Paleontologist Explains What The Fossils Really Say

[alang1216]

Not so fast, I said Neanderthals fossils are like those of regular humans today, i.e. they aren't common ancestors from the past as evolutionists claim. Shouldn't you produce these fossils and show us comparisons to see how they developed? We should not find Neanderthal fossils in other "time" layers, but I already debunked some of it with today's birds and animals found in the dinosaur level, but for whatever reason they are ignored by the atheist paleontologists.

Furthermore, there should be C14 remaining in those fossils. This would be the clincher and your scientists could do radiocarbon dating on them.

ETA: I also said I've been to the Pinnacles and Carlsbad Caverns. If I was a "evolution" Neanderthal, then I would not live in a cave as they are dark, cold, and the surrounding area is not suitable for growing crops. There is mostly forest nearby. Thus, creationists claim prehistoric people did not live in caves. Maybe they were temporary shelters or places to show ones art or graffiti lol.

You totally missed the point. Correct me if I'm wrong but, as you are a Bible literalist, you believe the Earth is very young. 6,000 is one number I know but do you accept that those Neanderthals died about 40,000 years ago?

 

[james bond]

You totally missed the point. Correct me if I'm wrong but, as you are a Bible literalist, you believe the Earth is very young. 6,000 is one number I know but do you accept that those Neanderthals died about 40,000 years ago?

I don't think I missed the point. It's interesting that you say that as you do not provide any hard evidence for Neanderthals and what they evolved0 years. If evolution was true, then you'd easily provide the evidence that I'm asking for. Instead, I discovered that in the layer where Neanderthal was found there were other fossils of animals and even a duck. So the absurd idea that birds are dinosaurs is a fairy tale. The atheist scientists are claiming it wasn't a duck. That's in those papers that atheist scientists wrote to continue to get their funding. Moreover, there are other fossils of today's animals found in the same layer, but were mysteriously disregarded because it doesn't fit the evolutionists argument that birds are dinosaurs. I think it means another win for creation science.

The Bible does not say anything about the age of the Earth. It does provide a history of humankind and the bibliography of the peoples in the Bible and these were added up to get around 6,000 years as the age of the Earth. This was to counter the claim of 4.54 billion year old Earth for radiometric dating by Clair Patterson in 1956.

The point is atheists and their scientists do not have any evidence to show long time. Their radiometric dating created and done by Clair Patterson in 1956 had mistakes and erroneous assumptions.

The atheists and their scientists do not have much history of what happened to Earth during the Neanderthal period, but from the cave drawings we can see that Neanderthals were quite skilled in art and knew about art techniques. That hurts evolutionary theory right there as Neanderthals are considered unsophisticated.

I was just watching the movie Minority Report and one character said people do not choose what they believe, but what they believe chooses them. That should definitely belong in science fiction .

 

[alang1216]

I don't think I missed the point. It's interesting that you say that as you do not provide any hard evidence for Neanderthals and what they evolved0 years. If evolution was true, then you'd easily provide the evidence that I'm asking for. Instead, I discovered that in the layer where Neanderthal was found there were other fossils of animals and even a duck. So the absurd idea that birds are dinosaurs is a fairy tale. The atheist scientists are claiming it wasn't a duck. That's in those papers that atheist scientists wrote to continue to get their funding. Moreover, there are other fossils of today's animals found in the same layer, but were mysteriously disregarded because it doesn't fit the evolutionists argument that birds are dinosaurs. I think it means another win for creation science.

The Bible does not say anything about the age of the Earth. It does provide a history of humankind and the bibliography of the peoples in the Bible and these were added up to get around 6,000 years as the age of the Earth. This was to counter the claim of 4.54 billion year old Earth for radiometric dating by Clair Patterson in 1956.

The point is atheists and their scientists do not have any evidence to show long time. Their radiometric dating created and done by Clair Patterson in 1956 had mistakes and erroneous assumptions.

The atheists and their scientists do not have much history of what happened to Earth during the Neanderthal period, but from the cave drawings we can see that Neanderthals were quite skilled in art and knew about art techniques. That hurts evolutionary theory right there as Neanderthals are considered unsophisticated.

I was just watching the movie Minority Report and one character said people do not choose what they believe, but what they believe chooses them. That should definitely belong in science fiction .

