What You Missed While Not Watching the Bill Nye and Ken Ham Creation Debate

Primary source references As a preface to this document, I want to point out that it is a shame that we have to continue to refute the same arguments that evolutionists keep bringing up over and over again in their attempts to argue against the fact of creation, which fact has been well established since the day the earth was created ex nihilo several thousand years ago. It is also a shame that the masses have bought all this based on some circular reasoning about fossils, where fossils tend to be found buried, similarities between various life forms, the presence of certain decay products in rocks, and other inherently speculative arguments about the past, based on phenomena that exist in the present. If I hope to accomplish anything, it will be to simply encourage critical thinking. One must get past the arguments ad populum that its popularity counts for something , ad hominem that if you attack the person making the argument, this counts for something , and especially ad baculum that there are people who have the clout to decree it as true , to ask the key questions and challenge the unsubstantiated assumptions and thinking of those who would hold to the evolution position. Today there are an increasing number of anti-creationist authors who are producing books and periodicals that make this relatively brief presentation insufficient to deal with all the points in dispute. Those defending creation today who don’t have the time to devote their life’s study to gaining expertise in all fields of inquiry must principally be prepared to think critically, logically, and challenge unsubstantiated assumptions made by these people. They must also keep a level head in the face of some vicious attacks and diatribes that will be directed against them, as is advised in the scriptures 1 Peter 3: By way of definitions, I want to point out that when I speak of “evolution,” I am referring to the popular contemporary use of the word, which in a nutshell is the belief that all life forms are related by ancestry, and that the first life form occurred spontaneously, all due to completely natural processes. When I speak of “creation,” I am referring to the inherently obvious fact that the origin of all life forms can be attributed to a creator who purposefully created them with planning and intent, and the documented fact that this occurred over the course of a week’s time several thousand years ago.

Radiometric Dating and the Geological Time Scale

Human timeline and Nature timeline Viruses are ancient. Studies at the molecular level have revealed relationships between viruses infecting organisms from each of the three domains of life and viral proteins that pre-date the divergence of life and thus the last universal common ancestor. This is the idea that viruses could have evolved from complex molecules of protein and nucleic acid before cells first appeared on earth. The virus-first hypothesis has been dismissed by some scientists because it violates the definition of viruses, in that they require a host cell to replicate.

Long ages is not evolution. Whether or not scientific dating methods are accurate has nothing to do with whether evolutionary theories work. However, in this article, we will learn that the time dating methods, which appear to stretch out the past to great lengths, are amazingly unreliable. Magical time.

By Lily Rothman November 24, The Australopithecus has been around for a while now—and so has our knowledge of that human ancestor. One of those big discoveries was the famous skeleton known as Lucy, who was found on this day, Nov. Two years later their team made an even more dramatic discovery. Not far from their first find, they [later] uncovered the fossilized remnants of a year-old female Australopithecus lying in a layer of sediment 3 million years old.

Unlike most other fossils of early man —a tooth here, a bone fragment there, occasionally a portion of a skull—this one comprised a good part of the skeleton. But the find left no doubts that she walked erect. The shape of her pelvis showed clearly that she was bipedal. A few years would pass, however, before the full importance of Lucy would become clear. Significantly, she dated to a period before hominids split into the brand that led to us and the one that led to extinction.

Lucy was small-brained, but could stand erect. Second, because Lucy is basically so primitive, man may have split from his ape ancestors much later than 15 million years ago, as is commonly supposed.

How Lucy the Australopithecus Changed the Way We Understand Human Evolution

Public Opinion Introduction The television, newspapers, and textbooks commonly proclaim, as though it were proven fact, that the earth is 4 to 5 billion years old. What is not commonly taught is how the scientists determined that age. What assumptions did they make? What evidence did they use? What evidence did they discard?

Beginning in the s, dating websites revolutionized the process in unprecedented ways, removing logistical boundaries of geography and time commitments. Fundamentally, the system subverted the traditional approach to romance.

Early history[ edit ] In Ancient Greece , Aristotle BCE observed that fossils of seashells in rocks resembled those found on beaches — he inferred that the fossils in rocks were formed by living animals, and he reasoned that the positions of land and sea had changed over long periods of time. Leonardo da Vinci — concurred with Aristotle’s interpretation that fossils represented the remains of ancient life. Steno argued that rock layers or strata were laid down in succession, and that each represents a “slice” of time.

He also formulated the law of superposition, which states that any given stratum is probably older than those above it and younger than those below it. While Steno’s principles were simple, applying them proved challenging. Over the course of the 18th century geologists realized that: Sequences of strata often become eroded, distorted, tilted, or even inverted after deposition Strata laid down at the same time in different areas could have entirely different appearances The strata of any given area represented only part of Earth’s long history The Neptunist theories popular at this time expounded by Abraham Werner — in the late 18th century proposed that all rocks had precipitated out of a single enormous flood.

It has been said[ by whom? This theory, known as ” Plutonism", stood in contrast to the"Neptunist” flood-oriented theory. Formulation of geologic time scale[ edit ] The first serious attempts to formulate a geologic time scale that could be applied anywhere on Earth were made in the late 18th century. The most influential of those early attempts championed by Werner , among others divided the rocks of Earth’s crust into four types: Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, and Quaternary.

