Freethought & Rationalism Archive

tgamble · 07-14-2002, 03:44 PM

I've just started working on a site refuteing this pile of crap. <a href="http://evolutionlie.faithweb.com/" target="_blank">http://evolutionlie.faithweb.com/</a>

No doubt I'll need quite a bit of help (if I actually get it done. There's tons of bullshit to workthrough.)

"In fact, there is a rock in Alberta that no evolutionist will discuss without
resorting to outright lying. This pre-cambrian rock is 350 miles long by 15
miles wide by 7 miles deep. How did it get to the top if it's one of the oldest.
Any scientist will tell you it's impossible to move something of this mass
through the earth. Also, there are no "up-thrust" marks anywhere on this
rock. In conclusion, there is no geologic table-just a tool for "duping"
innocents."

No references are given. No specific places. Nothing. What's the truth about this? Thanks!

Other "proofs" that I need help with are:

23. Laetoli Footprints -- These footprints were found in the same strata as
the "Lucy" bones. Johanson and other evolutionists have claimed these
were made by lucy-like animals, yet when studied by foot doctors, both
secular and non-secular, they found them to be completely human and
modern. At Glen Rose, Tx., several modern human footprints have been
found inside those of dinosaurs, much like a child of today would follow along
stepping into daddy's footprints. This proves man and dinosaur were
contemporary with each other until the world-wide flood. Evolutionists are
fond of say these prints have been disproven. This is an outright lie! The
exact opposite is true. They have been verified at every turn. By secular
science.

Evolution is dead with the advance of DNA technology.
Information is always made by some intelligent personal being. First, the
person must purpose, that is, originate in his mind, the concept of the final
product, goal, or outcome. Then, the person must, by reason, determine the
materials, tools, and specific sequence of steps needed to achieve the goal.
So, clearly, information always comes from intelligent process, from an
intelligent mind. In the case of the genetic information system it is very clear
that this must be a mind of supreme intelligence and a person of awesome
power.
Science News, Vol. 164 #24, December 10,1994, "Does nonsense DNA
speak it's own dialect?" reported extremely significant results of genetic
research. It cited the December 5, 1994 issue of Physical Review Letters
containing research by molecular biologists at Harvard Medical School and
physicists at Boston University strongly indicating that so-called "junk"
DNA, is not "junk" after all. Their study of 37 DNA sequences containing
50,000 base pairs from a variety of organisms showed that the "junk" DNA,
amounting to 90% of the human genome, is actually written in a special
language. Their tests showed "language like properties" in the "junk" DNA
indicating it to be distinctly different from the "code" of the genes.
Plainly, this development effectively removes the "junk" which evolutionists
have supposed is left over from eons of evolutionary trial and error, and
enormously strengthens the argument that God just plain made the genetic
code to begin with. It has been wondered just where in the genome are the
instructions that tell the genes when to "express" and when not to -- so you
get fingernails on your fingers and not on your elbows, for example. It would
seem the "junk" DNA, now discovered to have its own programmed
language, will turn out to be the place.

Nucleotides -- The various nucleotides essential for building RNA and
DNA molecules require radically different environmental conditions for their
assembly. Cytosine and uracil need near boiling water temperatures, while
adenine and guanine need freezing water temperatures. Thus, it seems
highly unlikely that under natural conditions all four building blocks would
come together under adequate concentrations at the same site.

39. Human fossils -- Human fossilized remains have been found lower in the
geographic table than dinosaurs. Not once, but 28 times so far. For a more
detailed explanation, click here . (Off site).http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/familytree.html

43. Dirac And Dicke's Coincidences -- In 1961, noted American physicist
Robert Dicke noticed that life in the universe is possible only because of the
special relationship among certain cosmological parameters (relationships
researched by British physicist Paul dirac 24 years earlier). Dirac noted that
the number of baryons (protons plus neutrons) in the universe is the square
of the gravitational constant as well as the square of the age of the universe
(both expressed as dimensionless numbers). Dicke discerned that a slight
change in either of these relationships and life could not exist. Stars of the
right type for sustaining life supportable planets only can occur during a
certain range of ages for the universe. Similarly, stars of the right type only
can form for a narrow range of values of the gravitational constant. For
more info on this click here . (off site)

45. Stability Of Protons -- This affects the quantity of matter in the
universe and also the radiation level as it pertains to higher life forms. Each
proton contains 3 quarks. Through the agency of other particles (called
bosons) quarks decay into antiquarks, pions, and positive electrons.
Currently in our universe this decay process occurs on the average of only
once per proton per 10 to 32nd power years. If that rate were greater, the
biological consequences for large animals would be catastrophic, for the
proton decays would deliver lethal doses of radiation. If the proton were
more stable, less matter would have emerged from events occurring in the
first split second of the universe's existence. There would be insufficient
matter in the universe for life to be possible.

