Guess how old the Causeway is?
Sometimes I think the Causewaygate scenario has been running since neolithic times, but then I remember it was only September when Arlene Foster said she was "minded" to approve a private visitor centre.
Alliance's Trevor Lunn wants to set this in context, though, so he has checked with the Environment Minister just how old the Giants' Causeway is.
Mrs Foster replies that "geologists generally agree that the Giant's Causeway is some 60 million years old. As you will be aware, however, there are alternative views in relation to the age of the Giant's Causeway."
I presume the element of doubt the Minister has in mind concerns those Christians like her colleague Mervyn Storey who reckon the Causeway dates to the time of Noah's flood. I suppose another alternative view might be the popular one which dates the Causeway's origins to the legendary fight between Finn McCool and the Scottish giant.
I'm 
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment
For goodness sake, "Geologists agree that the Causeway is 60 million years old, but the people that elected me believe Ussher's chronology that dictates it was actually made on the nightfall preceding 23 October 4004 BC".
I despair, bring back direct rule, it might mean unpopular decisions by a remote government, but its better than the childish antics of the current lot.
I second the bring back direct rule motion!
The executive don't have the first clue how to run a country backing away from any difficult decision by announcing a 'review of the review'.
I think the good ship DoE under Ms Foster is probably one of the worst offenders with many important decisions to be made on how to bring us upt to scratch with the rest of the UK and the Rebublic (Environmental Protection Agency being the no.1 priority) and now we discover that on top of completely ignoring the advice of the EXPERTS within her department on the causeway issue, she is also a flat earth creationist sympathiser!
Absolutely disgraceful.
Arlene Foster was quite right to delineate the sceptism by right thinking people as to the incredulous claims of such geologists about the Causeway being 60 million years old.
Any hal-witted chemist can tell you that the equations used to put forward such an outlandish claim is predicated on unproven constants and major evolutioary pre-suppositional commitments.
Well done Arlene. No doubt the DFM and the rest believe they came from animals, but the Unionist population will not surrender their critical thinking skills so easily to the latest science fiction tale in current vogue.
For anyone wanting to participate in Sam's challenge and approach their local pharmacist for a personalised debunking of evolution and geology, I have included the relevant Uranium-lead dating equations which (allegedly) yield concordant ages from which in turn the concordant line (ie age)is deduced:
206Pb / 238U = e λ238t– 1
And
207Pb / 235U = e λ235t– 1
(where U & T are the Parent isotopes and Pb is the Daughter isotope).
"but the Unionist population will not surrender their critical thinking skills so easily to the latest science fiction tale in current vogue".
Oh well done, I don't think I've laughed out loud like that in ages.
Of course, I'm not actually laughing with you...
It is a reality that the major proportion of the science world supports the evolutionary model and the minority who adhere to the creation model suffer a great deal of ridicule. Nevertheless, it is not always the size of the crowd that decides the fact. Scientists who accept the creation model offer convincing reasons why evolution is very questionable. If the evidence for the eruptions during Noah's flood was being debated in the court room I think the evolutions would have an impossible task proving the millions of years.
Creationists are fools, focusing on debunking something as wrong, instead of trying to prove their own theory.
Just because evolution isn't 100% provable doesn't mean a population of 6 billion came from 2 people in 4000BC.
Why are people so unwilling to accept the work of scientists? Because it might make them question their faith and their comfortable little worlds. It never fails to amaze me that in this day and age people still refuse to accept that what they believe might not be true. Although I notice that they are still willing to get on a plane and fly around the world, aren’t they worried they will fall of the edge?
I am not a complete idiot; I have just learnt the lesson of not sending a blog message in the heat of the moment. I take back what I said. What I meant to say was 'aren't they worried they will fall off the edge?'