Quote Originally Posted by Navaros View Post
darwinism started out as a crock with it's founder, darwin, and has retained its unfalsifiable core, crock-based ideas ever since. Which is why it remains an accurate term. darwin observed variation within a kind, then imagined that all life transformed into each other, and that imagination is all he had. Today, that remains the case. There is no proof, only faith in the accuracy of that particular imagining being true.

C14 dating, radiometric dating, and all forms of dating are unreliable and erroneous and often produce many different false results from the same sample. All have them rely on blind faith in the accuracy of circular reasoning and the underlying assumptions that go into them. There is no independent verification for any of those dating methods being accurate. Therefore, they may be believed in only by faith.

darwinism is completely unfalsifiable in the minds of darwinists. When some evidence comes to light that refutes it, the darwinist story just gets 're-written' around the facts, rather than discarded like it would be if it was legitimate science. It is assumed by faith that darwinism must be true, no matter what, period, and no consideration is allowed for the possibility that it's not. No evidence can prove it wrong. At most, evidence may only cause a re-write of the darwinist story. Everything must be spun in such a way that it can be ramrodded into the darwinist story that is held to be true based on pre-conceived bias; instead of letting the evidence dictate the facts, which is what legitimate science does.
Anyone else find it a delicious, cosmic irony that Navaros writes this post using a machine that is only possible because of the same physics he decries?