BornAtheist

Spreading rates of the Atlantic Seafloor (paleomagnetism confirms movement for millions of years) Thick layers of Ooze Thick formations made of clay without lamination because of bioturbation Coral reefs Best regards What are these proof OF? I can observe the same things on my company's lunch room floor. You will never know because you don't want to know. To those of you who want to know: You can meassure the spreading rate of the Atlantic. The orientation of the earths magnetic field is preserved in the magnetic minerals in magma. The variation in the orientation of the magnetic minerals and the spreading rate is telling us the seafloor has been constantly moving for millions of years. Ooze is a sediment originating from plankton, and the sedimentation rates of such is just a few centimeters per thousend years. Layers several hundred meters thick are known. Clay has a slow sedimentation rate aswell. Thick layers of clay having lost any signs of lamination is evidence of the clay being sedimented at a low pace giving bentic fauna time to mix the sediments. Corals are growing at a slow rate (less than 1 cm/year) and coral reefs several hundred meters thick are known.

It's OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) and they've been lobbying for a few years now. They have created the Cairo Declaration, and somewhere in their declaration it states that rights and freedoms are subject to the Shariah. They been trying to manipulate the UN to adopt this declaration.

Spreading rates of the Atlantic Seafloor (paleomagnetism confirms movement for millions of years) Thick layers of Ooze Thick formations made of clay without lamination because of bioturbation Coral reefs Best regards Welcome to the board and back to the topic - can you provide evidence from science that 'Macro-Evolution' is science? I don't think so. I'm a geologist, not a biologist. Can you provide evidence from science that the compounded effects of "Micro-Evolution" doesn't lead to "Macro-Evolution"? Is it within the scope of science to demonstrate the compounded effects of "Micro-Evolution" can lead to "Macro-Evolution"? Where does the information come from to change a theropod lung into an avian flow-through lung? Yes, it is possible to demonstrate that micro-evolution leads to macro-evolution. You just need to stay alive for another 50.000 years in order to witness undeniable proof. I don't need such demonstration. I accept biologic evolution as the best explanation for the fossilrecord. I have no intention browsing through the web in order to "debate" change from the theropod lung into an avian flow-through lung. You can pick billions of unanswered questions and argue such as evidence of creation (or intelligent design), the problem is these arguments are designed for the creationists and not the scientific audience you pretend to corner with such arguments. No one needs to understand or be able to explain anything possible in order for biologic evolution to take place. Now tell me: Can you provide evidence from science that the compounded effects of "Micro-Evolution" doesn't lead to "Macro-Evolution? So far you have provided no evidence, nor proof of your own opinions, your argument is therefor flawed at best. I for one do not have to justify my faith. You are on a Christian site and the statement of faith is clear. Please understand that you came here to argue a point that no believer on this site agrees with in any way. It is up to you to prove your statements. So essentially it is up to you to try and disprove the above question, without just cut and paste please I posted some evidence of an old earth without using radiometric dating: Spreading rates of the Atlantic Seafloor (paleomagnetism confirms movement for millions of years) Thick layers of Ooze Thick formations made of clay without lamination because of bioturbation Coral reefs And someone responded by asking me for evidence of makro-evolution being science (?), and you asking me for a link.. Now what do you want? A link to the Atlantic Seafloor, Ooze, clay formations and coral reefs? Do you doubt the existens of such?

Spreading rates of the Atlantic Seafloor (paleomagnetism confirms movement for millions of years) Thick layers of Ooze Thick formations made of clay without lamination because of bioturbation Coral reefs Best regards Please provide me with a link. Sorry I didn't respond sooner but I was on a vacation from here. Provide you with a link to what exactly? USGS Google

Spreading rates of the Atlantic Seafloor (paleomagnetism confirms movement for millions of years) Thick layers of Ooze Thick formations made of clay without lamination because of bioturbation Coral reefs Best regards Welcome to the board and back to the topic - can you provide evidence from science that 'Macro-Evolution' is science? I don't think so. I'm a geologist, not a biologist. Can you provide evidence from science that the compounded effects of "Micro-Evolution" doesn't lead to "Macro-Evolution"? Is it within the scope of science to demonstrate the compounded effects of "Micro-Evolution" can lead to "Macro-Evolution"? Where does the information come from to change a theropod lung into an avian flow-through lung? Yes, it is possible to demonstrate that micro-evolution leads to macro-evolution. You just need to stay alive for another 50.000 years in order to witness undeniable proof. I don't need such demonstration. I accept biologic evolution as the best explanation for the fossilrecord. I have no intention browsing through the web in order to "debate" change from the theropod lung into an avian flow-through lung. You can pick billions of unanswered questions and argue such as evidence of creation (or intelligent design), the problem is these arguments are designed for the creationists and not the scientific audience you pretend to corner with such arguments. No one needs to understand or be able to explain anything possible in order for biologic evolution to take place. Now tell me: Can you provide evidence from science that the compounded effects of "Micro-Evolution" doesn't lead to "Macro-Evolution?

Spreading rates of the Atlantic Seafloor (paleomagnetism confirms movement for millions of years) Thick layers of Ooze Thick formations made of clay without lamination because of bioturbation Coral reefs Best regards Welcome to the board and back to the topic - can you provide evidence from science that 'Macro-Evolution' is science? I don't think so. I'm a geologist, not a biologist. Can you provide evidence from science that the compounded effects of "Micro-Evolution" doesn't lead to "Macro-Evolution"?

Spreading rates of the Atlantic Seafloor (paleomagnetism confirms movement for millions of years) Thick layers of Ooze Thick formations made of clay without lamination because of bioturbation Coral reefs Best regards