Why do some creationists lie?

[spiced]

As for dating: seems that the Australian Mungo man is 30000 yrs old or is it 60000yrs. The scientists can`t decide based on their absolute fossil record and their absolute dating methods.

 

[searchingforanswers1]

I heard a good one the other day. I heard a well known tv preacher say: "Creation scientists have never lost a public debate".

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

As lying is the topic here:why do evolutionists bring it up? the term lie should not feature in the evolutionary scheme of things as it is jusy an emotion of a percieved wrong , which is just an emotion of a percieved wrong, which is just an emotion and so on and so forth......Where does morality come into evolution as it negates survival of the fittest.

Apparently you're trying not to answer anything that has to do with the OP. Since this is the case, please stop posting in this thread.

Mech Bliss
Re: Snelling and Austin:
when is volcanic rock not contaminated?

Contamination refers to partially metamorphosed samples and xenolithic inclusions. Samples are not contaminated when their cooling history is homogeneous.

Apparently you're trying not to answer anything that has to do with the OP. Since this is the case, please stop posting in this thread.

As for dating: seems that the Australian Mungo man is 30000 yrs old or is it 60000yrs. The scientists can`t decide based on their absolute fossil record and their absolute dating methods.

Apparently you're trying not to answer anything that has to do with the OP. Since this is the case, please stop posting in this thread.

You have a history of disrupting threads with unsubstantiated, off-topic nonsense. Either address the fact that creationism is backed by regular, pervasive lies or simply don't post anything at all here and take it to a different thread. There is a reason why threads have topics, you know--so they can actually be discussed, not ignored.

 

[Remnant]

Like science, discussion can be thread together when it relates to each other and sometimes rather difficult not to go on a tangent.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

The distractions that have been brought up in this thread have virtually no relation to its topic.

Furthermore, it's hard to go off on a tangent when the original topic hasn't even been touched yet by creationists who are starting with unrelated material, not merely taking the discussion in a new direction.

 

[Blessed-one]

What if somebody started a thread on 'Why do evolutionists reduce humans to mere mindless dust'. This kind of topic tears the harmony of the forum apart. I'm not sure where we're supposed to draw the line. It would be better if certain examples are simply listed. This thread is heading into a general apologetic direction, where christians defend their faith (which wouldn't be GA, would it? *frown*)

or perhaps the philosophy and morality forum would suit better.

Thread closed for review.