Quote:
|
Quote by: MerlinsByte It seems to me , and forgive me Matt, Prometheus, and ricksp, but you have never addressed the specifics in my counter augments to evolution. Allow me to re direct your attention to this very thread.
the intent of this thread was to show that evolutionary proof for large scale change , specifically geological dating , is faulty to the point of being unbelievable. I made two points. None of you whiz kids addressed either one.
geologic dating employs (1) tautologies and (2) circular reasoning of which both are unacceptable in science.
Your rants included the usual veiled insults and just plain mumbo jumbo but no meat against these two very simple accusations.
I’m waiting guys.
: } > |
Not surprisingly, you seem to mistake assertion for argument. You claim that geological dating is unreliable without suggesting why or what the source of unreliability might be. Do you know anything about the topic? There are seven different techniques commonly used. Do you even know which technique is used in determining the age for a given strata?
If you want a response to an argument, it best to first make one.
And as an aside, even if dating was to one degree or another unreliable, a point I would not concede, it does very little argue against the fundamental theory of evolution.