Quote
[quote]All of this is old ground which we have discussed before, CTD.

Comparing life to a child building something out of blocks is a non sequitur. The underlying assumption is that life was designed. The idea that it could have evolved, step by step, over billions of years, is rejected outright. Yet this is what we see from the fossil record, genetics, and dating methods. Claiming that our information is "cherry-picked" without providing any rationale for why you think this is, shows that you don't appear to have paid much attention to RAZD's lessons in reasoned debating.
Good money! What's the deal with this junk? Did you skip every third word in my post or something? My explanation certainly did not assume its conclusion. I'm no evolutionist, so I have no need to employ circular reasoning.

It's common knowledge that there are many methods of dating things, and evolutionists don't use methods which don't give them the results they desire. This is called 'cherry-picking'. Do I need to provide further rationale beyond the obvious? If so, why? (I'm guessing just because you're disagreeable.)

I'm a bit curious where RAZD has provided this instruction that obvious things and common knowledge requiring extra elaboration.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson