Prove to me creationism is real

[SRC]

no so thats not how science works, and thats not how it is done.

lol .. and where exactly did "science" come from? Just tell me for old time sake.

 

[SRC]

no see there is a difference:

one is established fact


one is pseudoscience/junk science

according to YOU .. which doesn't realy mean much to me, TBH

 

[All Else Failed]

Wiki sites are fun.

KBS Tuff shows the flaws of radiometric dating (Talk.Origins) - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

citing creationwiki is like citing something by Kent Hovind. Its pure propaganda.

 

[All Else Failed]

according to YOU .. which doesn't realy mean much to me, TBH

no you just don't understand basic science and how it works.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Then I suggest you read up on:


Radiometric dating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NO, since you know for sure, You give me the exact age. Not a Wikipedia contribution.

Prove it. :ninja

 

[All Else Failed]

lol .. and where exactly did "science" come from? Just tell me for old time sake.

tell me this, where did "religion" come from? You might stumble upon some insight here.

 

[gLing]

citing creationwiki is like citing something by Kent Hovind. Its pure propaganda.

So is wikipedia when you consider any monkey with a keyboard can add their two cents to any article.

 

[All Else Failed]

NO, since you know for sure, You give me the exact age. Not a Wikipedia contribution.

Prove it. :ninja

The exact, down to the day age is impossible to know. BUT we can KNOW how old it is withing a very small ballpark, which is incredibly good.

 

[All Else Failed]

So is wikipedia when you consider any monkey with a keyboard can add their two cents to any article.

no actually all articles on wikipedia need peer reviewed citations to be posted now.

 

[SRC]

tell me this, where did "religion" come from? You might stumble upon some insight here.

man wrote the bible .. man came up with science .. d you see some insight here.

It's all in WHAT and WHO you choose to believe. YOu on the other hand .. refuse to admit it .. you want to be right .. but you can't be right .. when you're right is base don the same thing you are fighting against .. something man "must" have come up with.

imo .. always has been .. always will be

 

[All Else Failed]

lmao you really really do not get how the scientific method works. We just happen to come upon all of these phenomena, science is simply a tool that we use to make sense of it all. The facts are there, we simple just need to stumble upon them.


This is sort of funny too, since you're been posting "flood theories" in this thread, you have to play by your own logic and admit they are wrong too!

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Then I suggest you read up on:


Radiometric dating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

no see there is a difference:

one is established fact


one is pseudoscience/junk science

Sorry to give you the bad news. Now...prepare yourself.

..........ready?

---------->Wikipedia does not = proof or established fact.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

So is wikipedia when you consider any monkey with a keyboard can add their two cents to any article.

===:ninja ((((tweeeet))))

Low blow gLing.

 

[All Else Failed]

Sorry to give you the bad news. Now...prepare yourself.

..........ready?

---------->Wikipedia does not = proof or established fact.

of course it doesn't, but considering there are peer reviewed, independently verified citations and sources all over the article, and seeing as how all credible scientific data matches up with the data in the article, the information I linked to you is good.

I simply use wiki because its a simple way of sending info to people.

 

[gLing]

no actually all articles on wikipedia need peer reviewed citations to be posted now.

Not all of them and there is nothing to stop me from altering any article including the one you posted. And who knows how long it would take somebody who really knew what they were talking about before they caught it. So you have no room to call any source another posts as propaganda or junk science considering where you get your information from.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

The exact, down to the day age is impossible to know. BUT we can KNOW how old it is withing a very small ballpark, which is incredibly good.

Give me the ballpark amount please.

 

[SRC]

lmao you really really do not get how the scientific method works. We just happen to come upon all of these phenomena, science is simply a tool that we use to make sense of it all. The facts are there, we simple just need to stumble upon them.


This is sort of funny too, since you're been posting "flood theories" in this thread, you have to play by your own logic and admit they are wrong too!

lol I can't be wrong OR right .. I'll NEVER know exactly how things happen (no one can/will) and anyne who thinks they do know exactly what happened .. is making up facts to support their own claims .. and I think I've stated this many times before right now.

I can only admit that all I or anyone else can do is assume and believe the religion they choose to support (science is a religion .. it has a following and believers and fanatics just like any "god" based faith does) .. YOU on the other hand .. refuse to admit that fact, yet cling to your man made theories/findings/facts as the gospel truth .. then try to turn it around and put heat on whoever starts putting heat on you ..

let's hear you say it then ..

 

[All Else Failed]

Not all of them and there is nothing to stop me from altering any article including the one you posted. And who knows how long it would take somebody who really knew what they were talking about before they caught it. So you have no room to call any source another posts as propaganda or junk science considering where you get your information from.

You can go to any other credible, scientific article published by an established researcher and see that they all add up.

 

[All Else Failed]

Give me the ballpark amount please.

4.54×109 years

 

[gLing]

You can go to any other credible, scientific article published by an established researcher and see that they all add up.

Unless of course it disagrees with what you said then it becomes "junk science" :smiley24: