Inbreeding was stopped a long time ago because god ordered it ,why ? Because if he didn't stop it man would have been plagued by genetic disorders due to mutations and man would have gone extinct.
That is why early man lived much longer and over time the average lifespan decreased significantly. We have around 5,000 genetic disorders,thank goodness we have large populations.
You have no evidence of god doing any such thing.
Do you deny entropy Daws ?
how many time did you fail high school again?can you rationalize any harder? fact is you're getting your ass handed to you again.....The fact of the matter is it doesn't matter where the info comes from. You are not open to any real scientific evidence, because like I said before, you were raised in a Christian home and when you began to struggle with same sex attraction, you abandoned your religion and now cling to the Darwinist religion. Since Darwinism is a religion for you, it wouldn't matter what I posted. You simply aren't open to science.
show some dignity.
Maybe Hollie is Daws.
bullshit! Type Number6000 to 10.000 years is not a long time in the age of the earth
You don't know for sure how old the earth is. 6,000 TO 10,000 years is a very long time in mans year. Long enough to produce almost 8 billion humans on the planet.
Dated Method Age (billions
of years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chondrites (CM, CV, H, L, LL, E) 13 Sm-Nd 4.21 +/- 0.76
Carbonaceous chondrites 4 Rb-Sr 4.37 +/- 0.34
Chondrites (undisturbed H, LL, E) 38 Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.02
Chondrites (H, L, LL, E) 50 Rb-Sr 4.43 +/- 0.04
H Chondrites (undisturbed) 17 Rb-Sr 4.52 +/- 0.04
H Chondrites 15 Rb-Sr 4.59 +/- 0.06
L Chondrites (relatively undisturbed) 6 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.12
L Chondrites 5 Rb-Sr 4.38 +/- 0.12
LL Chondrites (undisturbed) 13 Rb-Sr 4.49 +/- 0.02
LL Chondrites 10 Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.06
E Chondrites (undisturbed) 8 Rb-Sr 4.51 +/- 0.04
E Chondrites 8 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.13
Eucrites (polymict) 23 Rb-Sr 4.53 +/- 0.19
Eucrites 11 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.30
Eucrites 13 Lu-Hf 4.57 +/- 0.19
Diogenites 5 Rb-Sr 4.45 +/- 0.18
Iron (plus iron from St. Severin) 8 Re-Os 4.57 +/- 0.21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Dalrymple (1991, p. 291); duplicate studies on identical meteorite types omitted.
As shown in the table, there is excellent agreement on about 4.5 billion years, between several meteorites and by several different dating methods. Note that young-Earthers cannot accuse us of selective use of data -- the above table includes a significant fraction of all meteorites on which isotope dating has been attempted. According to Dalrymple (1991, p. 286) , less than 100 meteorites have been subjected to isotope dating, and of those about 70 yield ages with low analytical error.
Further, the oldest age determinations of individual meteorites generally give concordant ages by multiple radiometric means, or multiple tests across different samples. For example:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meteorite Dated Method Age (billions
of years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allende whole rock Ar-Ar 4.52 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.53 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.48 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.55 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.55 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.57 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.56 +/- 0.05
Guarena whole rock Ar-Ar 4.44 +/- 0.06
13 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.08
Shaw whole rock Ar-Ar 4.43 +/- 0.06
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.40 +/- 0.06
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.29 +/- 0.06
Olivenza 18 samples Rb-Sr 4.53 +/- 0.16
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.49 +/- 0.06
Saint Severin 4 samples Sm-Nd 4.55 +/- 0.33
10 samples Rb-Sr 4.51 +/- 0.15
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.43 +/- 0.04
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.38 +/- 0.04
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.42 +/- 0.04
Indarch 9 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.08
12 samples Rb-Sr 4.39 +/- 0.04
Juvinas 5 samples Sm-Nd 4.56 +/- 0.08
5 samples Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.07
Moama 3 samples Sm-Nd 4.46 +/- 0.03
4 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.05
Y-75011 9 samples Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.05
7 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.16
5 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.06
4 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.33
Angra dos Reis 7 samples Sm-Nd 4.55 +/- 0.04
3 samples Sm-Nd 4.56 +/- 0.04
Mundrabrilla silicates Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.06
silicates Ar-Ar 4.57 +/- 0.06
olivine Ar-Ar 4.54 +/- 0.04
plagioclase Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.04
Weekeroo Station 4 samples Rb-Sr 4.39 +/- 0.07
silicates Ar-Ar 4.54 +/- 0.03
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Dalrymple (1991, p. 286); meteorites dated by only a single means omitted.
