ooh! oooh! i just love this kinda stuff. so many directions to go so many toys being thrown into the pool to play with...
(sidebar question, perfesser... how come origins discussions seem to attempt to discredit judeo-christian beliefs/doctrine/writings? i am aware that we here in the u.s. live in a post-christian system, and therefore one could assume it's our reference point. why not use the Hindu origins model, an African animist model, or the late carl sagan's model?)
"religous fundamentalists have killed more..."
patently false.
It is sadly true that religious belief systems have been used to kill/eradicate/sterilize victims - the bible as an example, specifically the old testament, gives pretty good examples of wars and 'ethnic cleansings' of towns and cities, whether you're taking orders from G-d or the spiced goat you had last night for supper. (btw, it's nice to see this method used for talking about G-d - haven't seen it in a while)
there are several sources for body counts from population/political exterminations including the current african continent debacle(if i can find the sites again, i'll post em).
Yet Darwin's own racism (read him yourself) and its spawn of the 'superman' concept in europe with Hitler, Stalin,Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot,etc. and to a much lesser extent the British in Austrailia (just ask the Aboriginals),and on down the line, have killed or caused to be killed hundreds of millions of people. Papa Joe Stalin and his thugs killed, er 'purged', i recall the conservative estimate was 110 million of russians - hence his quote (f not him, then Lenin) "the death of one man makes a martyr, the death of millions a statistic".These die-hard evolutionists and their kissing-cousins (again read their own journals/letters) have been far more successful at human slaughter than even the best jihadist idiot.
(sidebar 2: i am not accusing evolutionists/non-religionists of harboring this kind of thinking anymore).
besmirching current christian belief systems with this type of behavior doesn't fly - have you heard the pope or billy graham issue a jihad to kill non-believers to attain paradise? Even the current spate of fundamentalist muslim killers can purportedly be connected back to Hilter and his ilk (haven't further checked/read up on this).
yes, what about the ol' spanish inquistion - sorry pal. who did the ruling government, in the guise of the official goverment church, kill first? 'Fundamentalist christians' because they were fiercely opposed to the Inquisitors' grab for power and control under the name of Christ and the Church. Next was the muslims and jews, and then anybody else who was in their way. (read also the French revolution, but not with the church as the costume for killing). This was tragic, indeed, but the numbers of deaths doesn't even come close to Hitler's 1st 3 years in power. (This applies to the U.S.'s salem witch trials, western expansion/subjugation of the aboriginial americans, and early imperialism lovingly foisted off as a christian thing)
Hitler's first victims also were religous fundamentalists who attempted to show him for what he was, not for what his image-spinners wanted the german people to see. the jews lost at(least) 6 million; gypsies, poles, russians, disabled, etc. add the conservative number to over 12 million exterminated - not including the war casualties.
No, we do a fine job of killing each other without any aid of or blaming a religous system. in fact, i'd hypothesize that religous systems are safer to live under than a 'godless' one - of course as long as you belong to the flavor of the day :)
"carbon dating has proved"...
Sorry again.
1st, you begin with at least one assumtion. that the supposed rate of decay is constant, and has been constant. next assumption: the tested article is or has been in a closed system, without outside interference.
Of the six or so standard methods used, none - repeat none - have produced the same time-frame scenarios across the board - hence the uses of the different tests to get the answers you want. read the science blogs for a snooze fest on this one - the best part to my little dark mind is the "nya nya my test is better" between the competing groups.
"most scientists believe"...
ouch. I read a bit, and I am astounded at the narrow- minded, bigoted and childish behaviour of some in the 'established' science community. Science is no more monolithic than the christian churches in its belief systems. Just one example is how the Leakey's (sp) were treated amongst anthropologists, and the continuing brou-ha-ha over lucy and her cousins. Somebody's being made a monkey of...
Same goes for competing origins theories. Asteroids? Pan-spermia? Hopeful monsters? Proto-ezymes in primordial ooze? Big-bang? all of these have HUGE problems with the scientific data. Just attend one conference on Origins and watch the fun! It makes a 3 stooges movie tame and cultured. (the black and white ones- not the cartoons, you young turks!)
btw, the lightning/ooze thing did not work - what is not told is the 'simple' items produced did not survive, did not conform to the necessary handed-ness required to couple together, among other absolute requirements to be even on the road to living/life - and sadly, the experiment/s still required outside intelligence to put the stuff together.
now, I'll be up all night looking for "Kerkut's 7 Evolution Absolutes"...
and (I forget who noted Jim Croce) I am an old dog.