Het fossielenverslag laat zien dat er nooit evolutie geweest is

[Eliyahu]

Bs'd

Dinosaurs 'survived in a remote 'lost world' for half a million years before extinction'

Dinosaurs survived extinction for another 500,000 years in a remote 'Lost World', scientists claim.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/d...xtinction.html

New evidence suggests an "isolated community" escaped annihilation and lived on a rocky, desert plateau in North America.

Until now, palaeontologists widely believed the creatures were wiped out 65 million years ago when an asteroid collided with Earth.

But now experts say a "pocket" of dinosaurs survived and roamed a remote area of what is now New Mexico and Colorado.

Carbon dating of newly-discovered bones in the San Juan Basin proves that these lived for another half-a-million years.

The discovery, published this week in the journal Palaeontologia Electronica, has been hailed as one of the most important breakthroughs in palaeontology this century.



It also brings Hollywood's 'Lost World' – Steven Spielberg's sequel to Jurassic Park – and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's 1912 novel of the same name, a step closer to reality.

The bones were discovered buried at Ojo Alamo, a soft sandstone valley deep in the remote San Juan Basin.

A team of experts unearthed the bones, which included 34 from a single hadrosaur, and used carbon dating techniques to age them.

According to the results, they were 500,000 years younger than any other dinosaur bones previously found.

Jim Fassett, author of the research of the US Geological Survey, said many would still doubt the discovery.

He said: "The great difficulty with this hypothesis – that these are the remains of dinosaurs that survived – is ruling out the possibility that the bones date from before the extinction.

"After being killed and deposited in sands and muds, it is possible for bones to be exhumed by rivers and then incorporated into younger rocks."

David Polly, editor of Palaeontologia Electronica, said the scenario of humans and dinosaurs existing together still belongs in the "realms of fantasy".

He added: "One thing is certain – if dinosaurs did survive, they were not as widespread as they were before the end of the Cretaceous and did not persist for long.

"This is a controversial conclusion, and many palaeontologists will remain sceptical."

Meanwhile experts from the University of Plymouth have uncovered new evidence about the Earth's first major catastrophe.

Geologists say the planet was hit by "runaway" global warming 250 million years ago, which wiped out between 80 and 95 per cent of its species.

The findings were published in the journal, Earth and Planetary Science Letters.

[Eliyahu]

Bs'd

Amazing Discovery Near Montrose, Colorado

http://www.discoverynews.us/DISCOVER...ck_strata.html

Dinosaur_National_Monument

Malachite_Man_1971In 1971 a heavy equipment operator made a startling discovery in a layer of Dakota Sandstone which is part of the Lower Cretaceous strata. The Lower Cretaceous strata is known for its dinosaur fossils and according to the evolutionary time table and is supposedly 140 million years old. This is the same rock strata where numerous dinosaur fossils have been found at Dinosaur National Monument.

Malachite_Man_closeupThe skeletons of ten perfectly modern human beings were found fifty eight feet down in the Dakota Sandstone. At least four of the individuals were female, one was an infant, and the rest were men. The amazing thing is that some the fossils were articulated or found in their natural body positions which indicates they were quickly buried by some sort of catastrophic flood and mud slide.

The bones have been partially replaced with malachite which is a green mineral and turquoise thus they have been named "Malachite Man".

Some have argued that this group of people may have been involved in a mining operation and their tunnel may have collapsed. This does not answer the question why women and an infant would be 58 feet underground in a mine . . . and it has been observed that not digging or mining tools have been found.

Malachite_Man_Site

This group of people were buried by mud and became part of the Dakota Sandstone strata as a lasting testimony that something catastrophic happened years ago, probably at the same time that millions of dinosaurs were buried alive in the same rock strata.

The point, is, man and dinosaur obviously lived at the same time. This totally destroys the philosophical theory of evolution that declares that dinosaurs disappeared from the earth millions of years before the evolution of man.