No you missed the point as I wasn't claiming anything about Neanderthal evolution, only for the fact that C14 put the date of one such individual as 40,000 years ago. My ONLY question is: Is this date accurate, and Homo has been on this planet for at least 40,000 years, or is C14 dating incorrect?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If you're asking why did the early geologists determine the layers represent millions of years, here's how. They measure how long it takes for new proto-limestone to form from the shell of plankton. Then they measure the thickness of existing limestone layers (e.g., White Cliffs of Dover) and get a ballpark number.


An earthquake or 'catastrophe'? Never. Only continental drift could do it but the evidence for it would be obvious.

The White Ciffs of Dover are NOT limestone, dumbass. They are chalk!

 

[alang1216]

The White Ciffs of Dover are NOT limestone, dumbass. They are chalk!

I may be a dumbass but at least I'm educated enough to know that chalk is form of limestone.

 

[james bond]

No you missed the point as I wasn't claiming anything about Neanderthal evolution, only for the fact that C14 put the date of one such individual as 40,000 years ago. My ONLY question is: Is this date accurate, and Homo has been on this planet for at least 40,000 years, or is C14 dating incorrect?

I'm no expert, but think it's accurate. But as we learned from radioisotope testing, there has to be controls and we have to know what assumptions we are making or else the results could be erroneous. To use this one test to gauge how long one Neanderthal lived ago is probably not correct. I would want to see other dating of Neanderthal fossils to get a conclusive number. We now have other animal fossils in that layer beside the human one, but for some reason the evolutionists aren't dating those.

To turn it around, what do you think? If you're an evolutionist, then are you going to accept this as hurting evolutionary theory?

 

[Mushroom]

They are chalk!

Which is composed of calcium carbonate. In other words, it was once a deposit of limestone that was then disintegrated over time and recomposed as a sedimentary rock. It is still "limestone", just after having gone through another step.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I may be a dumbass but at least I'm educated enough to know that chalk is form of limestone.

That's like saying the gravel in my driveway is chalk, because it isn't! It's limestone.

You call a spade a spade, dumbass!

 

[james bond]

Once again, that is a contradiction.

And when I talk about geology, I talk about geology. You see, geology does not give a damn about evolution, or the Bible, or anything else. It only cares about the planet, the rocks, and how the two of them developed. You are trying to mash them together, and that is a fail. Like trying to compare ERA stats in baseball, and saying a player is better or worse than a football quarterback because of their yards passed stats.

This is why you keep failing, because I am actually talking very little about evolution itself. I am discussing geology, and slightly into anthropology and paleontology. I am dismissing your claims based on the science of that alone, and not even going into biology, or actual evolution.

But please tell me, where are all these lime volcanos? Or these massive "lime floods", because there is no evidence of either of those events happening ever.

That is the difference. I use actual hard observation and science, you are believing fairy stories that are completely made up and have no basis in reality.

And you reject my assertations as "bullshit", yet ignore the fact once again that your reference lied to you. When faced with the fact they lied, you still believe them and what they say, and reject actual hard evidence that you were lied to.

As I said, take this claim down to the religion area. It does not belong here.

It's not a contradiction as I corrected the fake cave drawing for a verified one. Furthermore, I said creation scientists found other animals in the Neanderthal layer. They also have dinosaur fossils with soft tissue remaining, C14, and radiometric dating can be done on it. You have nothing to counter the hard evidence.

>>As I said, take this claim down to the religion area. It does not belong here.<<

Why don't you apologize for your lame, opinionated post? If you know so much about geology, then how does it relate to what was discussed in the Neanderthal level? All you claim is:

>>I am discussing geology, and slightly into anthropology and paleontology.<<

...

>>That is the difference. I use actual hard observation and science, you are believing fairy stories that are completely made up and have no basis in reality.<<

Why don't you provide this hard observation and science of what you are claiming? I'm not a mind reader.

As for your questions, I'll hold off answering them. I'm tired of answering atheist questions because I have the truth and scientific answers. What do you mean by "lime volcanoes" or massive "lime floods?"

I did provide the evidence for a sauropod dinosaur cave drawing in the US to correct the fake one. It's a simple mistake while the evolution scientists were caught red-handed in lies -- The Piltdown Man Fraud. That's much worse coming from your professionals.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That's like saying the gravel in my driveway is chalk, because it isn't! It's limestone.

You call a spade a spade, dumbass!

Chalk is a form of limestone. When you said it was not limestone, you were wrong.

Moving on...

