(referring to evolution as a "religion")
Too bad your religion is based on faith and not true science as you wish it to be.
17 comments
You might want to update your knowledge of rocks and fossils by about 180 years, duh.
In the early 1800 he became very rich digging canals because he realised there was a specific order to the layers of rocks and fossils under England.
By examining the fossils in the topmost rocks he knew ahead of time what kind of rocks that were below them that he would have to dig through to make a canal. By knowing his digging expenses ahead of time he could dig canals more efficiently.
Smith didn't know or care about the age of anything, he was only concerned with the expence of digging trenches through rock.
150 years later the lying fundies turned this into date the rocks with the fossils and date the fossils with the rocks.
They're not only centuries behind the times, they are also lying about the antique science.
Ok. You got us. We made up the whole layer/fossil dating thing and it's completely circular. We can not, by any means whatsoever, determine the age of a single fossil in the entire world, nor the age of a single rock.
Now, can you please explain why, without any dating at all, we can still show a clear progression of the fossil record? Why is A always below B ? Why is B always below C is always below D is always below E is always below F ... and so on, no matter where they are found in the world?
No, "it was sorted by the flood" is bullshit. Floods don't work that way. Aside from that, we can tell the difference between layers laid down in water and layers laid down on land. And sometimes, you get a land deposit below a water deposit.
ever found one?
This is as stupid as saying, "How do we know what time of day it is? By whether or not we've had lunch. How do we know when it's time for lunch? By what time of day it is." There are many other ways to date fossils and geologic layers, and it is possible to date fossils by the layer they're found in, plus we also know what each layer is by what fossils are commonly found there. But that's not the ONLY dating method used.
And please explain why the simpler fossils are found lower down in the older strata while the more complex fossils are always found higher up in the newer strata.
Screw it, we have the fossils, we win.
:::facepalm!.....Wow, Oboehner, how could they have missed it? All of those fancy-pants PHds who think they're so smart, and it took YOU coming along to point out the silliness of relying solely on the positions of layers and fossils to validate each other's ages. Oh, wait....
"how do we know the age of the geologic layer?"
Radiometric dating.
{Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geochronology because 2 seconds of searching is all O-boner is worth.}
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