Malachite_Man_femurDr. Don Patton is shown here in 1990 holding a human femur which had been found at the site. He had personally excavated this leg bone just moments before this photo. Note the green malachite that replaced the original bone.

Malachite_Man_truquoise_jawThis perfectly modern human jaw bone with teeth has also been excavated from the site. Notice the turquoise that replaced the original bone during the fossilization process.

[Eliyahu]

Bs'd

TIME UPSIDE DOWN
Chapter 3
By Erich von Fange

http://www.creationism.org/vonfange/...DownChap03.htm

Upside Down Formations That Can't Be

Over the past century, scientists have speculated that life began with a one-celled creature and that over enormous spans of time more complex creatures evolved. Thus they have charted a kind of family tree of life as they believe it evolved. This means that simple creatures ought to be found in the lowest or oldest layers of the earth, while the more complex organisms ought to be higher up in the strata. The theory fails to explain why one-celled organisms still exist today since presumably they have now had about 4.5 billion years to get on with evolving to better things.

This succession from simple to complex in the layers of the earth is then used to date each layer according to the time scale developed and frequently amended during the past 150 years.

If exceptions are found in the layers of the earth, that is, if simple (older) creatures are found deposited above complex (younger) creatures, scientists normally explain such finds as 'overthrusts.' An overthrust occurs when portions of the earth are pushed upward to form hills and mountains. Such layers may then come to rest on top of younger layers. No one would deny that overthrusts do in fact occur. Serious questions are raised, however, when enormous areas are found to have fossils in the 'wrong' order and there is no evidence whatsoever that overthrusts occurred. Some examples follow where something other than an explanation of overthrusts is called for.

When Precambrian strata seem to be deposited by water on top of Cretaceous formations, billions of years of rock are resting in the wrong place. Field work carried out in 1968 resulted in the above conclusion. This geologic puzzle is the Lewis Overthrust, which extends from Glacier National Park 350 miles into Alberta, Canada, in a strip 15-30 miles wide. This phenomenon is cited in the texts as the classic example of a large overthrust, that is, older rock pushed up and out over younger rock. The fossils are in the wrong order. The problem of applying the overthrust theory here is the vast extent of the 'wrong order' formation (CRSQ , 1969, 6:2, P.96).

A mystery occurs in the Franklin Mountains near El Paso, Texas, at a location known as West Crazy Cat Canyon. Here we find massive Upper Ordovician limestones lying immediately on top of an Upper Cretaceous formation. A geologist who conducted a tour there a few years ago explained that no actual physical evidence had yet been discovered of an overthrust, but since the fossils were completely out of order, geologists assumed an overthrust (CRSQ , ;1966, 3:1, p.59).

Another famous location is the Glarus Overthrust near Schwanden, Switzerland. Instead of the textbook order of Permian, Jurassic, and Eocene, a 21-mile overthrust is assumed because the order of formations is Eocene at the bottom, Jurassic next and Permian on top. A so-called gouge layer shows no striations, and even the irregularities at the bottom of each formation have not been worn away. Again the fossils clearly are in the wrong places (CRSQ , 1971, 8:4, p.251-255). Some argue that the formations were overturned, but again the extent of overturn involved seems to raise extreme problems.

In the Empire Mountains in southern Arizona, Permian limestone rests on top of Cretaceous. The contact resembles gear meshing. There could have been no sliding without the projections of the lower formation being ground off. Yet it is called an overthrust. Fossils are in the wrong order in Heart Mountain, Wyoming, and in nearby Sheep Mountain. These mountains are capped with Paleozoic limestone. Lower down are Jurassic and Tertiary sediments. Below these Paleozoic limestone again appears (CRSQ , 1964, 1:4, P.44-45).

An impossible combination of fossils was reported found in 1970 in Guryul Ravine, Kashmir. Permian brachiopods were found mixed with lower Triassic pelecypods. Since the one is supposed to have become extinct long before the other evolved, no explanation of the puzzle was offered (CRSQ , 7:2, p.122).

