RE: Early Cambrian explosion

Pim van Meurs (entheta@eskimo.com)
Sat, 6 Feb 1999 11:56:10 -0800

But they do, at least indirectly support the vaste amount of radiometric dates pointing NOT to a young
earth. So perhaps I do not understand your response here.

----------
From: Arthur V. Chadwick[SMTP:chadwicka@swau.edu]
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 1999 9:35 AM
To: evolution@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: Early Cambrian explosion

At 02:19 PM 2/5/99 -0800, Brian wrote:
>Hello Art. I have a question for you. Above you state that
>"The data are real, pervasive and conclusive ...". Does this
>mean that you accept that life is more than one billion years
>old?

Those data are from molecular biology of extant forms and have little to do
with radiometric ages of anything.
Art
http://geology.swau.edu