Also note that the meteorite ages (both when dated mainly by Rb-Sr dating in groups, and by multiple means individually) are in exact agreement with the solar system "model lead age" produced earlier.
The Age of the Earth
mans years? a year is 12 months. the time takes the earth to make one orbit around the sun.
the amount of people on earth is based on many other factors not just time.
since there is no accurate way to know just how many people have lived on earth before world censuses began in the 20th century ,the nearly 8 billion you rant about could be an average.
you conveniently leave out the fact that humans only began agriculture and animal husbandry 10.000 years .
for you specious speculation to have any validity at all you would have to accept that humans had those skills from the outset.
there is no evidence we did.
I'm perfectly fine with my personal stalker having the mods confirm my IP address or any other method they choose to verify a prior account. There is no prior account.still trying to rationlize your ass beating....Thrown back in my face? I don't think so!!! I was dead right. Hollie is attracted to women!!! Because Hollie is a man. Did you miss that? Funny thing, he never responded to my accusation because my guess he is banned from this website, and re-signed in as a female to avoid detection. Be careful who you align yourself with.
did you check with the mods about this alleged banning?
if you didn't your making false accusations and talking out your ass
since you do that all the time, it's no suprise.
You can't win debates with rhetoric on these subjects Daws. Your views are either supported by the evidence or they are not.
no need to, what part of all do you not understand.another dodge .Well many times I have put up my theory and you can't seem to follow along or do a rebuttal to anything I post except with an ideological response. I get on the subject of genetics and mutations and the conversation kinda dries up,why ? I have given you simple explanations as to why genetics is a problem for your theory so simple you could understand the explanation. Still no real rebuttal just your copy and paste rhetoric or conjecture.
when you post something not based on your intentional miss interpretation of genetics and mutation you might have a response.
why is it you miss the most obvious evidence to why your misinformation is overlooked?
as to this:"Still no real rebuttal just your copy and paste rhetoric or conjecture."ywc
people who live in glass petri dishes ....
YWC had to make one of his world famous hubris ridden false declarations!
Like you said to UR please point out these misinterpretation's of mutations and genetics otherwise you are talking out your Butt ,not that I think UR is doing anything of the sort.
funny you should say that as all of your "evidence"is rhetoric ,not evidence .still trying to rationlize your ass beating....thrown back in my face? I don't think so!!! I was dead right. Hollie is attracted to women!!! Because hollie is a man. Did you miss that? Funny thing, he never responded to my accusation because my guess he is banned from this website, and re-signed in as a female to avoid detection. Be careful who you align yourself with.
Did you check with the mods about this alleged banning?
If you didn't your making false accusations and talking out your ass.
Since you do that all the time, it's no suprise.
you can't win debates with rhetoric on these subjects daws. Your views are either supported by the evidence or they are not.
bullshit! Type NumberYou don't know for sure how old the earth is. 6,000 TO 10,000 years is a very long time in mans year. Long enough to produce almost 8 billion humans on the planet.
Dated Method Age (billions
of years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chondrites (CM, CV, H, L, LL, E) 13 Sm-Nd 4.21 +/- 0.76
Carbonaceous chondrites 4 Rb-Sr 4.37 +/- 0.34
Chondrites (undisturbed H, LL, E) 38 Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.02
Chondrites (H, L, LL, E) 50 Rb-Sr 4.43 +/- 0.04
H Chondrites (undisturbed) 17 Rb-Sr 4.52 +/- 0.04
H Chondrites 15 Rb-Sr 4.59 +/- 0.06
L Chondrites (relatively undisturbed) 6 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.12
L Chondrites 5 Rb-Sr 4.38 +/- 0.12
LL Chondrites (undisturbed) 13 Rb-Sr 4.49 +/- 0.02
LL Chondrites 10 Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.06
E Chondrites (undisturbed) 8 Rb-Sr 4.51 +/- 0.04
E Chondrites 8 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.13
Eucrites (polymict) 23 Rb-Sr 4.53 +/- 0.19
Eucrites 11 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.30
Eucrites 13 Lu-Hf 4.57 +/- 0.19
Diogenites 5 Rb-Sr 4.45 +/- 0.18
Iron (plus iron from St. Severin) 8 Re-Os 4.57 +/- 0.21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Dalrymple (1991, p. 291); duplicate studies on identical meteorite types omitted.
As shown in the table, there is excellent agreement on about 4.5 billion years, between several meteorites and by several different dating methods. Note that young-Earthers cannot accuse us of selective use of data -- the above table includes a significant fraction of all meteorites on which isotope dating has been attempted. According to Dalrymple (1991, p. 286) , less than 100 meteorites have been subjected to isotope dating, and of those about 70 yield ages with low analytical error.
Further, the oldest age determinations of individual meteorites generally give concordant ages by multiple radiometric means, or multiple tests across different samples. For example:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meteorite Dated Method Age (billions
of years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allende whole rock Ar-Ar 4.52 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.53 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.48 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.55 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.55 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.57 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.56 +/- 0.05
Guarena whole rock Ar-Ar 4.44 +/- 0.06
13 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.08
Shaw whole rock Ar-Ar 4.43 +/- 0.06
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.40 +/- 0.06
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.29 +/- 0.06
Olivenza 18 samples Rb-Sr 4.53 +/- 0.16
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.49 +/- 0.06
Saint Severin 4 samples Sm-Nd 4.55 +/- 0.33
10 samples Rb-Sr 4.51 +/- 0.15
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.43 +/- 0.04
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.38 +/- 0.04
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.42 +/- 0.04
Indarch 9 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.08
12 samples Rb-Sr 4.39 +/- 0.04
Juvinas 5 samples Sm-Nd 4.56 +/- 0.08
5 samples Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.07
Moama 3 samples Sm-Nd 4.46 +/- 0.03
4 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.05
Y-75011 9 samples Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.05
7 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.16
5 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.06
4 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.33
Angra dos Reis 7 samples Sm-Nd 4.55 +/- 0.04
3 samples Sm-Nd 4.56 +/- 0.04
Mundrabrilla silicates Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.06
silicates Ar-Ar 4.57 +/- 0.06
olivine Ar-Ar 4.54 +/- 0.04
plagioclase Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.04
Weekeroo Station 4 samples Rb-Sr 4.39 +/- 0.07
silicates Ar-Ar 4.54 +/- 0.03
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Dalrymple (1991, p. 286); meteorites dated by only a single means omitted.
Also note that the meteorite ages (both when dated mainly by Rb-Sr dating in groups, and by multiple means individually) are in exact agreement with the solar system "model lead age" produced earlier.
The Age of the Earth
mans years? a year is 12 months. the time takes the earth to make one orbit around the sun.
the amount of people on earth is based on many other factors not just time.
since there is no accurate way to know just how many people have lived on earth before world censuses began in the 20th century ,the nearly 8 billion you rant about could be an average.
you conveniently leave out the fact that humans only began agriculture and animal husbandry 10.000 years .
for you specious speculation to have any validity at all you would have to accept that humans had those skills from the outset.
there is no evidence we did.
Still based on presuppositions,assumptions,and imagination.
Check out these population growth formulas.
World Population Since Creation
still trying to rationlize your ass beating....really I think you went looking for dirt and it got thrown back in your face.
when you say juvenile shit like this : "you were raised in a Christian home and when you began to struggle with same sex attraction, you abandoned your religion and now cling to the Darwinist religion."
what did you expect, a conversion?
Thrown back in my face? I don't think so!!! I was dead right. Hollie is attracted to women!!! Because Hollie is a man. Did you miss that? Funny thing, he never responded to my accusation because my guess he is banned from this website, and re-signed in as a female to avoid detection. Be careful who you align yourself with.
did you check with the mods about this alleged banning?
if you didn't your making false accusations and talking out your ass.
since you do that all the time, it's no suprise.
bullshit! Type NumberYou don't know for sure how old the earth is. 6,000 TO 10,000 years is a very long time in mans year. Long enough to produce almost 8 billion humans on the planet.
Dated Method Age (billions
of years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chondrites (CM, CV, H, L, LL, E) 13 Sm-Nd 4.21 +/- 0.76
Carbonaceous chondrites 4 Rb-Sr 4.37 +/- 0.34
Chondrites (undisturbed H, LL, E) 38 Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.02
Chondrites (H, L, LL, E) 50 Rb-Sr 4.43 +/- 0.04
H Chondrites (undisturbed) 17 Rb-Sr 4.52 +/- 0.04
H Chondrites 15 Rb-Sr 4.59 +/- 0.06
L Chondrites (relatively undisturbed) 6 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.12
L Chondrites 5 Rb-Sr 4.38 +/- 0.12
LL Chondrites (undisturbed) 13 Rb-Sr 4.49 +/- 0.02
LL Chondrites 10 Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.06
E Chondrites (undisturbed) 8 Rb-Sr 4.51 +/- 0.04
E Chondrites 8 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.13
Eucrites (polymict) 23 Rb-Sr 4.53 +/- 0.19
Eucrites 11 Rb-Sr 4.44 +/- 0.30
Eucrites 13 Lu-Hf 4.57 +/- 0.19
Diogenites 5 Rb-Sr 4.45 +/- 0.18
Iron (plus iron from St. Severin) 8 Re-Os 4.57 +/- 0.21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Dalrymple (1991, p. 291); duplicate studies on identical meteorite types omitted.