In the past decade, studies of plant spores have been made in the formations of the Grand Canyon. Spores of the conifer were found in the Permian, Mississippian, Cambrian and Precambrian, and pollen of flowering plants were also found in the Precambrian. No evolutionary theory can accommodate these findings(CRSQ 1972, 9:1, p.25; l966, 3:1, p.49; l972, 9:4, p.238).

[Eliyahu]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door morte-vivante

dan zouden paleontologen continu aan de lopende band zulke "gemixte" lagen moeten vinden. Quod non

Bs'd

Zoals je ziet: Die vinden ze inderdaad aan de lopende band.

Maar dat gaan de evo's jou natuurlijk niet vertellen.

[Eliyahu]

Bs'd

Are fossils ever found in the wrong place?

by Michael Oard

http://creation.com/fossils-wrong-place

After Morris, J., The Young Earth, Master Books 1994, page 142
Typical geological column with its alleged ‘ages’.

Figure 1. Typical geological column with its alleged ‘ages’. Creationist geologists have determined that most of the rocks assigned to this column were deposited during Noah’s Flood. Just a small portion toward the top was deposited after the Flood.

When it comes to evidence, many people think that the fossils prove evolution. You may have seen a diagram of the geologic column (figure 1) with pictures of plants and animals showing how evolution progressed over millions of years. It gives you the impression that fossils are always found in the same definite order and that no fossils are ever found ‘in the wrong place’.

You may be surprised to learn that fossils are being found “in the wrong place” all the time. Out of place, that is, compared with the areas, or ranges, shown for them on the geological column. But evolutionists don’t think of them as being ‘wrong’ because they have a way of ‘explaining’ every new fossil discovery, no matter where it’s found. All they do is change their story about how evolution happened. Evolution is never questioned.

The fact is that we know very little about where fossils are buried on the earth. We only find them on the surface from scattered rock outcrops and from cores removed from boreholes. So, it is not surprising that new fossils are regularly found in places where they were previously unknown.1

For example, sometimes we will find an organism alive-and-well that was ‘extinct’ for ‘millions of years’. That creates a great surprise and paleontologists call them ‘living fossils’, or even ‘Lazarus taxa’.2 Of course, they must have been alive for those ‘millions of years’ after they went ‘extinct’, even though their fossils had not been found. These discoveries are no problem for evolutionists; they just extend the range of these animals upward on the geological column.

The fact is that we know very little about where fossils are buried on the earth

The Wollemi pine (figure 2) is a remarkable example of a living fossil. In recent years a grove of trees was found just 100 kilometres west of Sydney, Australia’s largest city, in the Blue Mountains.3 It was thought to be extinct since the so-called Jurassic period—about 150 million years ago on the uniformitarian timescale. So the Wollemi pine would have been living even though it has not been found in strata between the Jurassic and the present. One researcher said it was like “finding a live dinosaur”. Obviously, the Wollemi pine has not evolved over the alleged 150 million years, which in any case never ever existed. Catastrophic burial during Noah’s Flood about 4,500 years ago as well as survival and regrowth explains living fossils such as the Wollemi pine.

Ian Buchanan
Wollemi pine

Figure 2. The Wollemi pine was thought to be extinct for millions of years but a living grove of trees was discovered near Sydney, Australia.

On Vancouver Island, just off the west coast of Canada, in the late 1990s, a paleontologist found a sponge, which he called Nucha vancouverensis, claiming it was a new species.4,5 It was buried in rocks classified on the geologic column as Upper Triassic, which are supposedly some 220 million years old. Surprisingly, this sponge is virtually identical to one previously found in western New South Wales, Australia, named Nucha naucum, from Middle Cambrian rocks, supposedly 520 million years old.6 But why wasn’t it found in any strata from those 300 million intervening years? The Nucha from Vancouver has greatly extended the range for this particular fossil upward in the geological column.