(What this has to do with anything is beyond me.)

48. Sequential Ages -- You remember them from school, right? Stone Age,
Copper, Brass, Bronze, Iron, etc. Evolutionists would have you believe man
developed in this sequential order. No way! A quick look at middle-east
history and archaeology show that the Israelites possessed iron when
neighbors all around had brass. You remember the National Geographic
specials...The natives in Africa in the 50's and 60's were still using wood and
stone tools. Are they true man, or some throwback, or "missing link" ? How
about the American Indians of the 1800's? They used wood and stone tools.
Were they true man ? There are still tribes in South America that use wood
and stone tools exclusively. Are they living missing links ? This mentality is
what caused thousands of Australian Aborigines to be killed and their heads
cut off and shipped to museums in America. Scientists thought they were the
living "missing link". Their skulls were displayed to the public using this
argument of stone age technology. How sad.

50. Mica In Granite -- Anywhere on earth where granite is found, no matter
what depth (remember the geologic column is a lie-granite is found at
varying levels), it contains mica. Mica is composed of 3 different isotopes -
polonium-210, polonium-218 and polonium-214, without any p-238 halos. The
shortest lived of these isotopes has a half-life of .00162 seconds. The longest
half-life is 3 minutes. This means that the granite was fully formed and
"recording" in a maximum of 21 minutes and a minimum of less than 1/2
second. Granite did not take 300 million years to form as evolutionists would
have you believe. Science disproves this ridiculous notion. I don't profess to
understand this completely, so for a detailed explanation, click here. (off
site) For a simple to understand explanation on pleochroic halos, click here.
(off site)

How in blazes can a flood produce ripple marks, rain imprints etc.?

" 12. Soil layers -- This is another huge area of concern for evolutionists - the
lack of extensive soil layers in the fossil record. With all these layers
exposed for millions of years, you would expect to find numerous soil layers.
Even in extreme desert environments these should build up. Yet in the fossil
record there is very scant evidence of any build-up. Selected areas of soil
layers is exactly what you would expect for the geology of a world-wide
flood."

A single thought comes to mind here. Errosion. Is there something more or is this guy really that stupid?

Finally:

"16. Angular momentum -- The sun should have 700 times more angular
momentum than all the planets combined. Instead the planets have 50 times
more angular momentum than the sun. What this means is that this
planetary system was not made in an evolutionary pattern by particles
gravitating together."

Most of the other arguments are the usual bullshit about thermodynamics, transitional fossils, helium in the atmosphere etc.

[ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: tgamble ]

Christopher Lord · 07-14-2002, 03:51 PM

They better not be refering to a glacial rock (all over the place up here) outside a town I used to live by.

they say their rock is 350 miles wide though, which would mean its either not the rock im thinking of, they're inflating figures, or it doesn't exist.

If its not a glacial deposit, but does exist, it could be scowered rock. Thats basically what the entire Canadian shield is. Glaciers ripped all the soil off very old rocks, leaving VERY large solid 3-billion-year-old rock sheets that are many miles long.

This is just my informal knowledge of the subject, I could be gastly-wrong. I'll find some links to back this up in a sec.

[ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: Christopher Lord ]

Christopher Lord · 07-14-2002, 03:56 PM

Here we go:

<a href="http://www.canadianrockhound.com/fall97/cr9701403_corridor.html" target="_blank">http://www.canadianrockhound.com/fall97/cr9701403_corridor.html</a>

this is interesting and on topic (a comet impact which causes a local upshift of rock) <a href="http://miac.uqac.ca/MIAC/crater.htm" target="_blank">http://miac.uqac.ca/MIAC/crater.htm</a>

<a href="http://www.queticofoundation.org/rocks.html" target="_blank">http://www.queticofoundation.org/rocks.html</a>

I'm not finding ANYTHING (not even creationist material) on 350 mile rocks. I suspect they are pulling shit out of their ass.

