Hi Robert.
I'll check it out.


>If you really have questions on creation and evolution I suggest www.reasons.org.
>
>I think the Cambrian explosion by itself is enough to make the theory of evolution seem a bit flakey.
>
>
>>>>-SNIP
>>>>A Carbon 14 testing can give you one result and K-Ar test can give you totally different reading, perhaps difference f few millions years.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe its the best we have, but it can very will give tainted result.
>>>
>>>Different age verification techniques offer different resolutions.
>>>
>>>For example, if your watch has a second hand, you can count seconds. If someones watch only show minutes, the only minutes can be gauged- same for hours.
>>>
>>>If you try to measure a duration that spans a century, but the reolution on your "watch" is a million years, then you will never resolve an event to less than a million years. Get it?
>>
>>
>>So Professor...
>>If you get different readings from the same sample using the same technique, lets say a difference of 250,000 years, what do they do, get the average of all the reading from that one pieces of sample?
>>
>>Also. How did the RNA/DNA and other primordial soup molecules survive until the next big mutation occured? Did they just float about waiting for the next big mutation to occur? Outside of their nice protective caccoon (ie a cell enclosed by the cell wall), RNAs and DNAs tend to degenerate rather quickly. Even a "simple cell" requires very complex organization to have a chance to survive. With all our technology and know how, no scientists have been able to recreate this vital first step to evolution and make it stick. Certainly, we have not yet been able to created a "simple cell" out of non-living chemicals/materials.
>>
>>Just a few questions I want answered before I'm completed sold on evolution.
>>Get it? :)
>>
>>Don't worry I have lots of question concerning the creation side as well. I trying to be neutral here.