Volcano Girl wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 3:59pm:
GoodScienceForYou wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 1:39pm:| Please show all of us the scientific methods used to test fossils? Show us the scientific methods used in any part of the "theory of Evodelusion"? |
|
Dating of fossils or identifying the species? Please be specific, you say you've got all this scientific study under your belt so lets see it in action. There is no theory of evodelusion, there is the Theory of Evolution but as i said earlier i'm going to stick to my strengths and deal with the Geology. So i can go through dating methods, which i'll do in the other thread, as for identifying fossils i'll have to handle that with glowingape as it's a cross specialism thing and from what i gather he/she is a Biologist. |
|
The dating methods for dating fossils is unproven, assumptions. If you were to die today, and you fell into a watering hole (common place for fossilization), as time goes on and you are fossilized in less than 1000 years..... The sediment you fell in were to turn into compacted stone as is the normal case. Then in less than 1000 years your fossil would be dug up, using these "modern" radiometric dating, you would be dated as the age of the ground you fell in, which could be dated at many millions of years. This is why this method is ridiculous. This is why there are so many logical problems with the fossil record. You cannot date a replacement or recrystallization fossil at all. There is no tissue there, no carbon and no way to date. Assumptions are worthless for anyone who is seeking to find out what really happened.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s2U7EsJ1QQ
If we have 90% of the fossils found of vertebrate species (non bird) and some of those fossils are 110 million yrs old by this messed up dating system and the look the same today, then; 1/ fossilization is common 2/ evolution is ridiculous.
Other scientists show that there are flaws in using radiometric dating that are not considered. The main one is the assumption that life, space and time, minerals, have remained the same as they are now for all time. If you are living in a time warp and the only reference you have of time is from "your" time warp, then you will assume that the universe was stabilized at the instant it was established. That is ridiculous to assume that. There was a constant flux and many fusions taking place over who knows really how long of a time. It could be 10,000 years or 100 billion or 10 trillion years, and you would not know because of the constant manufacturing of minerals from fusion after the initial explosion of the big bang (which I am inclined to think of as plausible).
There have been many historically false dates made by these methods. At best it is extremely poor. It was because of many fossils that are obviously not dated even "ball park" close that caused me to look deeply into this radiometric dating. When I started my studies it was called radiation dating, by the way. I am 61 years old, 62 in a couple of months. Science has been my life, because it is what I do, my passion. Assumptions, make this whole fossil dating a logical fallacy and the fossil record is a mess because of it.
The closest thing to dating is by the layers of strata and by looking at the plates, but that has to have a reference point to start from. This makes dating by strata or ice layers, just another guess.
If you have 10,000 years ( a stretch ) of known time and space, with only about 6,000 years of almost recorded histroy of humans as your reference, and you use that for your way of establishing calibration for radiometric standards, then you cannot stretch that out to more than 100,000 years with any accuracy. The farther you go back in time, the less accuracy.
To illustrate this point. You are looking at a dark road on a moonless night with a tiny flashlight. You can see 6 inches of road with it, and from that 6 inches of what you can see, you
believe you can project that road to be the same for 47 miles. This is the insanity of accepting assumptions. The accuracy is .0000026 or 2.6 X10
-7As to the accuracy of what these fossils are , you are relying on the judgement of delusional people, with agendas and deeply held beleifs to inflict those beliefs on the fossils.
They think because they have degrees in bogus fields, that they can brainwash you with the same delusional crap they were fed. These are the priests of this Evodelusionism religion.
I realized this when I was 16 years old. I told myslef, it was ridiculous that these fools can look at distorted rocks and come to conclusions. Now they can use a toe bone and reconstruct an entire creature, but that is some of the feculence they do. It is impossilbe to take a warped and distorted fossil of some hominid (or any smashed and distorted creature) and create what this creature looks like, because they don't have a clue as to the muscle structure, density of skin tissue, how the tendons attached and the numbers of tendons and the fossil is obviously distorted. They can only make "assumptions" based on what is available to them in modern times. It may be that those old creatures had 12 inches of flesh and 4 inches of fat tissue to keep them from frying in the sun or from freezing to death. They do not know any of the organic structures to start from.
As to the "tree of life" ( a religious icon ) it is bogus, because in order to classify anything, you must have DNA and that is the only way we would have to determine any associations or any ties between any creature. Just looking with delusional fools with agendas to "prove" evolution because they are brain washed is not evidence. It is actually evidence against evolution. No idiot believer is going to come between me an the truth of what happened.
I never accept someone's opinion as any form of fact. This entire religious pseudo science is based on opinions from belief and nothing else.
The fossil record is mostly a mass of conflicting data, falsely identified data, and it is obvious why. Until we actually have the tools to see what happened, this science is just a friggin religion of delusional weak minded brainwashed believers. This is the same as any cult and any of the old sciences based on assumptions from religious belief.
The "World Is Flat" syndrome has never left science because of crap like this. This is a mythological religion and nothing more.
If there is any validity to any fossil classification it is by accident.
Volcano Girl wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 3:59pm:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s2U7EsJ1QQ
GoodScienceForYou wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 1:39pm:| I have never seen it used at all in the "Theory of Evolution". The only thing that is proven absolutely is that evolution is not proven to be even science. Whatever you think it is, it is not science. |
|
Well points for getting the name correct this time, however thats as far as it goes. Evolutionary theory is much more developed and understood than our knowledge of how gravity works, so are you going to rant on about Gravitationaldelusionism? |
|
Actually Evodelusion is not understood
it is believed and perpetuated by con artists who don't know they are con artists but think they are scientists. If you had any objective reason you too would see this as obvious. It is forced fed to students, who are forced into submission by pressures of society and they are taught out of logic and reason, while being told they are the "logical ones". That is really sad to watch and read about.
The only thing they have is a belief, because there is NOTHING to back up this belief, not in fossils, not in DNA, not in any living creature we have now. There is nothing but religious belief in fantasy and no use of any standard scientific methodology.
There is only evidence of genetic stability and extinction, nothing else. If you can show me where any fish has become a human over some immense time as it became a reptile, then birds and mammals, I would love to see this absolute evidence. If you believe in things by inference, forced dogma, and peer and social pressures then you are not a scientist, but a puppet of other people's religious beliefs, backed by nothing.
By the way it is the law of gravity as it has been for centuries. It is because these idiots can't accept that gravity is a foundation of science, and they can't understand how it works, that these weak humans have lowered its status to "theory".
Do you realize how many sciences are established on gravity and that without gravity, sciences like physics, chemistry, and electricity, could never be established at all. There would be no "periodic table of the elements" without gravity as the basis of the table.
Without gravity, you and I would not have this conversation.
It is one of the fundamental parts of the universe required for the universe to have any structure. It is a foundational principle required for life.
Unlike Evodelusionism, which is not even testable by any scientific methodology, gravity is here and now and we can test it. There is no way to tell what is in the deep past with any accuracy, but you can measure all the effects of gravity in any experiment. Don't you know this? Why do you accept bovine feculence from people?
Yet idiots who are not able to understand how it works, because there is no way for them to understand it they degrade fundamental laws of nature, by their tiny feeble minds. It is the "law of gravity" and it can only be a fundamental law of science that has no cause humans can perceive. It just is!
Volcano Girl wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 3:59pm:
GoodScienceForYou wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 1:39pm:Show me the evidence for fish coming out of the water, turning into reptiles, birds, and mammals. Show me the mechanism for this magical b u l l s h i t.
Show me the repeatable scientific tests done that even suggest this crap? |
|
The evidence will be in taxonomy and transitional fossils, the mechanism is evolution and how we explain that is the Theory of Evolution. Again i think i will work with glowing ape on this one, i shall stick with all things geological and if my suspisions of him/her being a Biologist by specialisation is correct then i'm sure they'll step in then and help out. |
|
There is no such thing as transitional fossils. In order to have transitions, you have to show transitional features that are growing or in stages of growth. All we see in the fossil record are complete creatures fully developed with no partial arms or partial ribs etc.
Volcano Girl wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 3:59pm:
GoodScienceForYou wrote on Dec 30th, 2009 at 1:39pm:| This is the whole reason for this website. It is to allow all of you believers to produce the evidence then we can discuss it. |
|
The evidence has been produced, it's this little thing called peer review science, found in journals. I can not help if you refuse to accept this or if you refuse to explain to us which parts you find problematic so that we can attempt to help you come to grips with this. And save your 'you've all been brainwashed by evil scientists', it's like a bad broken record thats boring. If you want to reach out and save use shouting at us isn't the way to go. |
|
I have read over 20,000 papers on science and evolution and the only thing contained in them is a belief in evolution, with no evidence to back it. There are only opinions and nothing more. If you read carefully it is clear that the authors are brainwashed into belief and there is an "elephant" in the room with them constantly that does not allow any objective reason when it comes to this belief. You go and start reading, realizing that the belief is stronger than reality.
Good questions and responses. I like having a conversation instead of the crap that most Evodelusionists try to inflict on me. For the most part the Evodelusionists are nasty and will do anything to stop me from destroying their "life" that the build around bovine feculence, just like any preacher or high priest of bovine feculence religions.
