....stuff deleted

Therein lies the problem, Evolutionism is based on an underlying
philosophy called Uniformatarianism, not a scientific method at all.
Just the assumtion that processes follow one after the other. Makes
understanding thing much easier. The only problem is that the evidence
does not bare this out. The uniformatarian scientist just went out and
found info that supported there position, and ignored info that did
not. Sort of like picking yourself up by your boot straps. And hence
uniformatarianism has fallen into disrepute in many quarters, and the
superstructure of evolution abandoned by many scientist.


No, it isn't. Evolution is, once again, scientific theory. More
importantly, it is a unifying theory which has been supported by many, a
great many, of scientific disciplines. This includes the following:

- anthropology
- geology
- genetics
- biology, biochemistry, and all other bio sciences
- chemistry

And the list goes on.

Your "uniformatiarian scientist" does not exist. You may have some
religious zealot making up words for scientists, but there isn't any
branch, individual, nor philosophy that fits this description.

Another philosophy has become more acceptable recently in the
scientific community called Catastrophism. This basically says that
cataclismic events occurred in the course of history that completely
changed the course of history. Radical events and elements have been
injected into the course of history that have determined where we are
today. These events would make following any uniform record impossible.
Hence though the dinosaur records are interesting, they are not
complete, and cannot be relied on for scientific information. Even such
test procedures as C-14 dating etc would not be considered reliable.


I see. Since it is convenient, we ignore scientific evidence and say,
"it is interesting." Since you seem incapable of understanding the
basics of these fields, mythology is much more meaningful for you. How
pathetic.

I remember reading one of these pamphlets which claimed that they carbon
dated a live insect and the result was wildly inaccurate. But, you
should know that you cannot get an accurate C-14 result on a live
animal. This does not invalidate carbon dating, it merely proves that
the indviduals involved attempted to use "spin" to convince the
unwitting of their political agenda.

Rick