Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Members Blogs
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nationalist
Public Chat and Announcements
General Chat in The Marcus Lounge.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tiger" data-source="post: 125768" data-attributes="member: 353"><p>Myles, I didn’t answer your question because it wasn’t a serious attempt at dialogue—it was a juvenile diversion from discussing the real issue: the origin of the universe. Both you and James have shown a consistent pattern of dodging meaningful conversation—especially when it comes to the creation of the universe, a topic you both introduced to this thread and yet contributed nothing to. This makes it painfully clear that you're not interested in actual discourse. If won’t answer my questions, then why would you expect me to answer yours? </p><p></p><p>That said, the age of the Earth, and more importantly, the methods and underlying assumptions behind dating fossils and rocks, is a subject worth exploring. However, I won’t waste time on it here, where your input is as vacuous as ever. Instead, I’ll address it on the Origins Thread, where you’re free to continue offering absolutely no value to the conversation, as per usual. </p><p></p><p>Now, while many who adhere to the Intelligent Design model of the universe may generally accept an old Earth (such as Stephen J Meyer from the video above), it’s still an interesting area to examine the actual methods used to date rocks and fossils—and among other things, how those methods have failed spectacularly when confronted with rocks of known, recent formation. </p><p></p><p>I'll be taking a look at Mount St. Helens, for example. Rocks from the 1980 eruption were dated to be hundreds of thousands, even millions, of years old—a laughable discrepancy given that we know the rocks were freshly formed. Then there’s Mount Pinatubo, where lava flows from 1991 were assigned absurd ages, far older than the eruption itself. The Mendenhall Glacier’s retreat exposed rocks that were dated to tens of thousands of years older than the glacier itself. And, of course, rocks from Kīlauea in Hawaii, freshly formed during ongoing eruptions, were dated to millions of years—an outright farce, I'm sure you'd agree.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tiger, post: 125768, member: 353"] Myles, I didn’t answer your question because it wasn’t a serious attempt at dialogue—it was a juvenile diversion from discussing the real issue: the origin of the universe. Both you and James have shown a consistent pattern of dodging meaningful conversation—especially when it comes to the creation of the universe, a topic you both introduced to this thread and yet contributed nothing to. This makes it painfully clear that you're not interested in actual discourse. If won’t answer my questions, then why would you expect me to answer yours? That said, the age of the Earth, and more importantly, the methods and underlying assumptions behind dating fossils and rocks, is a subject worth exploring. However, I won’t waste time on it here, where your input is as vacuous as ever. Instead, I’ll address it on the Origins Thread, where you’re free to continue offering absolutely no value to the conversation, as per usual. Now, while many who adhere to the Intelligent Design model of the universe may generally accept an old Earth (such as Stephen J Meyer from the video above), it’s still an interesting area to examine the actual methods used to date rocks and fossils—and among other things, how those methods have failed spectacularly when confronted with rocks of known, recent formation. I'll be taking a look at Mount St. Helens, for example. Rocks from the 1980 eruption were dated to be hundreds of thousands, even millions, of years old—a laughable discrepancy given that we know the rocks were freshly formed. Then there’s Mount Pinatubo, where lava flows from 1991 were assigned absurd ages, far older than the eruption itself. The Mendenhall Glacier’s retreat exposed rocks that were dated to tens of thousands of years older than the glacier itself. And, of course, rocks from Kīlauea in Hawaii, freshly formed during ongoing eruptions, were dated to millions of years—an outright farce, I'm sure you'd agree. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Name
Verification
What day comes after Saturday
Post reply
Latest Threads
B
WE IRISH ARE NOT PROTECTED AGAINST IMMIGRANT DISASES.
Started by BIG FAT HOOR
Today at 6:21 AM
Replies: 0
Health
Registrations now Open
Started by Declan
Wednesday at 9:18 PM
Replies: 6
Public Chat and Announcements
The Co-Op Has Been Formed.
Started by Declan
Tuesday at 7:29 PM
Replies: 3
Public Chat and Announcements
Fastway gone bust
Started by Anderson
Tuesday at 5:29 PM
Replies: 6
Economy
J
The Aisling O'Loughlin thread
Started by Jay Homer Simpson
Oct 27, 2025
Replies: 6
Public Chat and Announcements
Popular Threads
Ukraine.
Started by Declan
Feb 21, 2022
Replies: 15K
World at War
US Politics.
Started by jpc
Nov 7, 2022
Replies: 6K
USA
Mass Migration to Ireland & Europe
Started by Anderson
Feb 26, 2023
Replies: 5K
Nationalist Politics
C
🦠 Covid 19 Vaccine Thread 💉
Started by Charlene
Sep 14, 2021
Replies: 3K
Health
General Chat in The Marcus Lounge.
Started by Declan
Dec 30, 2024
Replies: 3K
Public Chat and Announcements
The Climate Change scam
Started by Anderson
Jul 29, 2022
Replies: 2K
Climate Change
Forums
Nationalist
Public Chat and Announcements
General Chat in The Marcus Lounge.
Top
Bottom
