It's got nothing to do with Wikipedia as such. It's typical of popular accounts of Evolutionist and Old Earth conclusions: They do not bother with giving you any of their reasoning, it's only their conclusions stated as absolute fact.
Yeah, and all your absolutist proclamations are totally different! A little less typical Christian hypocrisy, please!
You repeatedly make all kinds of unfounded proclamations. Show us your reasoning! In its totality! After all, you demand no less of others, so you must be ready to do the same yourself.
Or are you forgetting that Pharisee teaching:
quote:Do not to others that which is displeasing to yourself. That is the whole of the Law. The rest is just explanation. (Rabbi Hillel, 20BCE)
But then, you have already told us how you would treat any source that met those criteria. You would ignore it completely!
A little less typical Christian hypocrisy, please!
Not quite what you're asking for, but here's something that Glenn R. Morton wrote before his religious melt-down in which he examines John Woodmorappe's (pseudonym of a high school teacher, as I understand it) list of "bad dates" -- https://morton-yec-archive.blogspot.com/...age-of-earth.html. Basically, most of the "bad dates" that Woodmorappe presented ended up being too young, not "too old" as a YEC would want bad dates to be in order to reflect their false beliefs.
Edited by dwise1, : "reflect their false beliefs", not "reflect his false beliefs"
quote:Keyed to the relative time scale are examples of index fossils, the forms of life which existed during limited periods of geologic time and thus are used as guides to the age of the rocks in which they are preserved.
quote:Index fossils (also known as guide fossils or indicator fossils) are fossils used to define and identify geologic periods (or faunal stages). Index fossils must have a short vertical range, wide geographic distribution and rapid evolutionary trends. Another term, Zone fossil is used when the fossil have all the characters stated above except wide geographical distribution, they are limited to a zone and can't be used for correlations of strata.
Since limestone consists in part of the skeletal remains of marine organisms, I've assumed that they can at least serve to identify different limestones. But I haven't found any reference to that.