Fossil ranges have also been extended downward. For instance, vertebrates (animals with backbones such as fish and reptiles) have been pushed back into the Cambrian7,8 where 50% to possibly as high as 85% of all the phyla (i.e. the major types of animal designs) originated “suddenly” in what has been graphically called the Cambrian Big Bang.9 Sharks have been pushed back 25 million years into the Upper Ordovician.7 Vascular plants (i.e. land plants) have also been pushed back 25 million years into the Lower Silurian.7 Based on tracks of a lobster-sized, centipede-like creature, arthropods invaded the land 40 million years earlier (Upper Cambrian) than previously thought.10,11 The discovery of an apparent winged insect has pushed back the origin of winged insects and flight by more than 80 million years into the Lower Silurian. That means the origin of the supposed first land plants, which insects depend on, has to be pushed back even earlier into the Ordovician.12,13

But the fact is that evolution is assumed and then used to explain the fossils.

By analyzing rocks for organic molecules, researchers have said that eukaryote cells (containing a nucleus and other complex structures) originated 2.7 billion years ago in the Upper Archean, in the Precambrian.14,15 That’s one billion years earlier than previously thought. This raises the question, “Where are the remains of all the billions of organisms with eukaryote cells that lived between 2.7 billion years ago and the time of the Cambrian Big Bang?”

These are just a few examples of how the evolutionary time ranges of fossils are continually being expanded, millions of years earlier and later. The evolutionary story is presented in textbooks, movies, museums and documentaries, and we get the impression that the fossils reveal evolution.

But the fact is that evolution is assumed and then used to explain the fossils. So, when fossils are found in odd places not known before, the evolutionists just change their story about evolution. Creationists, on the other hand, assume that the Bible records what really happened in the past. They find that the fossil evidence can be explained from the order of burial during Noah’s Flood and the 4,500 years since.

[Klein Licht]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Eliyahu

TIME UPSIDE DOWN
Chapter 3
By Erich von Fange

Altijd lachen als van die types altijd 'Ph.D.' achter hun naam moeten zetten

Hier de zware doctoraatsstudie van de heer von Fange

Maw, meneer heeft 60u avondschool gevolgd en is nu 'dokter in de schooladministratie' Ik vraag me af waarom hij dat er soms af laat


Volgens zijn website heeft hij 40 jaar lang het boek Genesis bestudeerd en is hij nu expert inzake dinosaurussen.

Bonus is wel dat hij een foto van een echte drakenschedel heeft gepubliceerd (p.7)

[microwezen]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Eliyahu

De eerste????? Er liggen hele volkstammen verkeerd:

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...4162159AA325sl

Dr. Carl Werner has written a book that gives details of Scientifically Incorrect Fossils, fossils that have been found in the wrong layers.

Wie is die dokter Werner?

"Dr Werner graduated from the University of Missouri with distinction in biology (summa cum laude). He received his doctoral degree in medicine at the age of 23 and practices family medicine in St Louis."

Een huisarts dus die biologie als bijvak (waarschijnlijk verplicht voor een arts) heeft genoten.

Pfff, Dacht ik even dat je met een paleontoloog of een deskundige aan zou komen.

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Eliyahu

http://www.icr.org/article/5469/

Reli-kliek die niet serieus te nemen is.

Probeer het nog eens een keer!

[microwezen]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Eliyahu

Are fossils ever found in the wrong place?

by Michael Oard

http://creation.com/fossils-wrong-place

Dat ze überhaupt geloven in fossielen. Dat kan nooit in 6000 jaar!
Die zijn er dus door hun sprookjesfiguur daar neergelegd om ons voor de gek te houden. En waarom zouden ze daar aan twijfelen?
Blijkbaar zijn ze toch bang voor echte wetenschap

[microwezen]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Eliyahu

Bs'd

Amazing Discovery Near Montrose, Colorado

http://www.discoverynews.us/DISCOVER...ck_strata.html

[...]

