Talking about something is not explaining it. The bible has no idea about the big bang nor what happened before, you chose to believe the bible, why? There are other religious books that also explain the universe by your understanding, why the bible? Why not Zeus? They also explain how the universe is created.

Evolution is a fact, you can say whatever you want but it's an extremely well documented fact.

 We are actually still evolving though, In 2007, a group of researchers looking for signs of recent evolution uncovered 1,800 genes that have only become prevalent in humans in the last 40,000 years, many of which are devoted to fighting infectious diseases like malaria. More than a dozen new genetic variants for fighting malaria are spreading rapidly among Africans. Another study found that natural selection has favored city-dwellers. Living in cities has produced a genetic variant that allows us to be more resistant to diseases like tuberculosis and leprosy.

Why don't you try to read before posting something like that? And no one said something must evolve within 1000-2000 years, some things take much longer than that to evolve, some may not evolve at all.

If evolution means the conversion, over time, of inorganic to today's human and other life, evolution is a complete lie. The truth is that, because of detrimental mutations (a beneficial mutation has never been seen), we are devolving.

The term "natural selection" indicates free will in nature. Has science been saying that nature is alive all along? That would indicate God.

Changes are due to cause and effect. They are programmed in. Nothing random ever happens. Every happening has at least one cause that makes it happen. There is no proof of even one random happenstance, but there are easily provable cause and effect operations acting all around us all the time.

Nope, badecker will not accept that either, what about fossils, there are fossils far older than 7000 years.

Potassium-argon dating, Argon-argon dating, Carbon-14 (or Radiocarbon), and Uranium series. All of these methods measure the amount of radioactive decay of chemical elements; the decay occurs in a consistent manner, like a clock, over long periods of time.
Thermo-luminescence, Optically stimulated luminescence, and Electron spin resonance. All of these methods measure the amount of electrons that get absorbed and trapped inside a rock or tooth over time. 
Paleomagnetism. This method compares the direction of the magnetic particles in layers of sediment to the known worldwide shifts in Earth’s magnetic field, which have well-established dates using other dating methods.
Biochronology. Since animal species change over time, the fauna can be arranged from younger to older. At some sites, animal fossils can be dated precisely by one of these other methods. For sites that cannot be readily dated, the animal species found there can be compared to well-dated species from other sites. In this way, sites that do not have radioactive or other materials for dating can be given a reliable age estimate.
Molecular clock. This method compares the amount of genetic difference between living organisms and computes an age based on well-tested rates of genetic mutation over time.  Since genetic material (like DNA) decays rapidly, the molecular clock method can’t date very old fossils. It’s mainly useful for figuring out how long ago living species or populations shared a common ancestor, based on their DNA.

And there are more methods, of course badecker will say all of them are false as usual.


Obviously badecker does not understand what a religion is, to call evolution a religion is to show how incredibly stupid and ignorant you are.

All methods for measuring time are based on the idea that the physics of nature have been operating like they do now, for all of time past. Since we don't know this simple thing about physics (if it always acted like it does now), there can be no factual determination about the age of the earth or universe. All the determinations are guesswork.

Written records from the past are the best example of age determination that we have. And the Bible record is by far the strongest of these.

The evidence with Wikipedia is that, the articles that are re-updated by those who have an agenda, when anybody updates it with things that make sense. So, updating wouldn't make iny difference. It would simply be changed back.

The source is the fact that nobody knows what happened in the distant past. Using the make-believe ideas about the distant past to prove something, only proves that such a user is being deceptive. It is circular reasoning.

Badecker doesnt believe in carbon dating and your example doesnt work with looking at tree rings af newbie.

Something of more interest would be ice core analysis.
Check that out and bring it in connection with carbon dating badecker.

And how is it exactly that the Bible is the strongest of these? Why should I believe anything it says in the Bible when you don't believe anything any scientist says? You based your ''proof'' for God in the other thread on what you said where physical laws, then it means that your proof is also false because it assumes that physics of nature have been operating like they do now.