Replies

If only carbon dating was reliable ...

It is. And yes, I've seen the creationist garbage which dishonestly tries to "prove" that it isn't. As usual, the creationists are either being stupid, or lying, or both.

then this could be interesting.

It is.

Then atheists, er evolutionists, would have a leg to stand on. Instead it's the same ole thing - crowing about nothing and no evidence to support it.

Actually, the "same ole thing" is the creationists coming onto science threads to spout their goofy conspiracy theories about "atheists, er evolutionists", without any real clue about the science they hysterically try to hand-wave away.

Believe what you wish!

Ignore the flaws of carbon dating.

It is NO coincidence that the laws of science do NOT support your hypothesis, okay Ill be kind "theory". It is also NO coincidence that ALL prominent evolutionists are atheists.

Next you be crowing about Mary Schweitzer of North Carolina State university who discovered SOFT CELLUAR TISSUE inside several T rex is REALLY 68 MILLION YEARS OLD!!!

Back in the lab Schweitzer and her technicians demineralized the dinosaur skeleton fragments and low and behold the 68 MILLION year old skeleton dissolved and TRANSPARENT vessels were left behind. It was soooo SHOCKING that they did it 17 times because they couldn't believe it.

There is NO way in the world that soft tissue would be in bones that are 68 MILLION YEARS old!

Of course you are free to believe that they are 68 MILLION YEARS old - even though, again this hypothesis denies reality and turns the laws of science on their head. It's no wonder that the U.S. is trailing other countries in science and math in the education arena ... nonsense like this 68 MILLION years old SOFT TISSUE is utter nonsense and THAT is what you base your premises on - evolution and outcome based science to fit your ridiculous world view - to hell with reality and I add common sense.