How Old Do You The Earth Is?

[koshergrl]

You don't make sense, dear. I don't speak ebonics.

 

[Hollie]

You don't make sense, dear. I don't speak ebonics.

More spam.

 

[pinqy]

There are no links at all

bazinga!.....

Oh, please. You should know very well I meant no links were given in my post.

But here's the interesting thing....such groupings MUST occur if evolution is true, but are entirely unnecessary if all "kinds" were created separately.

lol....in a response to a post speaking of missing links?.....bullshit....

The post I responded to was not about missing links. It questioned whether man evolved from apes. There was no mention of missing links. I pointed out that humans are apes.

There's an irony when you say something untrue when trying to call me a liar.

????.....this is the post you were responding to.....

You left out all the Missing Links.

We were talking about my earlier response. Then mad scientist brought up missing links, which had nothing at all to do with my response .

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I actually did make an argument. You slithered away from any attempt at refuting the points I made.

Pretty typical behavior.

Want to point out where? I still don't see it.

None of the gods have said any such thing.

 

[Hollie]

I actually did make an argument. You slithered away from any attempt at refuting the points I made.

Pretty typical behavior.

Want to point out where? I still don't see it.

None of the gods have said any such thing.

Do your own search.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What nonsense.

There is a predictable range of genetic variation in a species, as well as an expected rate of random mutations.

Fundies admit that a "kind" (an ambiguous, non-scientific term) can change into different species but stop there.

I feel genuinely sad for you. You have bought into fundamentalist Christian apologetics, a not-so intricately woven pattern of lies and deception-- a false collection of easily refuted non-science. It's apparent you have not been exposed to a robust science program, having been denied the chance to learn about evolution in school, and have never formed a proper understanding of it.

I find it sad that your sort are so eager to vigorously attack what you do not understand, nor could possibly explain. It seems to me like cavemen throwing rocks at the moon.

I would suggest that you, or any creationist, should become fully versed in evolutionary theory before you attack it. I have yet to encounter this in a creationist. You should be able to explain how the process works.

Common sense says that you cannot criticize what you cannot explain.

Funny, I guess this proves you can't read because I did not criticize evolution.

The point I was making was that the simple fact that man classifies things and puts them in groups is not proof of evolution in those groups. If you want to refute that argument, feel free, if you want to pretend I said something that I didn't, don't expect me to argue with your attempt to look stupid.

By the way, if you want to find out how ignorant you actually are feel free to start a thread explaining how evolution works so I can point out everything you are wrong about. I have actually defended evolution more than once, and have a better than average understanding of how it works. In fact, I have actually explained it so well that some people who used to think that it wasn't true now understand that they were wrong. My guess is that you have never managed to convince anyone that they were wrong about anything.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Quantum Windbag.....

What a great handle, you just never stop blowing. "asteroids, which, by definition, never come into contact with the Earth".
Better share your infinite wisdom with Wikipedia which claims;

"An impact event is a collision between celestial objects causing measurable effects. Impact events have physical consequences and have been found to regularly occur in planetary systems, though the most frequent involve asteroids, comets or meteoroids and have minimal impact.
Asteroids with a 1 km (0.62 mi) diameter strike Earth every 500,000 years on average.[4] Large collisions – with 5 km (3 mi) objects – happen approximately once every twenty million years.[5] The last known impact of an object of 10 km (6 mi) or more in diameter was at the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago."[6]

Or with the editors at the Independent who were warning of a possible life-ending collision event with asteroid 1950DA. LINK

You should just tip-toe out of this one or man-up and apologize.

Sigh.

I love idiots that think Wiki is a definitive source.

Maybe you should explain to NASA that they are wrong.

Most of us probably have seen meteors or shooting stars. A meteor is the flash of light that we see in the night sky when a small chunk of interplanetary debris burns up as it passes through our atmosphere. "Meteor" refers to the flash of light caused by the debris, not the debris itself.

The debris is called a meteoroid. A meteoroid is a piece of interplanetary matter that is smaller than a kilometer and frequently only millimeters in size. Most meteoroids that enter the Earth's atmosphere are so small that they vaporize completely and never reach the planet's surface.

If any part of a meteoroid survives the fall through the atmosphere and lands on Earth, it is called a meteorite. Although the vast majority of meteorites are very small, their size can range from about a fraction of a gram (the size of a pebble) to 100 kilograms (220 lbs) or more (the size of a huge, life-destroying boulder).

Asteroids are generally larger chunks of rock that come from the asteroid belt located between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.

Comets are asteroid-like objects covered with ice, methane, ammonia, and other compounds that develop a fuzzy, cloud-like shell called a coma and sometimes a visible tail whenever they orbit close to the Sun.

HubbleSite - Reference Desk - FAQs

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is the type of drivel one expects from those who vilify what they don't understand.

Darwin said that all life on Earth is descended from a single ancestor. For the idiots, like you, that means every bit of life on Earth shares an ancestor with every other life form. As far as I know, no one has yet proven he was wrong. Maybe you know something I don't, but I highly doubt it.

I guess that makes your post drivel.

Want to tell me again how I don't understand science?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Do your own search.

I only replied to one post, which had no argument in it. You claimed that I failed to respond to your no existent arguments, I see no reason to go looking for them when I already proved that the post I responded to had no arguments.

 

[Hollie]

What nonsense.

There is a predictable range of genetic variation in a species, as well as an expected rate of random mutations.

Fundies admit that a "kind" (an ambiguous, non-scientific term) can change into different species but stop there.

I feel genuinely sad for you. You have bought into fundamentalist Christian apologetics, a not-so intricately woven pattern of lies and deception-- a false collection of easily refuted non-science. It's apparent you have not been exposed to a robust science program, having been denied the chance to learn about evolution in school, and have never formed a proper understanding of it.

I find it sad that your sort are so eager to vigorously attack what you do not understand, nor could possibly explain. It seems to me like cavemen throwing rocks at the moon.

I would suggest that you, or any creationist, should become fully versed in evolutionary theory before you attack it. I have yet to encounter this in a creationist. You should be able to explain how the process works.

Common sense says that you cannot criticize what you cannot explain.

Funny, I guess this proves you can't read because I did not criticize evolution.

The point I was making was that the simple fact that man classifies things and puts them in groups is not proof of evolution in those groups. If you want to refute that argument, feel free, if you want to pretend I said something that I didn't, don't expect me to argue with your attempt to look stupid.

By the way, if you want to find out how ignorant you actually are feel free to start a thread explaining how evolution works so I can point out everything you are wrong about. I have actually defended evolution more than once, and have a better than average understanding of how it works. In fact, I have actually explained it so well that some people who used to think that it wasn't true now understand that they were wrong. My guess is that you have never managed to convince anyone that they were wrong about anything.

What I find remarkable is how your self-serving claims to understanding anything about evolutionary biology are always absent any indication that you have ever been exposed to any of it. Of course, for those who wish to simply argue dogma, this is to be expected. Tossing around speculatives like, "the gods did it" is only for those who are intellectually inadequate. Unfortunately, you deride science for providing a mechanism for understanding the natural world. You would prefer instead to embrace ignorance and superstition. You would prefer to accept “the gods did it” and go on your way. Your comments in this thread more than highlight the polarizing nature of the fundamentalist ideology that is at odds with the modern, relevant world. Ultimately, the modern world of science, reason and rationality is under no obligation to make allowance for such imposed standards of ignorance and superstition. To endorse those practices that represent sneering disdain for the enlightened world is self destructive. The religious extremists' allowance for retrograde ignorance is a symbol of repression.

Scientific investigation might be described as a progressive enterprise built around the competition of ideas. Where are the theistic ones? What I find remarkable is how consistent the “the gawds did it” arguments really are. They are not similar, they are identical. And since so many of them are identically false, it is almost inconceivable that you came up with them on your own.

In college, the professors always know the most certain way of detecting cheating on an exam was for several students to make the same identical error in their work. Right answers are almost always the same. Wrong answers are usually stunningly original. Unless they are not original at all.

 

[Hollie]

This is the type of drivel one expects from those who vilify what they don't understand.

Darwin said that all life on Earth is descended from a single ancestor. For the idiots, like you, that means every bit of life on Earth shares an ancestor with every other life form. As far as I know, no one has yet proven he was wrong. Maybe you know something I don't, but I highly doubt it.

I guess that makes your post drivel.

Want to tell me again how I don't understand science?

I find your inability to address issues related to science as your own admission to a lack of an understanding regarding science matters.

 

[PostmodernProph]

There are no links at all

bazinga!.....

Oh, please. You should know very well I meant no links were given in my post.

But here's the interesting thing....such groupings MUST occur if evolution is true, but are entirely unnecessary if all "kinds" were created separately.

lol....in a response to a post speaking of missing links?.....bullshit....

The post I responded to was not about missing links. It questioned whether man evolved from apes. There was no mention of missing links. I pointed out that humans are apes.

There's an irony when you say something untrue when trying to call me a liar.

????.....this is the post you were responding to.....

You left out all the Missing Links.

We were talking about my earlier response. Then mad scientist brought up missing links, which had nothing at all to do with my response .

/boggle.....he quoted your post, how can you say it had nothing to do with it?....

 

[PostmodernProph]

You don't make sense, dear. I don't speak ebonics.

I can interpret for you, she said "My grandad's a sequoia!".......

 

[pinqy]

There are no links at all

bazinga!.....