 

[alang1216]

I'm no expert, but think it's accurate. But as we learned from radioisotope testing, there has to be controls and we have to know what assumptions we are making or else the results could be erroneous. To use this one test to gauge how long one Neanderthal lived ago is probably not correct. I would want to see other dating of Neanderthal fossils to get a conclusive number. We now have other animal fossils in that layer beside the human one, but for some reason the evolutionists aren't dating those.

To turn it around, what do you think? If you're an evolutionist, then are you going to accept this as hurting evolutionary theory?

Hardly surprising to find fish and humans together in recent rocks since both are alive today. What would be surprising would be to find humans and dinosaurs (NOT birds) together since their are no living dinosaurs and they are accepted by science to have perished before humans existed.

 

[alang1216]

That's like saying the gravel in my driveway is chalk, because it isn't! It's limestone.

You call a spade a spade, dumbass!

Don't double down on your ignorance, when there is Google you have no excuse.

Chalk is a form of limestone

 

[james bond]

Hardly surprising to find fish and humans together in recent rocks since both are alive today. What would be surprising would be to find humans and dinosaurs (NOT birds) together since their are no living dinosaurs and they are accepted by science to have perished before humans existed.

Well, you avoided the 40K years finding from the C14 dating while I thought C14 dating was valid. Can I just assume it blows evolution's millions of years out of the water?

Also, the Neanderthal level did find a duck and dinosaurs together, but the atheists won't admit it was a duck. There were other modern animals and birds in the dinosaur level, but they just ignored it. I had some evidence of dinosaurs and humans together, but it's not hard evidence so cave drawings (I just had those found in the US) would have to considred soft. It's unfortunate that Mushroom thinks my using fake evidence means making a mountain out of a molehill for evolution lmao. He presented no evidence while asserting he has it. The evidence is for Neanderthals not being ape-like and more human (because they were human).

"The theory of evolution states that all living creatures arose from a single cell by natural processes over eons of time, and God had nothing to do with this process. According to the theory each animal arose from a different kind of animal over ‘millions of years’. E.g. most evolutionists assert that modern birds evolved from dinosaurs. Finding fossils of modern birds with those of dinosaurs, not just above them, contradicts this idea.


Dr Carl Werner’s book and DVD, Living Fossils, reveals that fossil researchers have found many modern bird remains with dinosaurs, yet museums do not display these fossils, thus keeping this information from the public. By keeping this information hidden, children and adults are indoctrinated with the false idea that animals changed over time (since the time of the dinosaurs), and that evolution is true."

Modern birds with dinosaurs

Fossils of many modern birds are found with dinosaurs, but almost no museums display them, thus misleading the public.

creation.com

 

[Mushroom]

It's unfortunate that @Mushroom thinks my using fake evidence means making a mountain out of a molehill for evolution lmao.

What it does is bring up credibility and if the person or their claims should be taken seriously or not. When caught at it twice in a row, it brings your credibility down to almost nothing.

But I am sure that things like credibility means nothing to you, just so long as it is anybody or anything that agrees with you.

 

[james bond]

What it does is bring up credibility and if the person or their claims should be taken seriously or not. When caught at it twice in a row, it brings your credibility down to almost nothing.

But I am sure that things like credibility means nothing to you, just so long as it is anybody or anything that agrees with you.

Big assertions, but nothing in terms of evidence from geology, paleontology, and paleontology. Can I just assume you don't know or have anything solid or even soft evidence? You won't admit YOUR huge mistake.

I think we can safely say that modern birds and animals lived with Neanderthals thousands of years ago.

 

[alang1216]

Well, you avoided the 40K years finding from the C14 dating while I thought C14 dating was valid. Can I just assume it blows evolution's millions of years out of the water?

Not avoiding anything and no it does not blow "evolution's millions of years out of the water" since no one claims there were Neanderthals millions of years ago. I'm just impressed that you accept that the earth is at least that old.

Also, the Neanderthal level did find a duck and dinosaurs together, but the atheists won't admit it was a duck.

I never heard that dinosaurs were found at a Neanderthal level. I'm pretty sure you're mistaken since that would have been the biggest scientific discovery in the last 200 years and the discoverer would be famous.

There were other modern animals and birds in the dinosaur level, but they just ignored it.

Again, although birds are hardly modern and find them with dinosaurs is expected, no 'modern' animals would be ignored.

I had some evidence of dinosaurs and humans together, but it's not hard evidence so cave drawings (I just had those found in the US) would have to considred soft.

Radical claims require radical evidence. Soft won't cut it.

