Orb
Orb's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: May 28 2009 - 12:51am
Fossil hailed as missing link in evolution is not even close relative
Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm

Fuck Darwin. We've been done this road before. I'm willing to go again.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 years 5 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am

I knew it was wrong when they claimed it was more than 6,000 years old.

D'uh!

j_j
j_j's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 13 2009 - 4:22pm


Quote:
I knew it was wrong when they claimed it was more than 6,000 years old.

D'uh!

Ushering it in, eh?

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 years 5 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am


Quote:

Quote:
I knew it was wrong when they claimed it was more than 6,000 years old.

D'uh!

Ushering it in, eh?

To top it off, the flood that likely killed this fossil was actually only about 5,100 years ago.

As you know, carbon dating is a liberal atheist plot...unless it validates some religious claim, then it's OK.

The creation situation makes for GREAT science.

Have you ever tried to calculate what the Universe looked like on creation day?

All those stars and galaxies created at almost their current locations and the light from something 5 billiuon light years away having the light coming from it created only 6,000 light years from earth in order for it to arrive today, and with the proper characteristics and everything - as though it actually originated from them all that time ago!

If you ponder it, the Universe is one giant red herring!

It boggles the mind.

Log in or register to post comments
-->
  • X