Christopher Lord · 07-14-2002, 04:12 PM

Ah-ha!

found our 350 mile rock

The Lewis Overthrust. scroll down on this page: <a href="http://www.glacier.national-park.com/info.htm" target="_blank">http://www.glacier.national-park.com/info.htm</a>

Quote:

The mountains began as sediments deposited in an ancient sea and slowly hardened into thick layers of limestone, mudstone, and sandstone. About 60 million years ago, tensions building within the Earth's crust could no longer be contained, and the rock layers began to warp, fold and finally break. A huge slab of rock moved from the west and began to slide up and over the softer rock of eastern ranges. Eventually a 300-mile-long portion of the crust had been thrust more than 50 miles to the east. Throughout the world similar processes created other mountain systems, but few can rival the Lewis Overthrust of Waterton/Glacier.

The Lewis Overthrust of Waterton/Glacier provides scientists with insight about the massive dynamics of geologic processes that are going on today in other parts of the world, such as the Andes and the Himalaya Mountains. Because of the high degree of preservation of the original rock characteristics, the recent glacial sculpturing of the rocks, and the access by roads and trails, this major geologic structure in Waterton/Glacier Park is available for study by scientists from around the world.

The Lewis Overthrust began 170 million years ago, when a collision of the Earth s crustal plates elevated numerous mountain chains and formed the ancestral Rocky Mountains. Ever-increasing stresses near the end of this great event shoved a huge rock wedge, several miles thick and several hundred miles wide, eastward more than 50 miles. Large masses of relatively stronger rocks were shoved over softer and more easily deformed rocks. Erosion stripped away the upper part of the original rock wedge and exposed the rocks and structures visible in the park today. Rarely have rocks of such ancient age been thrust over rocks that are so much younger. The overlying Proterozoic rocks are over 1,500 million years older than the underlying Cretaceous age rocks. Thus, the Lewis Overthrust is significant as a structural feature, for the extent of lateral displacement (up to 80 kilometers), and because it has functioned to expose ancient sediments possessing an unparalleled degree of preservation. Of particular scenic and geologic note is Chief Mountain, a spectacular monolith towering above the prairie along the eastern margin of Glacier. Chief Mountain is an erosionally isolated remnant of the eastern edge of the upper plate of the Lewis Overthrust � a feature known as a Klippen ranking with the Matterhorn as an example of this structural and erosional phenomenon.

ps418 · 07-14-2002, 04:35 PM

Tgamble,

You're time would probably be better spent refuting something else. Regarding the Lewis Overthrust, see <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/lewis/" target="_blank">Thrust faults, by John Solum, </a> <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/lewis-overthrust.html" target="_blank">Geology in Error? The Lewis Thrust, </a> <a href="http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/othrust.htm" target="_blank">How Overthrusts Occur, by Glenn Morton, </a>and my own discussion of <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/thrust.htm" target="_blank">recent thrust faulting in Taiwan.</a> Regarding the soil layers that allegedly do not exist, I provide numerous references on my <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/pweathering.htm" target="_blank">weathering and paleosols bibliography, </a>and my article on <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/sap.htm" target="_blank">Weathering mantles and the Age of the Earth.</a>

Patrick

[ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: ps418 ]

KC · 07-14-2002, 04:40 PM

Quote:

43. Dirac And Dicke's Coincidences -- In 1961, noted American physicist
Robert Dicke noticed that life in the universe is possible only because of the
special relationship among certain cosmological parameters (relationships
researched by British physicist Paul dirac 24 years earlier). Dirac noted that
the number of baryons (protons plus neutrons) in the universe is the square
of the gravitational constant as well as the square of the age of the universe
(both expressed as dimensionless numbers). Dicke discerned that a slight
change in either of these relationships and life could not exist. Stars of the
right type for sustaining life supportable planets only can occur during a
certain range of ages for the universe. Similarly, stars of the right type only
can form for a narrow range of values of the gravitational constant. For
more info on this click here . (off site)

This is nothing more than a restatement of the basis for the Anthropic Principle, ie, that the parameters for the universe are so finely tuned for the existence of life that they had to be deliberately designed that way.

