Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-11-2015, 03:11 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(24-11-2015 02:58 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(24-11-2015 02:53 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  So, wait.. piles of rock that have been forming for 470 million years... and the fossil is 3 million years?

470my is an estimate of when what is at the top of everest now was at the bottom of the sea. The 3myo fossils were not found at the top. It wasn't until 50my ago that India collided with the region and began the major uplift and the fossils indicate that the area they are in was still under water 3my ago.

It is interesting, and may even indicate some revisions to the timeline are needed (I'll leave that to the geologists), but you are comparing apples and oranges.
Oh. It is starting to make sense now. So basically the area we know as India today was underwater 470 million years ago. Then it became an island and began to drift northward. It collided with Asia around 50 million years ago. Is that accurate?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jason_delisle's post
24-11-2015, 03:21 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
Btw. I just wanted to make sure everyone knows that I am not trying to use the fossils in the Himalayas to "prove" anything. It was just simply something I came across and thought it would be interesting to share. I figured this thread would be the best place to post it. I am loving the discussion. Next topic on my list is who would win in a battle between Liono and He Man.


[Image: e66bc8257b18294f7781289888f24e58.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2015, 03:33 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(24-11-2015 03:11 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(24-11-2015 02:58 PM)unfogged Wrote:  470my is an estimate of when what is at the top of everest now was at the bottom of the sea. The 3myo fossils were not found at the top. It wasn't until 50my ago that India collided with the region and began the major uplift and the fossils indicate that the area they are in was still under water 3my ago.

It is interesting, and may even indicate some revisions to the timeline are needed (I'll leave that to the geologists), but you are comparing apples and oranges.
Oh. It is starting to make sense now. So basically the area we know as India today was underwater 470 million years ago. Then it became an island and began to drift northward. It collided with Asia around 50 million years ago. Is that accurate?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Formation+of+the+Himalayas

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
24-11-2015, 03:41 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(24-11-2015 03:33 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(24-11-2015 03:11 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Oh. It is starting to make sense now. So basically the area we know as India today was underwater 470 million years ago. Then it became an island and began to drift northward. It collided with Asia around 50 million years ago. Is that accurate?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Formation+of+the+Himalayas
Bwahahaha. I can't believe there was a video about that. Lol
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2015, 03:58 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+to+use+google.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2015, 04:01 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(24-11-2015 03:11 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  
(24-11-2015 02:58 PM)unfogged Wrote:  470my is an estimate of when what is at the top of everest now was at the bottom of the sea. The 3myo fossils were not found at the top. It wasn't until 50my ago that India collided with the region and began the major uplift and the fossils indicate that the area they are in was still under water 3my ago.

It is interesting, and may even indicate some revisions to the timeline are needed (I'll leave that to the geologists), but you are comparing apples and oranges.
Oh. It is starting to make sense now. So basically the area we know as India today was underwater 470 million years ago. Then it became an island and began to drift northward. It collided with Asia around 50 million years ago. Is that accurate?

The Himalayas are, at most, 40 my old, not 470 my old. They started to rise between 40 and 20 mya and are still rising.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
24-11-2015, 05:26 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(24-11-2015 03:10 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(24-11-2015 02:58 PM)unfogged Wrote:  470my is an estimate of when what is at the top of Everest now was at the bottom of the sea. The 3myo fossils were not found at the top. It wasn't until 50my ago that India collided with the region and began the major uplift and the fossils indicate that the area they are in was still under water 3my ago.

It is interesting, and may even indicate some revisions to the timeline are needed (I'll leave that to the geologists), but you are comparing apples and oranges.

Ah! So... some parts/areas/places/bits of the huge, geological area we're now talking about (Not just On'a-top Tongue) may/probably were doing their 'Reach for the sky' thing at different rates/times/etc. Hence, why it's all 'Geology'.

*Nods*

Cool, thank'e for the expansion/explanation. Thumbsup

Don't take my word for it, I'm just going by what I've read and I haven't studied it in depth (or height in this case!). I do know that the age of the rocks at the top of Everest doesn't have anything to do with when they started moving up from the seafloor. Also, since the 3myo fossils weren't found in those same rocks the implication that there is a major problem here is unwarranted.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2015, 07:38 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
The Bible has more than one passage that insists the entire world was covered in water, so a worldwide flood is part of the religion.

But the most logical choice? Not aliens. The most logical choice is that it's just a book. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Clockwork's post
01-12-2015, 01:22 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(24-11-2015 07:38 PM)Clockwork Wrote:  The Bible has more than one passage that insists the entire world was covered in water, so a worldwide flood is part of the religion.

But the most logical choice? Not aliens. The most logical choice is that it's just a book. Smile

and a bad story book at that
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Ace's post
01-12-2015, 02:01 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(01-12-2015 01:22 PM)Ace Wrote:  
(24-11-2015 07:38 PM)Clockwork Wrote:  The Bible has more than one passage that insists the entire world was covered in water, so a worldwide flood is part of the religion.

But the most logical choice? Not aliens. The most logical choice is that it's just a book. Smile

and a bad story book at that

It's got space wizards Consider

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: