SCIENCE: -- "observational science" vs "historical science" vs ... science.

Are you certain you aren't actually talking about religion? because this post accurately describes religion, not any branch of science, biology or otherwise. I think you are attributing to the TOE what you actually see in your faith, not what you actually know about evolution and the study thereof. This belongs in the comments section of Youtube on a VenomfangX video, not here with educated people. That should tell you something..... Well, it would if you bothered to think about it for yourself instead of being scared of it. Again, save this crap for Youtube comments. You don't actually think this and you know how bonkers it sounds. I mean, really, a scientific theory that, at its core, serves to do nothing more than explain the diversity of life has diddly to do with culture, dignity or social anything. Again, I think you are confusing yourself for an evolutionist and you think you are speaking to a creationist. How can science misenterpret ANY of that stuff if it uses those interpretations to create things not evolution related? How can you interpret something wrong, yet still successfully and repeatedly use those interpretations in other aspects of life?At any rate, you need to recruit some help. I actually applaud you for sticking around being basically the only creationist here. I just wish you would argue more honestly and with more thought and less venom.

If not through the use of geology, how do you propose we go about finding the age of the earth? You've got to appreciate actually testing rocks, right? Certainly you've got a method to actually test the age of the earth using things we find buried in the earth or, better yet, things the earth is actually made of.

You're on this website ALL DAY LONG, EVERY DAY. I am near to asking Percy what your message per day rate is. Perhaps you should spend some of your internet time learning instead of arguing or preaching so you can maybe back up your assertions instead of continually claiming that you've not got the time or that you haven't put much thought into it.

So if DA wasn't mauled by a lion in the middle of nowhere it can't be proven one way or the other since it is not possible for anyone to have witnessed it? But if he wasn't mauled at a zoo, that changes everything because zoos carry the possibility of witnesses?

This should be sufficient to give your ass the boot. You show time and time and time and time again that you have no wish to so much as even read the messages people write in response to you. You are not here for discussion.Why are you here really? Why are you even allowed here? I am genuinely perplexed because it's not even funny anymore. It's pathetic. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : BIG off-topic banner.