THis argument is absurdly easy to refute.Consider a lottery where the odds are 800 million to one against picking a winning number. Does picking the right number mean that the entire lottery was set up so that YOU could pick that very number? What are the odds that you would decide to pick that particular store, on that particular day, at that very moment, when the machine was calibrated just so? It couldn't be just a coincidence, could it?

Cheers,

KC

tgamble · 07-14-2002, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ps418:
Tgamble,

You're time would probably be better spent refuting something else.

Why?

Quote:

Regarding the Lewis Overthrust, see <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/lewis/" target="_blank">Thrust faults, by John Solum, </a> <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/lewis-overthrust.html" target="_blank">Geology in Error? The Lewis Thrust, </a> <a href="http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/othrust.htm" target="_blank">How Overthrusts Occur, by Glenn Morton, </a>and my own discussion of <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/thrust.htm" target="_blank">recent thrust faulting in Taiwan.</a> Regarding the soil layers that allegedly do not exist, I provide numerous references on my <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/pweathering.htm" target="_blank">weathering and paleosols bibliography, </a>and my article on <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/sap.htm" target="_blank">Weathering mantles and the Age of the Earth.</a>Patrick [ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: ps418 ]

They were talking about the Lewis overthrust? Didn't realize that.

tgamble · 07-14-2002, 04:45 PM

Another one.

"Sea Slugs --The sea slug is an truly impressive design that can be used
to show evolution false. Sea slugs feed on the sea anemone. What makes
this so impressive is that the anemones have poison harpoons that stick out
and would paralyze anything that came in contact with it. The sea slug
however, is able to put these darts inside its own stomach to store and use
for its own defense. You would have to have all of these abilities from the
start or the organism would die the 1st time it came in contact with the dart.
A slow evolutionary process would have been deadly!"

Sea slugs belong to the order Nudibranchiata and a search on google turned up nothing. Do all sea slugs have this ability? Are there any such slugs that have features that are allegedly impossible? Thanks.

ps418 · 07-14-2002, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tgamble:


Why?

Simply because the "50 reasons" page falls below the minimum quality that would merit a refutation, IMHO anyway. Glen Rose "man tracks," and all that . . . <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Patrick

tgamble · 07-14-2002, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ps418:
Simply because the "50 reasons" page falls below the minimum quality that would merit a refutation, IMHO anyway. Glen Rose "man tracks," and all that . . . <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> Patrick

Well, surely creationism falls below the minimum quality that merits a response!

By pointing out such incompetance, maybe some who are leaning towards creationism will think again. Worth a shot anyway.

