her way.
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:12:19 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) writes:
> (previous subject: Iraq vs. N Korea)
>> People have found millions of proofs for evolution.
>> (dinosaurs which are more than a million years old [measured with
>> C14], embrios
>> which have a tale in the early development, .....................)
> Hi Ricsi,
> Actually, Carbon 14 results have an 'error swing'. This has been
> discovered by comparing dendochronology (tree ring dating) with C14
> dating. Starting from the modern era and working backward, the error is
> slightly off -showing earlier or later than actual dates (but I can't
> remember at the moment on which side the error starts) - then coming back
> to coincidence with dendochronology, then swinging the other way.
The C14 error becomes significant at about 40,000 years.
Fortunately, there are other isotopes that are more reliable, such
as potassium, silicon, and so on.
Ricsi, I agree with you, but I have to say that the claim of embryonic
development being a mirror of evolution has been thoroughly debunked. It
is not a valid argument for evolution, and doesn't really need to be.
Darwin never claimed that, either. It was proposed by well-meaning,
but misguided, supporters of evolution
Evolution, natural selection, and so on, stands on its own observed
data, it doesn't need artificial support.
Am I the only one who actually owns a copy of "On the Origin of
Species" ?
Regards,
Ron (of the wooden spoon)
Ron Clarke
http://homepages.valylink.net.au/~ausreg/index.html
http://tadpole.aus.as
-- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