The point, is, man and dinosaur obviously lived at the same time. This totally destroys the philosophical theory of evolution that declares that dinosaurs disappeared from the earth millions of years before the evolution of man.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moab_Man

Moab Man, often referred to as Malachite Man by creationists (further, Moab Man is sometimes used to refer to a 1971 finding and Malachite Man, a 1990 finding), refers to a finding of two human skeletons near Moab, Utah in 1971. The remains were first found by a rock collector named Lin Ottinger. After archaeologists completed an excavation of the skeletons, Ottinger sold one of them to Carl Baugh, who put it on display at a creationist museum in Glen Rose, Texas. A second excavation of about eight more skeletons was done in 1990. Because of the cretaceous sandstone at the site, young Earth creationists touted the skeletons as "proof" that men and dinosaurs co-existed. However, the skeletons were not fossilized, making them a recent burial. Carbon dating puts the first set of skeletons at around 140-280 years old and the latter set at 1,360-1,540 years. They were also found in loose sand and not associated with any rock formation according to the archaeologists who performed the excavation. This means they were the result of either an intentional (i.e., grave) or unintentional burial. The best evidence points to Puebloan miners who were either buried at the site or trapped in a mine collapse of some sort.

The use of Moab Man to support creationist arguments has even been criticized by some Old Earth Creationists.[1]


http://paleo.cc/paluxy/moab-man.htm

Conclusions:

The Moab Man/Malachite Man bones represent a number of intrusive burials in the Dakota Sandstone, and are not integral parts of the host formation. The bones evidently represent intentional or accidental entombments of native Americans in a mining environment. As reported by a number of conventional workers and even some creationist authors, the bones are largely unfossilized and of essentially modern appearance, except for the greenish stain. There is no foundation for the claims of a few creationists that the bones contradict mainstream geology or support dinosaur/human cohabitation.

FAIL!
Probeer het nog eens. Of denk je misschien dat als je nou maar genoeg keren een sprookje herhaalt, dat het dan vanzelf waar wordt? Net als bidden?
Tip: sla websites over waar 'crea' in voor komt. Helpt een hoop!

[microwezen]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Eliyahu

Zoals je ziet: Die vinden ze inderdaad aan de lopende band.

Ik zie niets.
Niet eens een stilstaande (STASIS) band

[Eliyahu]

Bs'd

Dinosaur Fossil Found in Mammal's Stomach

http://www.livescience.com/3794-dino...l-stomach.html

In China, scientists have identified the fossilized remains of a tiny dinosaur in the stomach of a mammal. Scientists say the animal's last meal probably is the first proof that mammals hunted small dinosaurs some 130 million years ago.

It contradicts conventional evolutionary theory that early mammals couldn't possibly attack and eat a dinosaur because they were timid, chipmunk-sized creatures that scurried in the looming shadow of the giant reptiles.

In this case, the mammal was about the size of a large cat, and the victim was a very young "parrot dinosaur" that measured about 5 inches long.

A second mammal fossil found at the same site claims the distinction of being the largest early mammal ever found. It's about the size of a modern dog, a breathtaking 20 times larger than most mammals living in the early Cretaceous Period.

Considering the specimens in tandem, scientists suggest the period in which these animals lived may have been much different than is commonly understood as the Age of Dinosaurs -- a time dominated by long-necked, 85-ton plant-eaters and the emergence of terrifying hunters with bladelike teeth and sickle claws.

It appears that at least some smaller dinosaurs had to look over their shoulders for snarling, meat-eating mammals claiming the same turf.

"This new evidence gives us a drastically new picture," said paleontologist Meng Jin of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, a co-author of the study in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

Other scientists who did not work on the bones described the discoveries as "exhilarating."

"This size range really has surprised everybody," said Zhexi Luo of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh, who digs in the same area of northeast China. "It dispels the conventional wisdom."

The fossils were found more than two years ago by villagers in the rich fossil beds of Liaoning province. The specimens were taken to a Beijing lab, where they were cleaned and analyzed by Chinese and American scientists.