07-14-2002, 03:44 PM	#1
tgamble Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: St. John's, Nfld. Canada Posts: 1,652	50 reasons to leave your faith (evolution) I've just started working on a site refuteing this pile of crap. <a href="http://evolutionlie.faithweb.com/" target="_blank">http://evolutionlie.faithweb.com/</a> No doubt I'll need quite a bit of help (if I actually get it done. There's tons of bullshit to workthrough.) "In fact, there is a rock in Alberta that no evolutionist will discuss without resorting to outright lying. This pre-cambrian rock is 350 miles long by 15 miles wide by 7 miles deep. How did it get to the top if it's one of the oldest. Any scientist will tell you it's impossible to move something of this mass through the earth. Also, there are no "up-thrust" marks anywhere on this rock. In conclusion, there is no geologic table-just a tool for "duping" innocents." No references are given. No specific places. Nothing. What's the truth about this? Thanks! Other "proofs" that I need help with are: 23. Laetoli Footprints -- These footprints were found in the same strata as the "Lucy" bones. Johanson and other evolutionists have claimed these were made by lucy-like animals, yet when studied by foot doctors, both secular and non-secular, they found them to be completely human and modern. At Glen Rose, Tx., several modern human footprints have been found inside those of dinosaurs, much like a child of today would follow along stepping into daddy's footprints. This proves man and dinosaur were contemporary with each other until the world-wide flood. Evolutionists are fond of say these prints have been disproven. This is an outright lie! The exact opposite is true. They have been verified at every turn. By secular science. Evolution is dead with the advance of DNA technology. Information is always made by some intelligent personal being. First, the person must purpose, that is, originate in his mind, the concept of the final product, goal, or outcome. Then, the person must, by reason, determine the materials, tools, and specific sequence of steps needed to achieve the goal. So, clearly, information always comes from intelligent process, from an intelligent mind. In the case of the genetic information system it is very clear that this must be a mind of supreme intelligence and a person of awesome power. Science News, Vol. 164 #24, December 10,1994, "Does nonsense DNA speak it's own dialect?" reported extremely significant results of genetic research. It cited the December 5, 1994 issue of Physical Review Letters containing research by molecular biologists at Harvard Medical School and physicists at Boston University strongly indicating that so-called "junk" DNA, is not "junk" after all. Their study of 37 DNA sequences containing 50,000 base pairs from a variety of organisms showed that the "junk" DNA, amounting to 90% of the human genome, is actually written in a special language. Their tests showed "language like properties" in the "junk" DNA indicating it to be distinctly different from the "code" of the genes. Plainly, this development effectively removes the "junk" which evolutionists have supposed is left over from eons of evolutionary trial and error, and enormously strengthens the argument that God just plain made the genetic code to begin with. It has been wondered just where in the genome are the instructions that tell the genes when to "express" and when not to -- so you get fingernails on your fingers and not on your elbows, for example. It would seem the "junk" DNA, now discovered to have its own programmed language, will turn out to be the place. Nucleotides -- The various nucleotides essential for building RNA and DNA molecules require radically different environmental conditions for their assembly. Cytosine and uracil need near boiling water temperatures, while adenine and guanine need freezing water temperatures. Thus, it seems highly unlikely that under natural conditions all four building blocks would come together under adequate concentrations at the same site. 39. Human fossils -- Human fossilized remains have been found lower in the geographic table than dinosaurs. Not once, but 28 times so far. For a more detailed explanation, click here . (Off site).http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/familytree.html 43. Dirac And Dicke's Coincidences -- In 1961, noted American physicist Robert Dicke noticed that life in the universe is possible only because of the special relationship among certain cosmological parameters (relationships researched by British physicist Paul dirac 24 years earlier). Dirac noted that the number of baryons (protons plus neutrons) in the universe is the square of the gravitational constant as well as the square of the age of the universe (both expressed as dimensionless numbers). Dicke discerned that a slight change in either of these relationships and life could not exist. Stars of the right type for sustaining life supportable planets only can occur during a certain range of ages for the universe. Similarly, stars of the right type only can form for a narrow range of values of the gravitational constant. For more info on this click here . (off site) 45. Stability Of Protons -- This affects the quantity of matter in the universe and also the radiation level as it pertains to higher life forms. Each proton contains 3 quarks. Through the agency of other particles (called bosons) quarks decay into antiquarks, pions, and positive electrons. Currently in our universe this decay process occurs on the average of only once per proton per 10 to 32nd power years. If that rate were greater, the biological consequences for large animals would be catastrophic, for the proton decays would deliver lethal doses of radiation. If the proton were more stable, less matter would have emerged from events occurring in the first split second of the universe's existence. There would be insufficient matter in the universe for life to be possible. (What this has to do with anything is beyond me.) 48. Sequential Ages -- You remember them from school, right? Stone Age, Copper, Brass, Bronze, Iron, etc. Evolutionists would have you believe man developed in this sequential order. No way! A quick look at middle-east history and archaeology show that the Israelites possessed iron when neighbors all around had brass. You remember the National Geographic specials...The natives in Africa in the 50's and 60's were still using wood and stone tools. Are they true man, or some throwback, or "missing link" ? How about the American Indians of the 1800's? They used wood and stone tools. Were they true man ? There are still tribes in South America that use wood and stone tools exclusively. Are they living missing links ? This mentality is what caused thousands of Australian Aborigines to be killed and their heads cut off and shipped to museums in America. Scientists thought they were the living "missing link". Their skulls were displayed to the public using this argument of stone age technology. How sad. 50. Mica In Granite -- Anywhere on earth where granite is found, no matter what depth (remember the geologic column is a lie-granite is found at varying levels), it contains mica. Mica is composed of 3 different isotopes - polonium-210, polonium-218 and polonium-214, without any p-238 halos. The shortest lived of these isotopes has a half-life of .00162 seconds. The longest half-life is 3 minutes. This means that the granite was fully formed and "recording" in a maximum of 21 minutes and a minimum of less than 1/2 second. Granite did not take 300 million years to form as evolutionists would have you believe. Science disproves this ridiculous notion. I don't profess to understand this completely, so for a detailed explanation, click here. (off site) For a simple to understand explanation on pleochroic halos, click here. (off site) How in blazes can a flood produce ripple marks, rain imprints etc.? " 12. Soil layers -- This is another huge area of concern for evolutionists - the lack of extensive soil layers in the fossil record. With all these layers exposed for millions of years, you would expect to find numerous soil layers. Even in extreme desert environments these should build up. Yet in the fossil record there is very scant evidence of any build-up. Selected areas of soil layers is exactly what you would expect for the geology of a world-wide flood." A single thought comes to mind here. Errosion. Is there something more or is this guy really that stupid? Finally: "16. Angular momentum -- The sun should have 700 times more angular momentum than all the planets combined. Instead the planets have 50 times more angular momentum than the sun. What this means is that this planetary system was not made in an evolutionary pattern by particles gravitating together." Most of the other arguments are the usual bullshit about thermodynamics, transitional fossils, helium in the atmosphere etc. [ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: tgamble ]</p>

07-14-2002, 04:35 PM	#5
ps418 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Louisville, KY, USA Posts: 1,840	Tgamble, You're time would probably be better spent refuting something else. Regarding the Lewis Overthrust, see <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/lewis/" target="_blank">Thrust faults, by John Solum, </a> <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/lewis-overthrust.html" target="_blank">Geology in Error? The Lewis Thrust, </a> <a href="http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/othrust.htm" target="_blank">How Overthrusts Occur, by Glenn Morton, </a>and my own discussion of <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/thrust.htm" target="_blank">recent thrust faulting in Taiwan.</a> Regarding the soil layers that allegedly do not exist, I provide numerous references on my <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/pweathering.htm" target="_blank">weathering and paleosols bibliography, </a>and my article on <a href="http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/sap.htm" target="_blank">Weathering mantles and the Age of the Earth.</a> Patrick [ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: ps418 ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-14-2002, 03:51 PM	#2
Christopher Lord Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Toronto Posts: 808	They better not be refering to a glacial rock (all over the place up here) outside a town I used to live by. they say their rock is 350 miles wide though, which would mean its either not the rock im thinking of, they're inflating figures, or it doesn't exist. If its not a glacial deposit, but does exist, it could be scowered rock. Thats basically what the entire Canadian shield is. Glaciers ripped all the soil off very old rocks, leaving VERY large solid 3-billion-year-old rock sheets that are many miles long. This is just my informal knowledge of the subject, I could be gastly-wrong. I'll find some links to back this up in a sec. [ July 14, 2002: Message edited by: Christopher Lord ]</p>

07-14-2002, 03:56 PM	#3
Christopher Lord Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Toronto Posts: 808	Here we go: <a href="http://www.canadianrockhound.com/fall97/cr9701403_corridor.html" target="_blank">http://www.canadianrockhound.com/fall97/cr9701403_corridor.html</a> this is interesting and on topic (a comet impact which causes a local upshift of rock) <a href="http://miac.uqac.ca/MIAC/crater.htm" target="_blank">http://miac.uqac.ca/MIAC/crater.htm</a> <a href="http://www.queticofoundation.org/rocks.html" target="_blank">http://www.queticofoundation.org/rocks.html</a> I'm not finding ANYTHING (not even creationist material) on 350 mile rocks. I suspect they are pulling shit out of their ass.

07-14-2002, 04:45 PM	#8
tgamble Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: St. John's, Nfld. Canada Posts: 1,652	Another one. "Sea Slugs --The sea slug is an truly impressive design that can be used to show evolution false. Sea slugs feed on the sea anemone. What makes this so impressive is that the anemones have poison harpoons that stick out and would paralyze anything that came in contact with it. The sea slug however, is able to put these darts inside its own stomach to store and use for its own defense. You would have to have all of these abilities from the start or the organism would die the 1st time it came in contact with the dart. A slow evolutionary process would have been deadly!" Sea slugs belong to the order Nudibranchiata and a search on google turned up nothing. Do all sea slugs have this ability? Are there any such slugs that have features that are allegedly impossible? Thanks.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.