How are the same fossils that respected scientists all over the world found to be millions of years old, claimed by creationists to only be thousands of years old? What methods do they use besides reading verses from the bible? How are these methods better than radioactive isotope dating that respected scientist all over the world are using? I even heard a creationist say that god created fossils that appear to be millions of years old. How does that make any sense?
2007-03-20 15:57:41 · 9 answers · asked by mntnbik8 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
They point to the unusual cases where radio active dating is wrong ( usually because a sample has been contaminated with new carbon makeing it appear younger than it is ( even though they pretend the false negatives make things look older) and generalize a few anomolies to the whole of dating tecniques.
re:booth
I'm tired of lying creatinonists misqouting people What Gould really said, in Natural History 86(5), May 1977 was that "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology." It goes without saying that "extreme rarity" is not the same as "absence." Johnson did not quote Gould correctly in Albuquerque, and repeated his error in Los Alamos. Gould had this to say about earlier, similar disinformation campaigns in the May 1981 Discover magazine: "Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists -whether through design or stupidity, I do not know - as admitting that the fossil record contains no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but are abundant between larger groups. The evolution from reptiles to mammals...is well documented."
2007-03-20 16:03:51 · answer #1 · answered by Zarathustra 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
not all creationist believe the earth was created in 6 days but countless ions of time
The Scriptures, in stating, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Ge 1:1), leave matters indefinite as to time. This use of the term “beginning” is therefore unassailable, regardless of the age scientists may seek to attach to the earthly globe and to the various planets and other heavenly bodies. The actual time of creation of the material heavens and earth may have been billions of years ago.
2007-03-20 16:03:16 · answer #2 · answered by gary d 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Lots of good questions. The fossils are millions of years old. Pseudoscientists with an agenda and a motive have produced false results. They are amusing to the scientific community but deceptive to the general public.
2007-03-20 16:00:53 · answer #3 · answered by Eleventy 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Who cares? And if I can get these guys to change their minds, will the world be a better place tomorrow?
2007-03-20 16:03:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It goes even further. They are sorted by layers of rocks simple to more complex: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/fossils/succession.html
2007-03-20 16:02:16 · answer #5 · answered by Alex 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It doesn't make sense. That's why I don't believe it...
2007-03-20 16:00:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't make any sense!! and thats all there is to it
2007-03-20 16:01:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's hilarious how they cling to silliness, no?
2007-03-20 16:01:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Exactly.
2007-03-20 16:00:04 · answer #9 · answered by Eldritch 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