Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Location
    Somewhere in Idaho

Contact Information

  • Homepage

TheWhiteRaider's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. First Few chapters I could realy care less. This isn't my choice of info anyways. The book Tornado in a Junkyard is one of the best. It is Writen by James Perloff who was once a evolutionist. Did I say they don't believe evolution is true? No I said they don't prefer neo-Darwinist views. I notice though that some of the older scientist are moving from neo-Darwinism. I know Steven J. Gould(Spelling?) has alreay dumped it. A note as well is that I have found 4 different sources that quote the same part from NewsWeek. So now I am curious. I will look for this copy of NewsWeek as well. I think the CDA library has every copy of NewsWeek so I will make a point of going there. If I should find it I will give it to you. I do have a scanner so all I would need is an e-mail address. Here is a quote. The man is an evolutionist at the meeting btw. "[Evolution] is undergoing its broadest and deepest revolution in nearly 50 years . . Exactly how evolution happened is now a matter of great controversy among biologists . . No clear resolution of the controversies was in sight [at the meeting]."—*Boyce Rensberger, Macroevolution Theory Stirs Hottest Debate Since Darwin,' " I do like the topic. Just wish I had a little more info to give. You assume that they would come out and tell you. I know someone who over heard their biology professor talking in his office and I quote him "All that stuff I said out there was complete crap. I know it wasn't true. I only teach it because that is what they want to hear." For legal reasons I can say his name here. Some people care more about their reputation than the truth I noticed anyone who tries to look from some other answer besides evolution is often discredited and bashed upon. You forget that they are human and they can lie. I mean who knew President Clinton was in bed with another woman. Almost no one! So did that mean it wasn't true? My point is don't take everything at face value there may be more under the surface. I think someone was planning on running the monkey on the type writer experiment using a supercomputer. I remember seeing it somewhere I will have to look for it. *sigh* So much to look for so little time. I read it and not once did they tell you how they dated it. Only that it has been dated at 160,000 years old. So how did they do it? Not even as much as listing a RA dating method. Even in the original news report. Just pointing that out. Here is one question I want answered. How could amino acids form in an oxygen rich atmosphere? Oxygen destroys lone amino acids. Only when it is in protein form is it safe. By the way this has been known since 1950's so don't go off on how I know that. I can pull up some literature on it later, but now it is 11:00 PM and I can't keep my eyes open so I am off to bed. I am also sorry for any spelling errors. I know there are most likely some in there, but my brain isn't working and I can't fix them as of now.
  2. OH man this thread is still going?!!!!! About 4-5 months I have been gone and this is still going!!!!!!!!!!!!
  3. Well I see this is still goiong on even though I have been away from this forum for who know how long. Something I have found for all you Neo-Darwinist (People who believe that Evolution came about by mutations) Have any of you heard of the 1980 Evolution Conference held in Chicago? That is when 150 of the top evolutionist from all over the world got together to hear about the evidence against evolution. The outcome of this was that over 65% said, "...that the neo-Darwinian mechanism could no longer be regarded as scientifically valid or tenable..." Newsweek (November 3, 1980) So while it does not disprove Evolution completely it does say that the popular view of evolution is not upheld by the P.H.D. guys. I got a site for you guys to check out. It isn't the best, but it does have some useful info. You might have alot of reading to do though(About 1000 pages worth) I gets better in some of the later chapters. http://www.evolution-facts.org/c01a.htm
  4. Boy it has been a long time. Ah hem... I hope you guys know that top evolutionist no longer believe that mutations is how evolution happen. I found this... "Chicago Evolution Conference (1980). While the newspapers, popular magazines, and school textbooks emblazoned evolutionary theory as being essentially proven scientifically in so many ways, the evolutionary scientists were discouraged. They knew the truth. The Switzerland, Wistar, and Alpbach meetings had clearly shown them theirs was a losing cause. However, in yet another futile effort, in October 1980, 160 of the world’s leading evolutionary scientists met again, this time at the University of Chicago. In brief, it was a verbal explosion. Facts opposing evolution were presented, and angry retorts and insults were hurled in return. The following month, *Newsweek (November 3, 1980) reported that a large majority of evolutionists at the conference agreed that the neo-Darwinian mechanism (of mutations working with natural selection) could no longer be regarded as scientifically valid or tenable. Neither