Evolution 101- part 6: Hot Date with a Dead Fish

Remember, normal text is copied from Evolution 101 by the Understanding Evolution team! (No relation to the Understating Evil Lotions Team) http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

BOLD font is me, Rent A Friend 2000, being Bold.

Adding time to the tree

If you wanted to squeeze the 3.5 billion years of the history of life on Earth into a single minute,

Don’t try this at home.

you would have to wait about 50 seconds for multicellular life to evolve, another four seconds for vertebrates to invade the land, and another four seconds for flowers to evolve — and only in the last 0.002 seconds would “modern” humans arise.

Am I the only person picturing a man with a heavy german accent and long white labcoat screaming,“ARISE, MODERN HUMANS! ARISE!”

Oh, I am? Ok. Sorry. Moving on…

Biologists often represent time on phylogenies by drawing the branch lengths in proportion to the amount of time that has passed since that lineage arose. If the tree of life were drawn in this way, it would have a very long trunk indeed before it reached the first plant and animal branches.

The following phylogeny represents vertebrate evolution — just a small clade on the tree of life. The lengths of the branches have been adjusted to show when lineages split and went extinct.

 phylogeny 6

How we know what happened when

Let me restate for clarity, if you draw the above chart using ONLY creatures we know to exist (Even allowing their time scale and other assumptions about the fossil record) ALL of those horizontal lines go AWAY. But then, what evolution do you have left? None. That’s why those horizontal lines are there, despite being nothing but pure imagination. To see evolutionists who are experts in their field verifying this over and over, you need to check out Dr. Carl Werner’s “Evolution the Grand Experiment” HERE.

Also, where the vertical line stops, going up or down, ONLY tells us when the fossils (On evolutionary assumptions) were laid down. It does NOT tell us that the species did not exist before or after that time, or even that they do not exist today. Case in point- fossils tell us that the coelacanth (a fat flippered fish) went extinct (according to Evolutionary dogma) 65 million years ago. How do we know the fish went extinct? Because we do not find any fossils of this fish in more recent rock layers. But a funny thing happened in the early half of the 1900’s. We found some coelacanth- not in the fossil record, but swimming in the ocean. The fossils don’t tell us the whole story, because while the “fossil record” shows the fish disappearing, the fish himself tell us, “The news of my extinction has been somewhat exaggerated.” And if I may, I think Monty Python sums up my feelings on the evidence in the fossil record; “I will not buy this record- IT is scratched.”

Life began 3.8 billion years ago, and insects diversified 290 million years ago, but the human and chimpanzee lineages diverged only five million years ago. How have scientists figured out the dates of long past evolutionary events?

The real answer is an embarrassment which these authors probably don’t really know. I will provide just a tiny glimpse into the pants-down-at-the-prom shame which is the history of evolutionary dating methods.

Here are some of the methods and evidence that scientists use to put dates on events:

  1. Radiometric dating relies on half-life decay of radioactive elements to allow scientists to date rocks and materials directly.

The science of radiometric dating is a fairly new one- less than a century old. Suffice it to say, no one has been watching things decay for millions of years. So, how have they calibrated the system? First off, most don’t. The assumptions are unquestioned. Those that do, use things like fossils to calibrate the system by testing the radioactive elements found in them. But, wait! How do they know how old those fossils are without radio dating them? Simple- they are dated using the evolutionary world view.

But chemistry is a fairly reliable science, right? Do we have any cause to doubt the results of Radio Dating? Boy, do we. I could go on for pages with examples, but my favorite comes from right here in the good old US of A. When the lava at the top of Mt. St Helens was dated using these methods, we first off got dates that ranged from 300,000 to 2.8 Million years. That’s a HUGE margin- like measuring a line and getting either 1 mile long or 9 miles long.

But the best part about this lava flow they tested is this: We KNOW when the lava rock formed. How? We watched it happen in 1980. The rock was less than 30 years old. And this is not a new issue. Check out the date on this quote: “200 year old lava rock dated at 1.60 million to 2.96 billion years!” (See *Science, October 11, 1968; *Journal of Geophysical Research, July 15, 1968).

To go back to my analogy- that line we measured was neither 1 mile nor 9 miles- it was 6 inches long. Are you going to trust that measuring system? EVERY TIME we date volcanic rock we know the age of, it’s wrong by hundreds of thousands or millions of years. Why would we trust it to find the age of rocks we don’t know?

Even internally, these methods don’t agree with each other, and plenty of tests have shown that even the same method will get wildly different answers. A primate skull was once tested 42 times before they got the date they wanted. How did they know the first 41 were wrong? Because they have faith in evolution and the fabricated timeline it comes with! Because they already “knew” the age (based on evolutionary dogma) they “knew” the first 41 attempts to date it were wrong. Take a second and count to 41. I’ll wait… That’s a lot, right? 

Carbon 14 dating is just as bad. First, because even hypothetically its not reliable for anything older than 50,000 years, so when people say it has been used to prove dinosaurs are HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of years old, the point they’re making it not the one they thing they are. After that long, ALL of the C14 has decayed and there is nothing to test. But secondly, and more importantly, we cannot find anything on earth that has no C14 in it. This means, if the tests are to be believed, then NOTHING on earth lived more than 50,000 years ago. So much for the 5 million year old monkey.

Radiometric dating relies on half-life decay of radioactive elements to allow scientists to date rocks and materials directly.

Finally, sometimes organic things, like tree remains, can be found fossilized in rock and colaified, meaning that part of the tree is coal (Still organic, containing C14) and part of the tree is rock (no longer containing carbon). Even if you can explain the formation of such items with the evolutionary assumptions (you can’t) you’d still fail to get the radio rock dates and the C14 dates to agree. And that’s not merely my opinion as you can see here:“It may come as a shock to some, but fewer than 50 percent of the radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples in northeastern North America have been adopted as ‘acceptable’ by investigators.”—*J. Ogden III, “The Use and Abuse of Radiocarbon,” in Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol. 288, 1977, pp. 167-173.

But as this fabulous quote will show, getting the right date isn’t as hard as you would imagine- with a little imagination: “Professor Brew, briefly summarized a common attitude among archaeologists toward it, as follows: ‘If a C-14 date supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is completely ‘out-of-date,’ we just drop it.”—*T. Save-Soderbergh and *Ingrid U. Olsson, “C-14 Dating and Egyptian Chronology,” Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology, ed. *Ingrid U. Olsson (1970), p. 35 [also in *Pensee, 3(1): 44].

For more on this subject from a Canadian man wearing a pot on his head, see Ian Juby’s Crevo Rant on Dating Methods, HERE.

Join me next week for more.



About rentafriend2000
Rocking my 40's with a heart full of love and muffins, science and technology. Jesus loves me and wants me to totally rock! And I am here to help.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

A Bit of Orange

Biblical Apologetics made Friendly

Reluctantly Aging

One man’s futile struggle against inevitability

A Bit of Orange

Biblical Apologetics Made Friendly

RaF Ministries News

What's new at Rent-A-Friend Ministries

Bible Science Forum

Creation Evolution Cosmology

Superhero etc.


Creation Science 4 Kids

creation science worded for all of us

christian ammunition

He that dasheth in pieces is come up before thy face: keep the munition...fortify thy power mightily--NAHUM 2:1

Surprised by Logic

Logic for the ordinary Joe and Jane


WordPress.com is the best place for your personal blog or business site.

Rent-A-Friend 2000's Biblical Thinking and Good Times!

Part of the Creation Soapbox Apologetics Ministry

%d bloggers like this: