Search results

No, the evidence is clear and considering that I'm not rooted in a belief system that has a preconceived notion from the outset then I can view it from an objective stance. The constraints of your belief restricts you from even entertaining the possibility that the earth can be a fair bit older...

Well, no. I don't have any preconceived ideas and as I've stated before, if the evidence supported a young earth/universe then I would have no problem with it whatsoever. It doesn't. Simple as. I've no interest in that particular source so you're right there. It's woeful but I read the article...

No, it's based on evidence like anything else that becomes a theory in science. If you can't understand that basic detail then you're in no position to talk about 'facts'.

You don't seem to have any idea of what scientists actually think but just post bizarre and uninformed diatribes regardless.

There was nothing insecure about the last election to start with, as corroborated by those in charge of security that included Republicans. Trump's continual whining and unhinged rants notwithstanding, it's a complete farce.

I've read how radiometric dating works thanks, I've certainly no interest in reading something that Bob Enyart cobbled together. To say that the ToE is based on such is just completely ignorant also.

There was no problem whatsoever with the phraseology and you dropped the ball when you accused me of stating that Dawkins was the only one when he clearly isn't as you now acknowledge. To say it's a 'huge' number of people is just hyperbole. You do understand what hyperbole means, right?

Uh huh. So you accuse me of a diversionary tactic by simply pointing out that you've been linked to an in depth article that debunked your supposedly 'completely detailed' explanation and then link to a Bob Enyart article?! That's hysterical right there. I recommend that you take your own advice.

Uh, I said "only the likes of Dawkins." Do you have a reading comprehension problem? That clearly doesn't state that he is the only one. It obviously implies that there are others of similar ilk so get a grip.

No, you didn't. You parroted on a lot in self congratulatory fashion and dismissed the contrary as you're continually prone to do. You were even linked to an in depth article on the subject and carried on doing the same. You really aren't in any position whatsoever to accuse other people of...

Did I say that he was the only one? Nope. The most vocal probably, but not the only one. And?

Only the likes of Dawkins and he isn't representative of science or evolution in general by any stretch.

You did no such thing and stop projecting.

Then supply some credible evidence to support the allegations then. Otherwise, just accept that Trump lost and get over it.

Quite right. It's only a big deal for those who are stuck in young earth creationism. I'm not arguing that God isn't involved in the process just to clarify.

You've had it shown all over by Alate, Barb along with others so don't play coy. You were never going to acknowledge any of it because presently at least, you have an unshakable belief in a young earth.

Your opinion of my opinions can be dismissed accordingly. You've been shown the evidence time and again and simply ignore it in favour of your belief system.

If it was it didn't help him much did it?

What are you prattling on about now?!

So, still no credible evidence then? Colour me shocked...