the origin nor diversity of living creatures could be explained by evolutionary theory (*Roger Lewin, "Evolutionary Theory Under Fire," in Science, November 21, 1980; *G.R. Taylor, Great Evolution Mystery, 1983, p. 55)." And you want to fight with radio active rocks? "Radioactive Halos Disprove Molten Earth Theory (1986). Robert V. Gentry carried on research into radiohalos in granite for years, but was discharged from Oak Ridge Research Laboratory in 1982 because he testified in defense of Arkansas State at the above-mentioned trial. He then put his years of research findings and professional articles into a book (Creation’s Tiny Mystery, 1986). In brief, billions upon billions of polonium 218 radiohalos are in granite, yet each halo was formed in less than 3 minutes. There is no way the halos could get in there after the granite was formed, yet the granite had to be solid when the halos formed. This means the granite was created solid in less than three minutes! Since granite is the basement rock under every continent, it would be impossible for the earth to once have been a molten mass as conjectured by the evolutionists. Interestingly enough, granite can be melted; but it will reform into rhyolite, never into granite. " Source http://www.evolution-facts.org/ I also saw somewhere a professer's reserch on half-lives which would suit this thread very well.
  5. I think for Reference I better put down the C-14 method. C-14 is made when radiation enters the atmosphere(I don't know what the exact chemical reaction is, but We don't need the details there) The ratio of C-14 to C-12 is 1-1,000,000,000,000 Plants absorb C-14 and C-12 and animals get C-14 and C-12 from eating other plant and animals. When the plant or animal dies the C-14 starts it's radio-active decay. They compair C-14 to C-12 in order to get a date. THe limits on C-14 dating is that 1. It may only be used on once living things 2. C-14's full-life(Time it takes for almost no useable C-14 is left) is 50,000-60,000 years. (And please anyone if I forgot anything about this pleaes correct me.) Read a quote by J.Gordon Ogden,who is a director of a radiocarbon lab. I find myself increasingly distressed that users of Radio Carbon dates fail to understand or appreciate what the quoted figures realy mean... all that a date represents is a "best estimate" of radiocarbon content of the sample received by the laboratory. It includes none of the sampling or physical and biological errors sources mentioned earlier... 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.-"The use and Abuse of RadioCarbon dating" Annals of the New york Academy of science 288(1977): 173 -I got more, but I have to go with my brother to a doctor apointment so I can't finish it now.
  6. I have sent the prizes. I will do this again, but first I need to get more credits. THanks for playing.
  7. DING DING DING! WE HAVE A WINNER! Correct awnser: Pattern Matt-Liell 1st. Lost Welshman 2nd PhantomHelix 3rd. I will give some consolation prizes to 2nd and 3rd.
  8. No. Hint ABABABABABABABABABABAB. What do you see in this?
  9. No, yet we use it to read. By finding these we see meanings. No, I can't think of anything it can do with energy. Hints Red and blue,Red and blue,Red and blue.
  10. You can anwser still. I said one question (i.e. Is it red, Can it be eaten, Is it alive, ect.), but if you want to drop out I can P.M. you the anwser.
  11. No. Good guess though. Light may be used to create this though.
  12. Extra hints. It can be made with colors and your eyes often see it better than something with out it.
  13. SO far no-one has got it.(By the way when I mean credits I mean all of mine:).) All of you may ask questions about it for extra hints. Only one per person.
  14. Bush did not intend on killing civilians. Besides what about Clinton bombing Bagdad? Five words and a quote:Notice the "Anything that has nothing to do with burning " in my post? There may be burning solutions in the future, but some uses my never be gone for oil You mind not ragging on Christains? I don't like the whole Iraq deal anyways. In the media we heard Osama bin Laden,Osama bin Laden,Osama bin Laden,Osama bin Laden,Osama bin Laden,Osama bin Laden,Osama bin Laden,Osama bin Laden,Osama bin Laden,Sadam. I don't even know why the jump. I havent been pleased with it either. Besides did you know the U.S. gets most of it's oil from somewhere else?(If I had a map in front of me I would write the name down, but I don't speak Spanish so I don't even want to try to spell it.) That and illegal experiments. History Channel's "Why can't we kill Sadam"(Or one of the other history channel specials) and from the mouth of someone who has been through it. Any questions? I also think we need the army's help with the mexican boarder. Men with Ak-47s in full cammo have come across illegaly and even shoot dead park rangers and we aren't doing anything about it!
  15. Who ever guesses this riddle gets alot of my credits(Seeing how I don't use them that much.) Ok here it goes What is it that goes back and forth or forth and back. It may go one, two, skip a few.It is every where yet you can not feel them yet blind people use it to read. One question per person. Guess as many times as you want.
  • Create New...