Because the scientists interpret the evidence under a confirmation bias. If they found a dino fossil next to a human fossil, they would just sweep it under the rug. I'm sure they've found human and dinosaur bones in the same layers, it just doesn;t make it to published articles.
[One post later...]
There are no actual layers, the geological timescale is pure fabrication. Sure, there may be pockets where certain animals are more prevelant, that's just due to the regions where those creatures lived before the great flood.
19 comments
That's what happens when you try to defend a lie at any cost. The only thing you can use is more lies, and it is inevitable that they will conflict with each other at some point. This guy is just more obvious about it than most, making obvious contradictions back to back.
If someone actually found a human skeleton next to a dinosaur skeleton he would be on the front page of most archeological and biological science magazines. He would get get a boost in his funding and recognition from all.(As log as it wasn't planted there to make it look like they lived together)
"Because the scientists interpret the evidence under a confirmation bias. If they found a dino fossil next to a human fossil, they would just sweep it under the rug. I'm sure they've found human and dinosaur bones in the same layers, it just doesn;t make it to published articles."You know, BD, just because you lack ethics doesn't mean that most scientists lack them too. Science has a reputation for finding factual answers to real world questions. Scientist get the right answers because most of them have integrity to the scientific process. They don't lie about their results.
[One post later...]
"There are no actual layers, the geological timescale is pure fabrication."
No, creationism is pure fabrication, the biblical Flood story is pure fabrication, the virgin birth is pure fabrication, but geological layers and geological timescales are supported by solid, clear, scientific evidence.
"Sure, there may be pockets where certain animals are more prevelant, that's just due to the regions where those creatures lived before the great flood."
There was no "great flood," therefore, any argument based on the "great flood" is without foundation.
See, the thing about scientists is that they AREN'T bound by tunnel vision and don't continue to believe in a theory after it has been disproven. If it were discovered that man and dinosaur were in the same strata, it would be well documented.
There are no actual layers, the geological timescale is pure fabrication. Sure, there may be pockets where certain animals are more prevelant, that's just due to the regions where those creatures lived before the great flood."
It's not that the animals are more prevalent. It's that they're always found buried in the same order. Any time we find armored, jawless fish and dinosaurs, the dinosaurs are always in a higher layer. Likewise, dinosaurs are always found buried lower than horses. We never find dinosaurs buried in the same undisturbed layer as early jawless fish or horses. With a flood, everything would be jumbled together.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
