• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Are dinosaurs really 65m years old?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Why do people assume that the commonly given age of 65m for dinosaurs is accurate? I don't. The bible makes a whole lot more sense than evolution to me now that I've read up on evolution and how it isn't possible for life to come from nonlife.

Aren't evolutionists unable to explain how life came from non life?

This is very blatant trolling in OT. You already troll enough in P&N. Please confine your trolling to there. -Admin DrPizza
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Trollololooloolollololololololololooloolollolololololollolololololololooolololololooloolollololololololololooloolollolololololoolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololooloolollololololololololoolool
 
Last edited by a moderator:
im_a_dinosaur_rawr-1738.jpg
 
Scientists do attempt to explain how life came from non-life with abiogenesis.

The problem with that is all the experiments either:

1) Involve an intelligent scientist
2) Require millions of years and/or a time machine

So you have to pretty much take it on faith that life arose spontaneously from the chemicals and energy present on early earth. There's no way to conduct sound science that proves the timeline. Evolution that requires millions of years is not a testable scientific theory, it is proposed history.

Someone will post the font color-change paragraph as a visual analogy, but it's not comparable, since there is no way to directly observe or test past events. You have to make assumptions about (i.e. put faith in) past events regardless of whether you accept the current scientific chronology or biblical chronology.
 
Last edited:
Anarchist420 said:
Why do people assume that the commonly given age of 65m for dinosaurs is accurate? I don't. The bible makes a whole lot more sense than evolution to me now that I've read up on evolution and how it isn't possible for life to come from nonlife.

Aren't evolutionists unable to explain how life came from non life?
Click to expand...

Really? What's your proof?
 
Anarchist420 said:
Why do people assume that the commonly given age of 65m for dinosaurs is accurate? I don't. The bible makes a whole lot more sense than evolution to me now that I've read up on evolution and how it isn't possible for life to come from nonlife.

Aren't evolutionists unable to explain how life came from non life?
Click to expand...

Troll troll troll your boat...
 
Bryophyte said:
Good grief.

So if life can't come from nonlife, how exactly does creationism work?
Click to expand...

An argument is that life was created. That doesn't rule out evolution of course because once you add the yeast so to speak, it grows and changes independently. Of course I have no clue why things started, but Jesus didn't ride no tyrannosaurosesses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top