The evidence is for Neanderthals not being ape-like and more human (because they were human).

No scientist thinks Neanderthals were ape-like. I've heard it said that if you saw one walking down the street you wouldn't think anything of if. The differences are small, significant but small.

"The theory of evolution states that all living creatures arose from a single cell by natural processes over eons of time, and God had nothing to do with this process. According to the theory each animal arose from a different kind of animal over ‘millions of years’. E.g. most evolutionists assert that modern birds evolved from dinosaurs. Finding fossils of modern birds with those of dinosaurs, not just above them, contradicts this idea.

Incorrect. The theory of evolution states that there is no requirement for supernatural intervention to create the species we see. Of course that may be exactly what God intended, science wouldn't know. Finding birds and dinosaurs in no way contradicts evolution since the precursors to birds still existed back then. My wife gave birth to my daughter but both are still alive.

 

[Hollie]

Well, you avoided the 40K years finding from the C14 dating while I thought C14 dating was valid. Can I just assume it blows evolution's millions of years out of the water?

Also, the Neanderthal level did find a duck and dinosaurs together, but the atheists won't admit it was a duck. There were other modern animals and birds in the dinosaur level, but they just ignored it. I had some evidence of dinosaurs and humans together, but it's not hard evidence so cave drawings (I just had those found in the US) would have to considred soft. It's unfortunate that Mushroom thinks my using fake evidence means making a mountain out of a molehill for evolution lmao. He presented no evidence while asserting he has it. The evidence is for Neanderthals not being ape-like and more human (because they were human).

"The theory of evolution states that all living creatures arose from a single cell by natural processes over eons of time, and God had nothing to do with this process. According to the theory each animal arose from a different kind of animal over ‘millions of years’. E.g. most evolutionists assert that modern birds evolved from dinosaurs. Finding fossils of modern birds with those of dinosaurs, not just above them, contradicts this idea.


Dr Carl Werner’s book and DVD, Living Fossils, reveals that fossil researchers have found many modern bird remains with dinosaurs, yet museums do not display these fossils, thus keeping this information from the public. By keeping this information hidden, children and adults are indoctrinated with the false idea that animals changed over time (since the time of the dinosaurs), and that evolution is true."

Modern birds with dinosaurs

Fossils of many modern birds are found with dinosaurs, but almost no museums display them, thus misleading the public.

creation.com

As you are aware, cutting and pasting from creationer ministries is pointless in the Science forum because their (and your) agenda is spelled out clearly.

The attempted undermining of peer reviewed science matters is one of the devices used by creationists to create the illusion that creationism is a viable mechanism to explain the diversity of life on the planet. Christian creationism is simply the misrepresentation of authoritative scientific research; The lack of actual research undertaken by the christian creationist ministries and the refusal to submit research and results for peer review is a standard tactic. The entirety of the creationist argument is to appeal to people with a prior commitment to religious dogma. However, since there is nothing in the literature of the Christian creationist ministries to support their arguments, their charade of authority can be maintained only by pressing a distorted caricature of how the Scientific Method is actually maintained

About Us - creation.com

Creation or evolution? It makes a big difference! Over 10,000 trustworthy articles. Evidence for biblical creation.

creation.com

About Us​

First time here? About Creation Ministries International​

• Our Motto: Proclaiming the truth and authority of the Bible
• Our Vision: To see the Lord Jesus Christ honoured as Creator and Saviour of the world
• Our Mission: To support the effective proclamation of the Gospel by providing credible answers that affirm the reliability of the Bible, in particular its Genesis history.

 

[Hollie]

Well, you avoided the 40K years finding from the C14 dating while I thought C14 dating was valid. Can I just assume it blows evolution's millions of years out of the water?

Also, the Neanderthal level did find a duck and dinosaurs together, but the atheists won't admit it was a duck. There were other modern animals and birds in the dinosaur level, but they just ignored it. I had some evidence of dinosaurs and humans together, but it's not hard evidence so cave drawings (I just had those found in the US) would have to considred soft. It's unfortunate that Mushroom thinks my using fake evidence means making a mountain out of a molehill for evolution lmao. He presented no evidence while asserting he has it. The evidence is for Neanderthals not being ape-like and more human (because they were human).

"The theory of evolution states that all living creatures arose from a single cell by natural processes over eons of time, and God had nothing to do with this process. According to the theory each animal arose from a different kind of animal over ‘millions of years’. E.g. most evolutionists assert that modern birds evolved from dinosaurs. Finding fossils of modern birds with those of dinosaurs, not just above them, contradicts this idea.


Dr Carl Werner’s book and DVD, Living Fossils, reveals that fossil researchers have found many modern bird remains with dinosaurs, yet museums do not display these fossils, thus keeping this information from the public. By keeping this information hidden, children and adults are indoctrinated with the false idea that animals changed over time (since the time of the dinosaurs), and that evolution is true."

Modern birds with dinosaurs

Fossils of many modern birds are found with dinosaurs, but almost no museums display them, thus misleading the public.

creation.com

“Dr Carl Werner’s book and DVD, Living Fossils, reveals that fossil researchers have found many modern bird remains with dinosaurs, yet museums do not display these fossils, thus keeping this information from the public. By keeping this information hidden, children and adults are indoctrinated with the false idea that animals changed over time (since the time of the dinosaurs), and that evolution is true."


Your loopy, over the rainbow, ain’t coming’ back conspiracy theories are pretty typical for the most extreme of the religious extremists.

 

[james bond]

Not avoiding anything and no it does not blow "evolution's millions of years out of the water" since no one claims there were Neanderthals millions of years ago. I'm just impressed that you accept that the earth is at least that old.


I never heard that dinosaurs were found at a Neanderthal level. I'm pretty sure you're mistaken since that would have been the biggest scientific discovery in the last 200 years and the discoverer would be famous.


Again, although birds are hardly modern and find them with dinosaurs is expected, no 'modern' animals would be ignored.


Radical claims require radical evidence. Soft won't cut it.


No scientist thinks Neanderthals were ape-like. I've heard it said that if you saw one walking down the street you wouldn't think anything of if. The differences are small, significant but small.


Incorrect. The theory of evolution states that there is no requirement for supernatural intervention to create the species we see. Of course that may be exactly what God intended, science wouldn't know. Finding birds and dinosaurs in no way contradicts evolution since the precursors to birds still existed back then. My wife gave birth to my daughter but both are still alive.

Yes, you're avoiding my question as whether you believe in radiocarbon dating? I gave you a straight answer, but you're avoiding my question. It means you're ignorant and don't know much about dinosaurs and evolution.

It does mean evolution's millions of years as atheist scientists as they think Neanderthals were ape-like creatures from millions of years ago. Darwin was a racist towards them and thought they were subhuman and from Africa. Such a mofo and he made huge mistakes to boot. Creationists think they're like today's humans as we share their DNA, but the Neanderthals were ancient people both at end of OT and beginning of NT.

We're not talking about dinosaurs and humans unless you want to answer why dinosaur fossils still have soft tissue inside and have C14 remaining. Are you admitting they're not millions of years old? Also, why are atheist scientists ignoring the birds and animals found also with the Neanderthal fossils. My opinion is that we'll find dinosaurs and human fossils in the same layer eventually.

As for the rest, it sounds like you're in denial and can't give a straight answer. That's typical of people who don't really know and fell for evolution. Not even one link from an atheist scientist backing your weak opinions up.

 

[Hollie]

Yes, you're avoiding my question as whether you believe in radiocarbon dating? I gave you a straight answer, but you're avoiding my question. It means you're ignorant and don't know much about dinosaurs and evolution.

It does mean evolution's millions of years as atheist scientists as they think Neanderthals were ape-like creatures from millions of years ago. Darwin was a racist towards them and thought they were subhuman and from Africa. Such a mofo and he made huge mistakes to boot. Creationists think they're like today's humans as we share their DNA, but the Neanderthals were ancient people both at end of OT and beginning of NT.

We're not talking about dinosaurs and humans unless you want to answer why dinosaur fossils still have soft tissue inside and have C14 remaining. Are you admitting they're not millions of years old? Also, why are atheist scientists ignoring the birds and animals found also with the Neanderthal fossils. My opinion is that we'll find dinosaurs and human fossils in the same layer eventually.

As for the rest, it sounds like you're in denial and can't give a straight answer. That's typical of people who don't really know and fell for evolution. Not even one link from an atheist scientist backing your weak opinions up.

“We're not talking about dinosaurs and humans unless you want to answer why dinosaur fossils still have soft tissue inside and have C14 remaining.”

The discovery of so-called soft tissue was made by real scientists not quack creationers. That makes sense because we know that creationer quacks do no research and submit no data for peer review.

I suppose you’re admitting that the planet is very old as opposed to the creationer nonsense of just 6,000 years old.