Each type of rock, according to the theory, formed during a specific period in Earth history. It was thus possible to speak of a “Tertiary Period” as well as of “Tertiary Rocks.

What You Missed While Not Watching the Bill Nye and Ken Ham Creation Debate

Some paleoanthropologists lump Paranthropus robustus and other paranthropoids into the genus Australopithecus. They consider them to be a physically robust subgroup of australopithecines. Following that excavation, he dedicated the rest of his life to writing everything known about all of the early hominins. He completed this compendium work in He was 85 years old and ill.

Carbon Dating Gets a evolution. Human evolution is the lengthy process of change by which people originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million has been a lot of changes in the world of dating in the past 10 .

The online countdown clock races toward zero. Dramatic music with a heavy bass line begins to play. Hashtags sprout in Twitterspace: The epic Braveheart-Lord-of-the-Rings-style soundtrack intensifies. Only thing missing is a sweeping camera pan over the horizon as Frodo travels on toward Mount Doom. Ham and his PR team are firing away tweet after tweet about the debate and its importance. Nye, meanwhile, has tweeted about it only once.

Creation vs. Evolution

January Fossils provide a record of the history of life. Smith is known as the Father of English Geology. Our understanding of the shape and pattern of the history of life depends on the accuracy of fossils and dating methods. Some critics, particularly religious fundamentalists, argue that neither fossils nor dating can be trusted, and that their interpretations are better.

Other critics, perhaps more familiar with the data, question certain aspects of the quality of the fossil record and of its dating. These skeptics do not provide scientific evidence for their views.

dating of time in evolution Here is scientific evidence that the 19 dating methods, used to establish ancient dates, are not accurate. Evolutionary theory is a myth.

The Evidence for Evolution: Biogeography This site explains how the biogeography of organisms, which keeps closely related species in fairly close proximity, provides further evidence for evolution. The role of plate tectonics in determining geographic locations of organisms is also discussed. Hosted by Nova Southeastern University.

External Link Evidence for Evolution Biodiversity is a Guarantee of Evolution This transcript of an interview with Nobel Prize-winning microbiologist Werner Arber reveals his opinions about the origins of biodiversity and its evolutionary and ecological consequences. Other Resources Evidence for Evolution Biogeography This college-level text provides a thorough introduction to the principles of biogeography, and includes the original map of zoogeographic regions drawn by Alfred Russel Wallace.

Brown and Mark V. Other Resources Evidence for Evolution Crowding Innovation out of Evolution This “Research News” article examines the theory that evolution produces some threshold level of biodiversity and then diversification levels off as all the available “ecospace” gets filled. Kerr [Science A Biogeographic Approach This analysis shows how biogeographical and geophysical studies can inform each other, using the breakup of the supercontinent Rodinia during the early Cambrian as a case in point.

Language tree rooted in Turkey

As scientists will often claim something to be millions or billions of years old ages that do not conform to the Biblical account of the age of the earth , Christians are often left wondering about the accuracy of the carbon method. Carbon is an unstable, radioactive isotope of carbon As with any radioactive isotope, carbon decays over time. The half-life of carbon 14 is approximate 5, years. That means if you took one pound of percent carbon , in 5, years, you would only have half a pound left.

Isotopes, Radiometric Dating and the Geologic Time Scale: A short but clear explanation about radioactive isotopes commonly used for determining ages of rocks (with graphics) and putting numbers on the geologic time scale, extending it back before the occurance of abundant index fossils.

My friends call me Ape Jaw Evan. Click here to read about me and other media myths, frauds, and lies. The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of biology. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law is wrong. This web page will prove that the Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors.

This is why it is called a theory, instead of a law. The process of natural selection is not an evolutionary process. The DNA in plants and animals allows selective breeding to achieve desired results.


Can you observe evolution happening? Because for many species, humans included, evolution happens over the course of many thousands of years, it is rare to observe the process in a human lifetime. Usually only laboratory scientists studying quickly reproducing life forms, like single-celled creatures and some invertebrates, have the opportunity to see evolutionary change happen before their eyes.

Creation and Evolution: Time; Dating; Age of Things. The core issue in the entire battle has to do with time, dating, the age of things. Evolution follows the principle of time plus chance equals everything.

Under the current taxonomy based on genetic rather than behavioral criteria , the term “hominid” refers to members of the biological human family Hominidae: The chart at right shows the evolutionary chronology inputed to these biological branches. Ardipithecus, the common primate ancestor to paranthropines, australopithecines and humans, went extinct about 4 million years ago. Human evolution is a puzzle made up of thousands of fossil pieces.

The Chart of Human Evolution below shows the major pieces of that puzzle arranged in a likely solution. The tentative connections between species or time of extinction, indicated by a “? Yale University Press, See also “The Dawn of Humans. Human Origins and History to 10, BC. Dotted lines indicate the conjectural evolutionary lines of descent.

Different paleoanthropologists will connect these in different ways, while preserving the chronological sequence. Subsequent discoveries and reclassifications will have changed these numbers. The number of individuals is considerably smaller than the number of fossil specimens, because a specimen can be a single tooth, bone or bone fragment.

Evolution of Dating

Hi! Would you like find a sex partner? It is easy! Click here, registration is free!