Seeing God in the Physics Lab

AISH ^ | Fall 2003 | Dr. Gerald Schroeder

[gore3000]

Nonsense, and totally false. Evolutionists themselves have been saying for a long time that life on earth is over 4 billion years old.-me-

I guess it's OK to answer you if you're talking to me. J. William Schopf is the only one I know of who has claimed to find 3.5 billion year old protist fossils.

Which does not address or refute my statement above. It should also be noted that evolutionists embraced the cyanobacteria's age for a long time until they realized that if something so old had not changed then it disproved evolution. It is just part of the little numbers games evolutionists play. Like the Communists they will say one thing one day, the opposite the next and deny they had ever said anything else.

The 4+ billion claim for life on earth has been made by evolutionists for a long time (and I am sure you have made it yourself). However, once someone opposed to evolution uses it as part of his theory then you call it a lie. Pretty shameful knee jerk behavior on your part.

[gore3000]

Scientists should stick to things they can observe and measure with their own eyes instead of hypothesizing about what can never be ascertained.-me-

I'm sorry to point out that you are completely wrong about this.

The beginning of the universe can never be observed, it is not subject to scientific study now or ever. If they want to make up stories let them call it science fiction, not science. Without proof, observations, experiments, evidence it is storytelling, not science.

[gore3000]

I don't think you fully understand gore's position.

Don't put words in my mouth. Paleontology is bunk. They change ancestries more than women change their hemlines, their dating is also quite fungible according to evolutionist desires.

There are millions of species on earth which should easily prove that the theory of evolution is true. They do not, so evolutionists go about making up stories with little or no evidence to try to hide the fact that their theory is totally false and has been proven scientifically false. The only thing that keeps evolution alive is the ignorance of the public.

[VadeRetro]

Which does not address or refute my statement above.

What is false and what is nonsense? I backed up everything I said. When do you ever back up any of your irresponsible spew?

It should also be noted that evolutionists embraced the cyanobacteria's age for a long time until they realized that if something so old had not changed then it disproved evolution.

Do you really hope to fool the lurkers that no one realized immediately that Schopf's 3.5 billion year old cynobacteria gave life very little time to arise after the end of the Hadean? That he himself didn't address the question in his book? Suddenly after three years science decided the creationists were making too much hay with the "too complex too soon" business and decided to repudiate Schopf? Back it up or shut up!

Like the Communists they will say one thing one day, the opposite the next and deny they had ever said anything else.

For science, it's about evidence. It's an intellectual curiosity thang. You wouldn't understand. When you don't already have the answer, you follow evidence.

The 4+ billion claim for life on earth has been made by evolutionists for a long time (and I am sure you have made it yourself).

Show me! Show me where I said life is 4 billion years old on Earth. Show me where anybody said it.

[PatrickHenry]

1⁷²⁰

---

Placemarker

[js1138]

Don't put words in my mouth. Paleontology is bunk.

You are right. Your version of yourself is much more colorful than mine.

[RightWhale]

Did you know that not all galaxies need dark matter? Apparently some exhibit ordinary Keplerian rotation.

Ref - Aaron Romanowski, Nottingham

[gore3000]

You are right. Your version of yourself is much more colorful than mine.

Again proving that none of you can discuss any matter honestly without insults and slimes. All you folks are are a bunch of losers who cannot discuss scientific issues because you are not interested in science. You are just interested in promoting atheism.

[gore3000]

Which does not address or refute my statement above.-me

What is false and what is nonsense?

You need some reading comprehension. What I am saying is that as usual you are saying one thing one day and another the other. Evolutionists have been saying for decades that life arose shortly after the earth was formed - WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL. You have said the same numerous times. Now that a Christian uses the evolutionists own statements against them you come out and deny what you folk have been saying all along. It is the typical evo doubletalk of just contradicting anything with specious garbage.

Oh and BTW - it is not just one guy that has said cyanobacteria are 3.5 billion years old. The following is from Berkeley University (guess that is a creationist source?). So you have been caught in another of your numerous lies:

Cyanobacteria are aquatic and photosynthetic, that is, they live in the water, and can manufacture their own food. Because they are bacteria, they are quite small and usually unicellular, though they often grow in colonies large enough to see. They have the distinction of being the oldest known fossils, more than 3.5 billion years old, in fact! It may surprise you then to know that the cyanobacteria are still around; they are one of the largest and most important groups of bacteria on earth. FROM: Introduction to the Cyanobacteria Architects of earth's atmosphere.