The dinosaur-eater belongs to a species called Repenomamus robustus, known previously from skull fragments. It has no modern relatives.

The squat, toothy specimen measures a little less than 2 feet long, and probably weighed about 15 pounds. On R. robustus' left side and under the ribs in the area of its stomach are the fragmented remains of a very young Psittacosaurus.

This common, fast-moving plant-eater is known as the "parrot dinosaur" because it had a small head with a curved, horny beak. Its arms were much shorter than its legs. Adults grew to be 6 feet long, but the one that was devoured was just 5 inches.

The remains still are recognizable, indicating that R. robustus ripped its prey like a crocodile, but probably had not developed the ability to chew food like more advanced mammals.

"It must have swallowed food in large hunks," Meng said.

The larger, second fossil also is a Repenomamus, but considerably larger -- more than 3 feet long with a likely weight of more than 30 pounds. Dubbed R. giganticus, it weighed 20 times more than most of the 290 known early mammals, Meng said.

A larger mammal could roam and hunt aggressively, preying on young dinosaurs.

"Giganticus is in a league by itself," Luo said. "It's the world champion so far for body mass in any Mesozoic mammal."

This new class of predatory mammals has set off new speculation.

Originally, scientists believed that mammals remained small because larger dinosaurs were hunting them. Only after dinosaurs went extinct by 65 million years ago did surviving mammals begin to grow larger, they reasoned.

Now, the discovery of larger mammals is reversing some of the speculation. The Liaoning region already is famous for its trove of small feathered dinosaurs and early birds.

"Maybe small dinosaurs got larger -- or got off the ground -- to avoid rapacious mammals,'' wonders Duke University paleontologist Anne Weil.

Equally mysterious is how these specimens died. Neither shows evidence of being hunted itself.

The Yixian rock formation in which their bones were encased is a combination of river sediments and volcanic ash. The formation also includes the fossils of insects, frogs and other creatures, suggesting a mass die-off.

"It's possible that poisonous volcanic gas killed the animals when they were sleeping,'' Meng said. ''Then there was a catastrophic explosion that buried the whole thing."

[Eliyahu]

Bs'd

Wat we dus zien is dat vele fossielen. ook van mensen, in de verkeerde lagen zitten.

En wat de evo's dan doen is verklaringen vinden waarom ze daar zitten:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door microwezen

The best evidence points to Puebloan miners who were either buried at the site or trapped in a mine collapse of some sort.

Maar: Some have argued that this group of people may have been involved in a mining operation and their tunnel may have collapsed. This does not answer the question why women and an infant would be 58 feet underground in a mine . . . and it has been observed that not digging or mining tools have been found.

Dus de verklaringen worden wel erg absurd.

Er zijn constant overal fossielen in de verkeerde lagen.

[Len]

teveel om alles te lezen.

ik ben blij dat religieuzen ook wetenschappelijk onderzoek trachten te doen ipv brandstapels en gifbekers te hanteren.

Hoe dubieus de stelling, alles begint met proberen.
Maar alle streken om een passage in de bijbel te doen kloppen is lachwekkend.
De bijbel is bewezen als zijnde geschreven door mensen en herschreven door mensen.
Er staan veel tegenstrijdigheden in en het is een machtig inefficiënt document om de waarheid te publiceren.
Straks moeten we ook nog scientology-visies op de schoolbanken gaan leren.

Een aarde van 6000 jaar is een grap. Een duidelijke log van een paar miljard jaar willen zien is een grap.
En straks vinden we een koe van 600 miljoen jaar geleden? of waarom niet een haai van 1.2miljard jaar geleden?

Ik stel de visie voor dat we een death match zijn op een aliens tv-network.
Om de 100.000 jaar laten ze een nieuwe soort los om mee te vechten.

[Eliyahu]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Len

teveel om alles te lezen.

ik ben blij dat religieuzen ook wetenschappelijk onderzoek trachten te doen ipv brandstapels en gifbekers te hanteren.

