Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes, yes, we know how mountains were formed.also; other mountains with fish fossils, or in this case whales. WHALE FOSSILS HIGH IN ANDES SHOW HOW MOUNTAINS ROSE FROM SEA
'First human' discovered in Ethiopia - BBC News refer here for evidence of first man.
did you even read the article. the fossil is 2.8 million years old .You do not appear to understand that article. It puts the time when Homo sapiens first appeared almost 300,000 years ago. Still very very recent in a geological sense.
Did you read the article? It makes no claim that this jaw bone is from a Homo sapiens. Rather they state the fossil is from an earlier hominid species.did you even read the article. the fossil is 2.8 million years old .
False. The ages are unsupportable.Again, no. The ages of mountains are well understood..
Did you read the article? It makes no claim that this jaw bone is from a Homo sapiens. Rather they state the fossil is from an earlier hominid species.
Wrong again dad, they are confirmed time and again.False. The ages are unsupportable.
Nope, Adam was a myth."The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor.."
Hominid Species
Even using that word gives me the creeps. The common ancestor was Adam.
I was responding to dad.we will not even get into that right now. jeesh;
You did not and cannot. Blather all you like.I already supported my claims. . .
You are a myth.Nope, Adam was a myth.
dad, of course I did let me do so again:You did not and cannot. Blather all you like.
You are a myth.
Sorry. Radioactive dates require a same state past, that is what you need to prove. Citing ratio dates based on a past nature that cannot be shown to have existed is religious cowardice.dad, of course I did let me do so again:
Fingerprinting the K/T impact site and determining the time of impact by UPb dating of single shocked zircons from distal ejecta - ScienceDirect
It is another peer reviewed article on how the K-Pg boundary was dated.
Nope, I am real. Perhaps I seem like a nightmare to you since I won't let you off the hook.
Sorry. Radioactive dates require a same state past, that is what you need to prove. Citing ratio dates based on a past nature that caTnnot be shown to have existed is religious cowardice.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?