As shown in the table, there is excellent agreement on about 4.5 billion years, between several meteorites and by several different dating methods. Note that young-Earthers cannot accuse us of selective use of data -- the above table includes a significant fraction of all meteorites on which isotope dating has been attempted. According to Dalrymple (1991, p. 286) , less than 100 meteorites have been subjected to isotope dating, and of those about 70 yield ages with low analytical error.
Further, the oldest age determinations of individual meteorites generally give concordant ages by multiple radiometric means, or multiple tests across different samples. For example:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meteorite Dated Method Age (billions
of years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allende whole rock Ar-Ar 4.52 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.53 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.48 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.55 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.55 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.57 +/- 0.03
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.02
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.56 +/- 0.05
Guarena whole rock Ar-Ar 4.44 +/- 0.06
13 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.08
Shaw whole rock Ar-Ar 4.43 +/- 0.06
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.40 +/- 0.06
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.29 +/- 0.06
Olivenza 18 samples Rb-Sr 4.53 +/- 0.16
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.49 +/- 0.06
Saint Severin 4 samples Sm-Nd 4.55 +/- 0.33
10 samples Rb-Sr 4.51 +/- 0.15
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.43 +/- 0.04
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.38 +/- 0.04
whole rock Ar-Ar 4.42 +/- 0.04
Indarch 9 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.08
12 samples Rb-Sr 4.39 +/- 0.04
Juvinas 5 samples Sm-Nd 4.56 +/- 0.08
5 samples Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.07
Moama 3 samples Sm-Nd 4.46 +/- 0.03
4 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.05
Y-75011 9 samples Rb-Sr 4.50 +/- 0.05
7 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.16
5 samples Rb-Sr 4.46 +/- 0.06
4 samples Sm-Nd 4.52 +/- 0.33
Angra dos Reis 7 samples Sm-Nd 4.55 +/- 0.04
3 samples Sm-Nd 4.56 +/- 0.04
Mundrabrilla silicates Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.06
silicates Ar-Ar 4.57 +/- 0.06
olivine Ar-Ar 4.54 +/- 0.04
plagioclase Ar-Ar 4.50 +/- 0.04
Weekeroo Station 4 samples Rb-Sr 4.39 +/- 0.07
silicates Ar-Ar 4.54 +/- 0.03
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Dalrymple (1991, p. 286); meteorites dated by only a single means omitted.
Also note that the meteorite ages (both when dated mainly by Rb-Sr dating in groups, and by multiple means individually) are in exact agreement with the solar system "model lead age" produced earlier.
The Age of the Earth
mans years? a year is 12 months. the time takes the earth to make one orbit around the sun.
the amount of people on earth is based on many other factors not just time.
since there is no accurate way to know just how many people have lived on earth before world censuses began in the 20th century ,the nearly 8 billion you rant about could be an average.
you conveniently leave out the fact that humans only began agriculture and animal husbandry 10.000 years .
for you specious speculation to have any validity at all you would have to accept that humans had those skills from the outset.
there is no evidence we did.
Still based on presuppositions,assumptions,and imagination.
Check out these population growth formulas.
World Population Since Creation
SINCE THOSE FORMULAS ARE BASED ON AN ERRONEOUS SOURCE no. it exists.total bullshit ...
You have no evidence of god doing any such thing.
Do you deny entropy Daws ?
it's no proof that a god did it. so my previous answer stands!
FROM AN OBJECTIVE OBSERVER YOU APPEAR TO BE WHINY BITCH WHO has no dignity.still trying to rationlize your ass beating....Thrown back in my face? I don't think so!!! I was dead right. Hollie is attracted to women!!! Because Hollie is a man. Did you miss that? Funny thing, he never responded to my accusation because my guess he is banned from this website, and re-signed in as a female to avoid detection. Be careful who you align yourself with.
did you check with the mods about this alleged banning?
if you didn't your making false accusations and talking out your ass.
since you do that all the time, it's no suprise.
It appears you didn't read any of my posts. In my belief system, anyone that assumes a false identity could be said to be lying. If you are okay with that, then feel free to come to Hollie/Rugged Touch's defense. However, your assertion that I took a beating is based on your skewed perception of the argument. If you were looking at this objectively, you would see that Hollie hasn't ever presented an argument here.
how many time did you fail high school again?can you rationalize any harder? fact is you're getting your ass handed to you again.....
show some dignity.
Maybe Hollie is Daws.