Hoe dubieus de stelling, alles begint met proberen.
Maar alle streken om een passage in de bijbel te doen kloppen is lachwekkend.
De bijbel is bewezen als zijnde geschreven door mensen en herschreven door mensen.
Er staan veel tegenstrijdigheden in en het is een machtig inefficiënt document om de waarheid te publiceren.
Straks moeten we ook nog scientology-visies op de schoolbanken gaan leren.

Een aarde van 6000 jaar is een grap. Een duidelijke log van een paar miljard jaar willen zien is een grap.
En straks vinden we een koe van 600 miljoen jaar geleden? of waarom niet een haai van 1.2miljard jaar geleden?

Ik stel de visie voor dat we een death match zijn op een aliens tv-network.
Om de 100.000 jaar laten ze een nieuwe soort los om mee te vechten.

Bs'd

„Oermoeder leefde 6000 jaar geleden”

http://www.refdag.nl/achtergrond/tec...leden_1_502336



Op basis van nieuwe berekeningen aan de mutatiesnelheid van mitochondriaal DNA (mtDNA) hebben wetenschappers van het International Creation Research (ICR) vorige week geconcludeerd dat de ”menselijke oermoeder” zo’n 6000 jaar geleden geleefd heeft.

Elke menselijke cel bevat mitochondria, organellen die energie leveren met een uniek chromosoom. Dit mtDNA wordt doorgegeven van moeder op kind.

Berekeningen uit 1998 in Science gaven aan dat de ”mitochondriale Eva” 100.000 tot 200.000 jaar geleden in Afrika leefde. Daarvoor waren de wetenschappers uitgegaan van de evolutionaire aanname dat ‘Eva’ 100.000 jaar geleden geleefd moet hebben.

Onderzoekers van de Rice University in Houston gebruikten een nieuwe statistische methode die aangaf dat ze 200.000 jaar geleden leefde. „Hoe ze is geëvolueerd in de tijd is afhankelijk van het evolutiemodel dat je gebruikt”, onthulde auteur Krzysztof Cyran eerder dit jaar in Theoretical Population Biology.

Wetenschappers van het ICR stellen dat „je moet jongleren met getallen en de biologische werkelijkheid negeren om uit te komen op een tijdschaal die overeenkomt met de evolutionaire klok.” Zij komen op basis van de beschikbare gegevens en de biologische wetmatigheden niet verder dan 6000 jaar.

[Peche]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Klein Licht

Altijd lachen als van die types altijd 'Ph.D.' achter hun naam moeten zetten

Hier de zware doctoraatsstudie van de heer von Fange

Maw, meneer heeft 60u avondschool gevolgd en is nu 'dokter in de schooladministratie' Ik vraag me af waarom hij dat er soms af laat


Volgens zijn website heeft hij 40 jaar lang het boek Genesis bestudeerd en is hij nu expert inzake dinosaurussen.

Bonus is wel dat hij een foto van een echte drakenschedel heeft gepubliceerd (p.7)

mag je veel van hem zeggen, maar zijn observaties benader je niet? Klopt er teveel van misschien?

[microwezen]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Eliyahu

„Oermoeder leefde 6000 jaar geleden”

http://www.refdag.nl/achtergrond/tec...leden_1_502336
[...]
Op basis van nieuwe berekeningen aan de mutatiesnelheid van mitochondriaal DNA (mtDNA) hebben wetenschappers van het International Creation Research (ICR)

ICR als bron gebruiken is heel erg dom. "Wetenschappers" van ICR zijn geen wetenschappers. (laat staan dat ze van de wetenschappelijke methode hebben gehoord). Voor hun is alleen de bijbel de waarheid™. Dus is de aarde op 23 oktober, 4004 voor Christus gecreëerd.
Je wordt dan -per definitie- NIET serieus genomen en gezien als marionet van een stel evangelisten.