[js1138]

Again proving that none of you can discuss any matter honestly without insults and slimes

A number of people have asked you to state your opinion as to the age of the earth. That is quite relevant to threads that touch on abiogenesis. So how old is the earth?

[VadeRetro]

You need some reading comprehension. What I am saying is that as usual you are saying one thing one day and another the other. Evolutionists have been saying for decades that life arose shortly after the earth was formed - WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL. You have said the same numerous times. Now that a Christian uses the evolutionists own statements against them you come out and deny what you folk have been saying all along. It is the typical evo doubletalk of just contradicting anything with specious garbage.

Repetition is not backing up. Schopf's claims were initially accepted, complete with whatever difficulties they posed for the chronology of life on Earth. After all, he had probable-looking photomicrographs and a geologic analysis of the Apex chert which supported his thesis.

Questions arose later purely because of new evidence, physical evidence in the form of new pictures and new geologic analyses. I've already linked two articles on the subject. You haven't laid a glove on them. Creationist dumb-dumbing, a background noise quite independent of whatever the evidence picture may be, had no role in the reversal of scientific opinion.

Oh and BTW - it is not just one guy that has said cyanobacteria are 3.5 billion years old. The following is from Berkeley University (guess that is a creationist source?). So you have been caught in another of your numerous lies:

What numerous lies? You cite the University of California Museum of Paleontology at Berkely "Cyanobacteria For Dummies" page making a statement clearly based upon Schopf. They need to update it. And you're still sliding the bar. You accused me personally of saying that life on Earth goes back 4 billion years, not 3.5. You're just spewing blue again.

I have said one thing consistently on this thread: Schopf made a claim which was once widely accepted and now is not. You jumped in and started calling me a liar. However, everything I ever said is still true and fully backed up, including that you continue to recklessly and irresponsibly spew charges of :nonsense" and "liar" all over the place while never backing up a thing.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your reply! That is interesting indeed.

For Lurkers, Dark matter deficiency puts theory in the shade

[VadeRetro]

Now that a Christian uses the evolutionists own statements against them you come out and deny what you folk have been saying all along.

He's Jewish and no YEC. He's all for synthesis. You're pretty far off base tonight, even for you.

[gore3000]

Repetition is not backing up.

Yup, and you continue to evade the point that evolutionists have been saying what Dr. Gerald Schroeder is saying in this article about when life started - without any evidence either. In fact you have said the same many times so your statement on this thread is totally hypocritical.

Here's more about their age from the University of Texas:

# These photosynthetic bacteria have extensive fossil records. The oldest known fossils are cynobacteria from Archean rock of western Australia, dated 3.5 billion years old. This is an amazing discover since the oldest rocks are only a little older that 3.8 billion years old! These cyanobacteria are among the easiest microfossils to recognize. FROM: Univ of Texas

Everyone is a liar except you. Big universities accept the word of one person without questioning too I guess. Oh, here's a fossil of it:

[VadeRetro]

Oh, here's a fossil of it: [Western Australia, 3.5 Ga]

Western Australia, 3.5 Giga-anna? That's based on Schopf and thus already answered by posts #54 and #55. How dumb are you willing to pretend to be?

[VadeRetro]

The PubMed Abstract. This is where it's at right now. You can comb the net all night for out-of-date museum websites based on Schopf's earlier papers and book, but that's just a microcosm of all those creationist quotes of George Gaylord Simpson describing the fossil gaps in 1944.

[Mike-o-Matic]

   Much better than waking up in a pool of somebody else's saliva, I guess.

Or not waking up at all!

[gore3000]

You can comb the net all night for out-of-date museum websites

So you are saying that all the stuff in these museums is bunk? That they all took the word of one man before making such a claim? That no one bothers to verify paleontological and dating claims? You are accussing the whole paleontological industry of being totally unscientific. If you are, that's fine with me. We are in total agreement for a change.

[Held_to_Ransom]

Now this creation was a very small point, and from this all things that ever were or will be formed

Yes, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or perhaps more to the point, how many galaxies?

I was cool with it till he got to the end.

[VadeRetro]

So you are saying that all the stuff in these museums is bunk?

I am saying that you are using outdated material which is based upon Schopf, Schopf, and only Schopf. I am saying that throughout this thread I have correctly characterized the status of Schopf's claim. I am saying that your supposed rebuttals are bunk. I am saying that your charges of falsehood, lying, nonsense are mere irresponsible blue spew--your trademark.