Massive Genetic Study Reveals 90 Percent Of Earth’s Animals Appeared At The Same Time
#11
(06-07-2018, 03:10 PM)Paul Wrote:
(06-07-2018, 01:19 PM)Mark Williams Wrote: And the best thing about it is, in a few years, the scientists will start admitting the earth is young, too. I don't know how they'll spin that one.

No, they won't. If there's evidence that the earth is young, at most they'll say the evidence might seem that way, but there's another explanation we just haven't discovered yet. Because at the root of modern science is the premise is that the supernatural doesn't exist. The purely natural but highly-improbable-to-the-point-of-being-impossible explanation will always be favoured over the supernatural one.

Origins-related science is controlled by an atheist cult that would rather have its collective eyes gouged out than admit that the earth is young.
Reply
#12
(06-07-2018, 01:19 PM)Mark Williams Wrote: Except it wasn't 200,000 years ago, it was around 7,000!

And the best thing about it is, in a few years, the scientists will start admitting the earth is young, too. I don't know how they'll spin that one.

If humans have been around for at least 100,000 years, how come Europeans discovered that the Americas existed only about 500 years ago?
Reply
#13
(06-07-2018, 09:59 AM)Paul Wrote:
(06-07-2018, 08:13 AM)VoxClamantis Wrote: As to how that could have happened, it's unclear. A likely possibility is the occurrence of a sudden event that caused large-scale environmental trauma and wiped out majority of the Earth's species.

Because the other possibility, well, we can't have that.

(07-11-2018, 03:33 PM)AnthonyB Wrote:
(06-07-2018, 03:10 PM)Paul Wrote:
(06-07-2018, 01:19 PM)Mark Williams Wrote: And the best thing about it is, in a few years, the scientists will start admitting the earth is young, too. I don't know how they'll spin that one.

No, they won't. If there's evidence that the earth is young, at most they'll say the evidence might seem that way, but there's another explanation we just haven't discovered yet. Because at the root of modern science is the premise is that the supernatural doesn't exist. The purely natural but highly-improbable-to-the-point-of-being-impossible explanation will always be favoured over the supernatural one.

Origins-related science is controlled by an atheist cult that would rather have its collective eyes gouged out than admit that the earth is young.

Exactly Anthony, 'origins related science' is one that can be controlled to suit the New World Order because all the evidence is based on ASSUMPTIONS based on ideology.

We know this because in 1887 there was evidence that showed the Earth does not orbit the sun.

‘There had to be an explanation [for the Airy and M&M test result]. Either the Earth was motionless with respect to the ether, or the Earth dragged the ether with it, or something. All possible explanations seemed highly unlikely, and for nearly a quarter of a century, the world of science was completely puzzled. It took a scientific revolution to explain the matter, so that the Michelson-Morley experiment is perhaps the most important “failure” in the history of science.’

O.K., here above the author Isaac Asimov shows us again that the ‘progress’ of modern cosmology is ideologically based and not empirically founded. He does this by telling us they rejected perfectly valid interpretations of two different empirical tests showing the Earth does not orbit the sun, readings they could not falsify. He then tells us it took a scientific revolution to explain the matter. Such ‘revolutions,’ the Illuminati know, are best brought about by individuals in whom the public would be conditioned to accept as men of ‘great genius.’  

The one chosen to save the world from knowing we exist in a geocentric world was of course Albert Einstein. What he did was INVENT reasons why the M&M experiment COULD BE INTERPRETED GEOCENTRICALLY OR HELIOCENTRICALLY.  

Yes, according to modern science the world we live in could be the one only God could create. 

Now, do you know anyone who is aware of this? Not one Catholic churchman or 20th century scientist took any notice that geocentrism has MORE evidence for it than heliocentrism. We see then science means nothing to modern man, only to make it look like it 'proves' a big bang, a heliocentric solar system, long ages and evolution.
 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)