Talk:Essay: Evolutionists, stop the mud slinging. You don't have enough mud
From Conservapedia
Actually geologists have an explanation for where the mud went. It's called "sedimentary rock." --BillTyler 11:38, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- Are those the same evolution believing geologists who keep messing up as to how the earth formed? ““...most every prediction by theorists about planetary formation has been wrong.” Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605. See: Evolution article Conservative 11:45, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- Evolution doesn't have anything to do with geology; it's biology. Neither does how the planet originally formed; that's cosmology. The fact remains that geologists are going to point out that mud and other sediments become sedimentary rock. They have several trillion tons of such rock as evidence to back up their claim. --BillTyler 11:55, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- Are you claiming that planet formation is not an interdisciplinary field? You will need to provide adequate evidence for this claim. Conservative 12:08, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- How planets form is cosmology. How they change once formed is geology. In any case, my point about sedimentary rock stands and you haven't even attempted to address it. --BillTyler 12:10, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- Claiming something is not proving it. I want sources that planet formation is not an interdisciplinary field, Bill. Conservative 12:17, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- How planets form is cosmology. How they change once formed is geology. In any case, my point about sedimentary rock stands and you haven't even attempted to address it. --BillTyler 12:10, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- Are you claiming that planet formation is not an interdisciplinary field? You will need to provide adequate evidence for this claim. Conservative 12:08, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- Evolution doesn't have anything to do with geology; it's biology. Neither does how the planet originally formed; that's cosmology. The fact remains that geologists are going to point out that mud and other sediments become sedimentary rock. They have several trillion tons of such rock as evidence to back up their claim. --BillTyler 11:55, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- Are those the same evolution believing geologists who keep messing up as to how the earth formed? ““...most every prediction by theorists about planetary formation has been wrong.” Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605. See: Evolution article Conservative 11:45, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
For the sisyphean long age believing cosmologists/geologists in search of bona fide evidence to support their planet formation schemes: As always, there is more work to be done! There is no rest for the wicked. ““...most every prediction by theorists about planetary formation has been wrong.” Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605. In addition, to the embarrassment of the atheist community, there is no proof and evidence that atheism is true.
(Graphic obtained from Flickr, see: license agreement)
(Graphic obtained from Flickr, see: license agreement)
- I cite: "PLANET-Z is an interdisciplinary research project with the goal of answering fundamental questions concerning the formation and evolution of planetary systems with the ultimate goal of addressing the potential for life to develop on habitable worlds. It is comprised of experts from a diverse set of backgrounds relevant to understanding planet formation and their subsequent evolution. PLANET-Z brings together colleagues from the Institute for Astronomy (ETH, D-PHYS), Institute of Geophysics (ETH, ERDW), the Institute of Geochemistry and Petrology (ETH, ERDW), and the Institute for Theoretical Physics (UniZ). We also maintain excellent connections with colleagues in the Space and Planetary Science Institute (UniB), and the Geneva Observatory (UniG) with related interests. Our work builds on the successful INIT project led by S. Lilly (Astro, ETH) and D. Giardini (ERDW, ETH) which culminated in the very successful Ascona Conference in 2008."[1] Conservative 12:23, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- I don't see what any of that has to do with sedimentary rock. It almost looks like you're trying to change the subject here. --BillTyler 12:24, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- I cite: "PLANET-Z is an interdisciplinary research project with the goal of answering fundamental questions concerning the formation and evolution of planetary systems with the ultimate goal of addressing the potential for life to develop on habitable worlds. It is comprised of experts from a diverse set of backgrounds relevant to understanding planet formation and their subsequent evolution. PLANET-Z brings together colleagues from the Institute for Astronomy (ETH, D-PHYS), Institute of Geophysics (ETH, ERDW), the Institute of Geochemistry and Petrology (ETH, ERDW), and the Institute for Theoretical Physics (UniZ). We also maintain excellent connections with colleagues in the Space and Planetary Science Institute (UniB), and the Geneva Observatory (UniG) with related interests. Our work builds on the successful INIT project led by S. Lilly (Astro, ETH) and D. Giardini (ERDW, ETH) which culminated in the very successful Ascona Conference in 2008."[1] Conservative 12:23, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
Link repeats?
Why have the same two links twice (both in the article and in the picture caption)? ~ JonG ~ 16:05, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
- Evolutionists are often stubborn. Repetition is often helpful to them. 19:08, 17 October 2011 (EDT)
