Joined: June 2007
|Quote (VMartin @ Sep. 10 2007,11:42)|
|Before adressing nonsenses about the color perception (Why "knowledgeable evolutionists" do not read more about the complicated problem of the perception of colors and always try to defend completely nonsense green = white - red?) some words on topic.|
According Buffon <<Histoire de la Terre>> from the midst 18 century the Earth was 75.000 years old. Charles Lyell in 1830 estimated the time of rocks to 230 millions years. Helmholtz and Kelvin estimated 100 millions years of the Earth as exaggerated.
I don't know if the nowadays estimation 5,4 mrd years is the final one and no other changes are possible.
But preliminary scientific dating of Cambrian explosion or mammalian "radiation" in Eocene is something I take for granted.
Because Darwin himself didn't suppose the Earth to be 5,4 mrd years old the question of the exact age of the Earth has no relation to mechanisms that govern evolution of life.
What I disagree is the neodarwinian explanation of evolution of organisms. On my view natural selection play no role in it.
Actually, white - red is a light blueish color.
Hey VMartin, that monitor your using, do you know how it creates those "complex colors"? By combining red, green, and blue.
Ever used a digital camera? Know how it perceives those "complex colors"? By using pixels sensitive to red, green, and blue and combining them.
Know how all color images on a PC store that complex color data? As red, green, and blue channels. They are combined when the image is displayed.
To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris