Thread: How does a creationist resolve this discrepancy

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

And before any Atheist start with "well, they were here with humans" I'm talking about advance cognitive thinking modern day humans. I'm not talking about animals like Neanderthals and other predecessor hominids, all of which you "believe" were humans with no evidence to support it.

Point 1, dinosaurs existed over 60 millions years before the homo genus was present. Even the oldest primates came only when dinosaurs were gone.

Point 2, you insist on implying the theory of evolution is an "atheist thing", in spite of the fact that every scientist in the world accepts evolution regardless of their religion or lack of. And I know you probably are ready now to write a few names of so called scientists who reject evolution but - and this may come as shocker - when someone rejects the scientific method and it's collectively verified results, for no reason other than pure unadulterated bias, that person is not a scientist.

Originally Posted by Scatterbrain

Point 1, dinosaurs existed over 60 millions years before the homo genus was present. Even the oldest primates came only when dinosaurs were gone.

and how do you know it was over 60 million years ago? were you, or any scientist there at that time? Don't say carbon dating because carbon dating is very unreliable with most things.

Originally Posted by erible

and how do you know it was over 60 million years ago? were you, or any scientist there at that time? Don't say carbon dating because carbon dating is very unreliable with most things.

Radiometric dating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We've actually got quite a few radio isotopes that can be used in dating shit. And when they all point to the same date with very little margin of error, well...it isn't as unreliable as you make it out to be.
Also, carbon-14 has a half life 5730 years, which means it is worthless in trying to date something so old.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Radiometric dating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We've actually got quite a few radio isotopes that can be used in dating shit. And when they all point to the same date with very little margin of error, well...it isn't as unreliable as you make it out to be.
Also, carbon-14 has a half life 5730 years, which means it is worthless in trying to date something so old.

I know, but scientists have carbon dated things, and got different results each time. That is what I meant by it being unreliable. It may work with little error to some things, and may get different results with others. And I just meant carbon dating in general, not the 60million years thing. I will read up on the Radiometric dating, I have only heard a bit about that.

Originally Posted by Scatterbrain

Point 2, you insist on implying the theory of evolution is an "atheist thing", in spite of the fact that every scientist in the world accepts evolution regardless of their religion or lack of. And I know you probably are ready now to write a few names of so called scientists who reject evolution but - and this may come as shocker - when someone rejects the scientific method and it's collectively verified results, for no reason other than pure unadulterated bias, that person is not a scientist.

Now this, folks, is called bullshit. There are many people holding doctorates in Science who reject the theory of Evolution. Google is your friend -- look it up!

Originally Posted by Carera

Now this, folks, is called bullshit. There are many people holding doctorates in Science who reject the theory of Evolution. Google is your friend -- look it up!

I'm still not sure if you're just here to troll, but you seem to have missed the last part of what you quoted.

Originally Posted by Carera

Now this, folks, is called bullshit. There are many people holding doctorates in Science who reject the theory of Evolution. Google is your friend -- look it up!

I did google. 128 biologists signed something saying they had doubts in evolution. I also found out from Time, that not one of them have done research into evolution. Biology is a very wide field.

Anyone who rejects the scientific method, is by definition, not a scientist.

Google for doctors who say smoking doesn't cause cancer, you actually get significantly more results that googling for biologists who say evolution isn't real.