[microwezen]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Eliyahu

Maar: Some have argued that this group of people may have been involved in a mining operation and their tunnel may have collapsed. This does not answer the question why women and an infant would be 58 feet underground in a mine . . . and it has been observed that not digging or mining tools have been found.

Dus de verklaringen worden wel erg absurd.

Welk onderdeel van "However, the skeletons were not fossilized, making them a recent burial" was er onduidelijk in het oorspronkelijke bericht?

Man man man. . . .

Ben je nou echt zo dom of doe je alleen maar alsof om te trollen?

[microwezen]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Peche

mag je veel van hem zeggen, maar zijn observaties benader je niet? Klopt er teveel van misschien?

Uit de tekst:

"You probably learned in school that the earth is billions of years old, and there are constant reminders of this in the media.2 What you may not know is that there is good scientific evidence that the earth is less than ten thousand years old."
Alleen wordt er nergens verwezen naar die "wetenschappelijke bewijzen". (ergo: Een zomaar uit de lucht gegrepen uitspraak)

"First and foremost, Christian faith will be strengthened when it is shown that scientific data supports the age of the earth described in the Bible."
Nog steeds geen enkele verwijzing naar wetenschappelijke data. (wat raar is, want er staan een hoop verwijzingen [xx] naar voetnoten met bronnen in de gehele tekst.)

"The plan here is to deal with pieces that seem to fit a “young earth” view. Before starting, however, it is important to remind ourselves that for Christians, trusting God’s Word is critical for a faith that will stand."
Kortom: Wat er ook gebeurt, god MOET je vertrouwen. Anders kloppen mijn argumenten niet.

"The Big Bang scenario requires a “singularity” at the very beginning,
what is called the “Cosmic Egg.” By definition, this “singularity” requires a suspension of the known laws of physics otherwise the Egg would never hatch. Thus, even a materialistic cosmology requires miracles".
Nope. Kwantumfluctuatie. (lees meer Hawkins).
En dat was al bekend ten tijden van het schrijven van dit stuk. Als je iets wilt ontkrachten, moet je weten waar je het over hebt)

En dat is pas pagina 1.

Pagina 2&3 gaat over 'soft tissue" van Dr. Schweitzer en carbon dating (wat hier al de revue is gepasseerd en verworpen)
Dinosaur blood and polystrate trees debunked (video)

Pagina 4:
"Dr. Don Patton took a lie-detector test about this track in 2007 and passed. He is of the opinion that the track was deliberately damaged by one or both of two evolutionists (see back cover)"
Een leugendetector test? Serieus?

En dan heb ik het alleen even snel doorgelezen.
Kortom: niet serieus te nemen.

[Eliyahu]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door microwezen

Welk onderdeel van "However, the skeletons were not fossilized, making them a recent burial" was er onduidelijk in het oorspronkelijke bericht?

Bs'd

Welk gedeelte van: "Note the green malachite that replaced the original bone.

Malachite_Man_truquoise_jawThis perfectly modern human jaw bone with teeth has also been excavated from the site. Notice the turquoise that replaced the original bone during the fossilization process." is het dat je niet begrijpt?

Man man man. . . .

Ben je nou echt zo dom of doe je alleen maar alsof om te trollen?

[Eliyahu]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door microwezen

Pagina 2&3 gaat over 'soft tissue" van Dr. Schweitzer en carbon dating (wat hier al de revue is gepasseerd en verworpen)

Bs'd

Natuurlijk verwerp jij dat. Maar dat neemt niet weg dat de feiten er nog steeds liggen, ook al probeer jij ze te verwerpen.

Dino's testen positief voor C14, wat onmogelijk zou moeten zijn als ze tientallen miljoenen jaren oud zijn, en de elastische pezen en soepele bloedvaten met hemoglobine er in van dino's van zogezegd 80 miljoen jaar oud, die bewijzen dat de hele evolutionistische tijdlijn totale kolder is.

Hoe vaak en hoe ver je het ook verwerpt.