Oh, please. You should know very well I meant no links were given in my post.

But here's the interesting thing....such groupings MUST occur if evolution is true, but are entirely unnecessary if all "kinds" were created separately.

lol....in a response to a post speaking of missing links?.....bullshit....

The post I responded to was not about missing links. It questioned whether man evolved from apes. There was no mention of missing links. I pointed out that humans are apes.

There's an irony when you say something untrue when trying to call me a liar.

????.....this is the post you were responding to.....

You left out all the Missing Links.

We were talking about my earlier response. Then mad scientist brought up missing links, which had nothing at all to do with my response .

/boggle.....he quoted your post, how can you say it had nothing to do with it?....

Because it didn't. I gave the phylogenetic tree. That has nothing to do with missing links. I have no idea why he brought it up: it was a non sequitur and had nothing to do with what he quoted.

 

[SmedlyButler]

Quantum Windbag.....

What a great handle, you just never stop blowing. "asteroids, which, by definition, never come into contact with the Earth".
Better share your infinite wisdom with Wikipedia which claims;

"An impact event is a collision between celestial objects causing measurable effects. Impact events have physical consequences and have been found to regularly occur in planetary systems, though the most frequent involve asteroids, comets or meteoroids and have minimal impact.
Asteroids with a 1 km (0.62 mi) diameter strike Earth every 500,000 years on average.[4] Large collisions – with 5 km (3 mi) objects – happen approximately once every twenty million years.[5] The last known impact of an object of 10 km (6 mi) or more in diameter was at the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago."[6]

Or with the editors at the Independent who were warning of a possible life-ending collision event with asteroid 1950DA. LINK

You should just tip-toe out of this one or man-up and apologize.

Sigh.

I love idiots that think Wiki is a definitive source.

Maybe you should explain to NASA that they are wrong.

Most of us probably have seen meteors or shooting stars. A meteor is the flash of light that we see in the night sky when a small chunk of interplanetary debris burns up as it passes through our atmosphere. "Meteor" refers to the flash of light caused by the debris, not the debris itself.

The debris is called a meteoroid. A meteoroid is a piece of interplanetary matter that is smaller than a kilometer and frequently only millimeters in size. Most meteoroids that enter the Earth's atmosphere are so small that they vaporize completely and never reach the planet's surface.

If any part of a meteoroid survives the fall through the atmosphere and lands on Earth, it is called a meteorite. Although the vast majority of meteorites are very small, their size can range from about a fraction of a gram (the size of a pebble) to 100 kilograms (220 lbs) or more (the size of a huge, life-destroying boulder).

Asteroids are generally larger chunks of rock that come from the asteroid belt located between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.

Comets are asteroid-like objects covered with ice, methane, ammonia, and other compounds that develop a fuzzy, cloud-like shell called a coma and sometimes a visible tail whenever they orbit close to the Sun.

HubbleSite - Reference Desk - FAQs

Oh I don't have to rely on Wiki, there are thousands of sites on the web that reference asteroids hitting the Earth. If I wasn't so bored with your weaseling ways I would go grab a NASA page that describes an asteroid collision with Earth. Your link's mention "Asteroids are generally larger chunks of rock that come from the asteroid belt located between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter." says nothing about them striking the Earth or not." Again, do you even read your own submissions? I'm not even call you an idiot, Windbag.

 

[Agit8r]

So the theory of evolution does not claim that man evolved from an ape like creature?

Given the similarity of humans to apes, the idea of a common ancestor is pretty logical. Hard to deny.

Except that man also shares about90 percent of his dna with pigs and mice did we evolve from a mouse like creature too?

We share a common ancestor with all animals living and dead, yes.

 

[Youwerecreated]

This view is only conjecture,now if you said that all groups share a (MRCA) then this can be confirmed through genetic inheritance. It takes faith to believe all animals share a common ancestor.

 

[Hollie]

You don't make sense, dear. I don't speak ebonics.

I can interpret for you, she said "My grandad's a sequoia!".......

And you're still confused as to why people criticize you YEC'ists.

 

[Hollie]

This view is only conjecture,now if you said that all groups share a (MRCA) then this can be confirmed through genetic inheritance. It takes faith to believe all animals share a common ancestor.

As usual, you extremist thumpers can offer no viable alternative to the scientific theory.

 

[BillyP]

So the theory of evolution does not claim that man evolved from an ape like creature?

Given the similarity of humans to apes, the idea of a common ancestor is pretty logical. Hard to deny.

Except that man also shares about90 percent of his dna with pigs and mice did we evolve from a mouse like creature too?

if one truly believes in macro-evolution we have a common ancestor with pine trees.....

Ok, now I'm BEGGING YOU, read up on evolution, PUUULLLLEEEAAASSSEEEEE!