Joined: Sep. 2006
|Quote (afdave @ Oct. 08 2006,08:36)|
|THERE IS AT LEAST ONE PERSON WHO UNDERSTANDS MY ARGUMENT -- CHRIS HYLAND|
For those that don't, I'll try one more time ...
1) Evolutionists NEED Deep Time for ToE to work. This heavily influences the selection of rocks for RM Dating and the judgment of "good" and "bad" dates. Example: the RM "dating" of a human skull at Koobi Fora http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0816dating-game.asp
No one has ever observed these types of changes. Therefore the "Macro" part of ToE is not empirically verifiable.
I gave a response to the format you said would work for you.
And looking at point #1 above you still feel you need to discuss RM dating. Although I think using Koobi Fora as an example against RM dating is a bit disingenuous since even the experts in RM dating say that evaluating the consistency and co-genetic nature of aglomerated free-fall ash deposits (as opposed to magmatic flows) is difficult and can lead to erroneous results if not investigated in detail (which was done with this sample).
The last statement of your quote is revealing. Are you now taking the stance of Ken Hamm with any evidence? Will you argue with anyone that presents any evidence from the past whether there was eyewitness accounts? Will every aspect of argument go through the filter of "were you there"? Just wonderring.
Dave, can you answer my refutation of your mixing claim? I can move on to physics if we address this issue.