Andy and soil dating for real Hot chat group gratis
Dr Mark H Armitage Responds to Dr Hugh Ross on Soft Tissue in Dinosaur Bones. Hugh Ross is completely lame when it comes to my published findings of soft tissues in Triceratops horn.He can call my findings tactics and claims but he is IGNORANT when it comes to my peer-reviewed DISCOVERIES.I would love to get it to the the right people but I do not know how. I spend most of my time trying to do the science plus I am clueless about social media! Okay, so are you really doing science just to prove the bible or are you really be scientifically objective for the purpose to educate?What about the articles that explain this is possible with Iron rich blood?I wanted her opinion, should they just burn them( this would release some harmful pollutant).The scientists were desperate to get rid of these Piles and Piles of bones!
And the simple common sense in me said, if these bones have been buried for over thousands and thousands of years than why the hell is there still flesh on them??
HERE IS MY REPLY: hahaha - wow you have some pain don't you? Do you think that the dumbing down of America is only taking place at the high school level? because I was learning NOTHING from their expensive pablum puke. Unless you have been teaching ON THE INSIDE like I have for over 20 years, you are a clueless drone. Besides how are you going to defend yourself to Jesus for disobeying the 4th commandment if you tell Him he is a LIAR about creation in SIX DAYS? WRITTEN IN STONE for bold and italic for Godhaters like you.
How funny that you sound so much like those who lectured John the Baptist.. D.'s that are dumber than a sack of hammers, so don't throw that DOCTOR moniker at me and don't try to demonize me because you think I am only a lab technician. Do you think that the doctoral level is a pristine chapel of sanctified learning? There was a time in the not-too-distant past when finding soft material in an otherwise mineralized bone would have been paradigm-shattering.
I was just wondering why you have a problem with the dating methods when we have not one but many ways to date things and they all seem to point to around the same time frame.
Sure not exactly, but it's impossible to get exact dates you know this as a scientist yourself.I read a lot of articles about this and you haven't brought up anything about the explanations from those articles. Now you keep saying this couldn't be millions of years old, well you have just this sample, what about everything else that dates way back with lots of different methods? It would take a lot more than your hypothesis to convince me.Mark HArmitage Course I don't expect you to tackle everything, that's totally fine with me.Your mention of peer-reviewed DISCOVERIES right out of the gate is completely lame. Would you like a list of people dismissed from their jobs that tried to publish or support findings that go against the status-quo?