blackbird

Evidence of an old earth has already been debunked. Carbon 14 dating is only good for a few thousand years. People mistakenly think it was used to measure things millions of years old. Check this article: http://creation.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter4.pdf http://creation.com/radiometric-dating-questions-and-answers I believe the biblical account of creation in Genesis. I believe the earth was created with an apparent age built in it at the time of creation. For instance a tree had to have a certain age at the moment of creation. So, one can look at these debates but the way I see it eliminates doubts. One must accept that creation was a supernatural event of course. God created everything in six days and rested on the seventh day. That avoids the endless debate about how it happened. But if one wishes to delve into all the scientific information that some creation believers have, one is free to do so. But I'm not sure it will satisfy someone who will not accept it. I see it as a matter of faith in the written word, the King James Bible (1611). The Bible is a spiritual book full of supernatural events. Men wrote it under the inspiration of God. The evidence for the inspiration of the Bible is within the Bible itself.

Which countries are on the ban list today? Some not on the ban list like SA have governments that agree to support the war against ISIS and terrorism. The U.S. chooses it's allies based on what they believe is in their best interest, not what some lefty thinks would make an appearance of the best social justice.

Because SA is an ally of the U.S. and helping fight Islamic terrorism.

Obama and the Dems signed agreements like the Paris Accord committing America to give billions to third world countries and shut down American industries. Trump is putting America first.

So why didn't Hillary support Trump's plan to deport illegal criminals in the election campaign? Why didn't she support building the wall? Why didn't she support a travel ban from countries known for terrorists.

A wall would slow the drugs, criminals, and illegals down. I think it's a good idea. Might help Canada too as a spinoff benefit.

Hillary and Obama (and Trudeau to some extent) are very experienced in the political system and government and are expected to know far more than someone who never had any experience in it. He was a businessman who spent time in negotiating contracts for business. It will take time for him to learn how governments works and what you can do and can't. But you oppose Trump so much you blame him for not doing everything exactly as someone who knows all about it. You have to treat someone who was not hired for a job because of his qualifications and experience, but was chosen by the people to do a job that few people have experience in, but has a plan that millions support.

The Hillary and her party support the killing of unborn babies, about nine million to date. Trump opposes abortion. Hillary /Obama wouldn't deport illegal aliens who committed criminals acts. Wouldn't get serious about criminals and terrorists coming into the U.S. Wouldn't get serious about stopping the flow of U.S. jobs to Mexico and China. Lots of reasons for supporting Trump. You worry about some alleged groping twenty years ago but ignore all the bad things the Dems have been doing to the U.S. and unborn babies. Not in the same league of crimes.

Just heard someone interviewed on CBC news that said Trump didn't have a bad day.

Only if you believe everything you hear on MSM, which you seem to do.

No. They don't hold elections every year or two to satisfy the losers. If Trump were removed (which I don't think will happen), Pence is VP and would rightfully take over.

They are a bunch lefty globalists and they just took a hit with Trump. He is not going to give the UN climate fund the billions of dollars they hoped for. He is deporting illegals /criminals every day. He told NATO to pony up. Don't expect the U.S. to carrying most of the cost. He told middle east leaders to buck up about funding and supporting terrorism. Maybe Pence would become President. So not much gain for Democrats and liberals.

You mean become the sucker for the rest of the world and start forking out billions to fight climate change and let in lots more terrorists and criminals. Trump might not be PC kind of guy but at least he is doing something for Americans.

In geology, the layers of the earth with fossils in them is generally accepted as evidence of an old earth. This is based on uniformitarianism. That means the layers developed very slowly over long periods of time. But it has been found and shown that the earth layers could have been formed very rapidly as a result of the flood in Genesis. This is called the catastrophism principle. The is means a great catastrophy such as a Noah's flood could have caused the layers to be placed very quickly with the fossils within them. Quote The vast thicknesses of sedimentary rocks around the world are commonly used as evidence for vast age. First, Teaching about Evolution gives a useful definition on page 33: Sedimentary rocks are formed when solid materials carried by wind and water accumulate in layers and then are compressed by overlying deposits. Sedimentary rocks sometimes contain fossils formed from the parts of organisms deposited along with other solid materials. The ‘deep time’ indoctrination comes with the statement ‘often reaching great thicknesses over long periods of time.’ However, this goes beyond the evidence. Great thicknesses could conceivably be produced either by a little water over long periods, or a lot of water over short periods. We have already discussed how different biases can result in different interpretations of the same data, in this case the rock layers. It is a philosophical decision, not a scientific one, to prefer the former interpretation. Because sedimentation usually occurs slowly today, it is assumed that it must have always occurred slowly. If so, then the rock layers must have formed over vast ages. The philosophy that processes have always occurred at roughly constant rates (‘the present is the key to the past’) is often called uniformitarianism. Uniformitarianism was defined this way in my own university geology class in 1983, and was contrasted with catastrophism. But more recently, the word ‘uniformitarianism’ has been applied in other contexts to mean also constancy of natural laws, sometimes called ‘methodological uniformitarianism,’ as opposed to what some have called ‘substantive uniformitarianism.’ It should also be pointed out that uniformitarian geologists have long allowed for the occasional (localized) catastrophic event. However, modern historical geology grew out of this general ‘slow and gradual’ principle, which is still the predominantly preferred framework of explanation for any geological formation. Nevertheless, the evidence for catastrophic formation is so pervasive that there is a growing body of neo-catastrophists. But because of their naturalistic bias, they prefer, of course, to reject the explanation of the Genesis (global) flood. Unquote part of article from: http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth

There are countless article delving into this, not a single document. It is a very large topic with huge implications that you should research. Quote Yet the ‘big picture’ is very different, and encouraging for the biblical creationist. For many decades now, with few exceptions,2 a consistent pattern has emerged. It’s as if each find switches on some more pixels in a grainy image, maybe sharpening but not changing the picture, which was long obvious in outline. All of the finds more or less naturally fall into one of only three major groups. And two of these, Neandertal and Homo erectus, are similar anyway. Both are clearly human descendants of Adam.3 Virtually all others, including the famous ‘Lucy’, are in the remaining group, which generates the most evolutionary excitement. But it turns out to be an extinct non-human primate group, anatomically not between apes and humans Unquote from the above link

That has been disputed and debunked for ages. Right now I am tied up with other things. You might want to take a look at this website. Many great minds have done extensive research and written lengthy articles on their findings. http://creation.com/anthropology-and-apemen-questions-and-answers

I don't know the answer to that. People have a lot of freedom in countries like Britain. They never mentioned how many in Canada. I am not sure what it means for May to ignore individual rights. They are in a bad situation in Britain. I am not sure what can be done. I don't see anything significant happening in the U.S. or Canada in the near future. The problem is not as big as the UK. But in the future decades, who knows what will happen.

A report on CBC said the British police have a total of about 23,000 Muslims they are concerned about and 3,000 of those very concerned about. They have a long list of radicals they are trying to watch but it is practically impossible to watch every radical because they don't have enough manpower to watch that many people. There are a smaller number that are a grave concern. When talking thousands of people, this is pretty serious. It is impossible to follow every person of concern.

Trump said in a tweet on June 6 " The FAKE MSM is working so hard trying to get me not to use Social Media. They hate that I can get the honest and unfiltered message out. " 44,000 liked that tweet. He is probably the first President to keep millions of his followers in the loop through social media and they appreciate it greatly. MSM hates it because they can't control the message.

His followers could care less what opponents say.

No. He has millions of followers. Tens of thousands of people check off that they like his tweets. Why should he quit? Because some liberal or dem doesn't like it. He's too popular and too many followers on Twitter to quit. It's his way of speaking to his base directly.

If interested you can watch Trump's weekly address on Twitter (video and sound). It is 3 mins 44 secs long and is a summary of his trip to the middle east, Rome, and NATO. https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump

On June 4, Donald Trump tweeted "we must stop being politically correct and get down to the business of security for our people. If we don't get smart, it will only get worse." .

Just looked at some of Donald Trump's Twitter postings. Fascinating stuff. . He has been a member of Twitter since March 2009. He has 31.9 million followers. His account has received 35,000 tweets, counting his tweets and responses I believe. Anyone can tweet a response to his tweets. He made quite a few tweets on June 6. He sometimes quotes or links in a Fox News item. Great stuff. Great that people can reply and read what others say.

Check back ID 5229. My comment was to Omni. I know you don't like political correctness.