so the pack of laughing hyenas gather to pick the bones off the rabbit after the eagle swoops.....
rob,...I am far from convinced that the examples you quote demonstrate any intentional deception. I have no doubt that similar examples could be collected from evolutionist writings, apart from some well known frauds like Piltdown and hacklyes embryonic drawings [ which persisted long after exposure].
so many top creation scientist liars.....I suppose it is possible.
maybe that's why they wont publicly debate top evolutionist scientists........oh, actually, it is the other way round.
well it is certainly very disappointing if such widespread deception is proven, but it has occurred to me since, that you have moved the goalposts much wider than the original position.
the criticisms of the song details are pretty pedantic, and attacking arguments not contained therein.
I have rechecked a number of non creation mungo sites and I am essentially correct.
I will make some minor changes, but that different scientists using different methods arrived at divergent dating is agreed on, and that there is still not universal agreement, though granting that the 40 thousand mark seems most agreed on.