Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 120 (8782 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-21-2017 8:01 AM
90 online now:
Coragyps, DOCJ, herebedragons, PaulK, RAZD (5 members, 85 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: evilsorcerer1
Post Volume:
Total: 816,593 Year: 21,199/21,208 Month: 1,632/2,326 Week: 87/881 Day: 9/78 Hour: 1/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Cross forum evolution debate on Age of the Earth
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18864
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 1 of 3 (798761)
02-05-2017 12:07 PM


' time' emailed me with the link to his reply on Cross forum evolution debate thread on the website:

So this is to be a debate with 'time' spanning two different forums, 'time' on the link above, and myself here.

The moderation on the other forum I find unacceptable and biased, so there is no way I would or could discuss anything there.

And I'm not sure I can not be banned on his site:

quote:
If this is your first visit, you will have to register before you can post on all forums. If you post links, spam or advertisements of other websites, will be deleted and/or banned. Account will be activated upon registration and you will be listed as junior member: click the register link above to proceed, when logging in, best to select remember me box or you may be logged off by system after time. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. Again, to post you must login.

So I have registered with CARM in order to read the posts and make minor comments, but I don't trust them to let me post in full without banning me permanently and without notice.

So here we are...


time on CARM writes:

Cross forum evolution debate thread
01-30-17, 02:23 PM

I was asked to comment on some issues contained in a post on another forum. Time permitting I plan to briefly address the dozen or so points raised there. I see no need for the thread originator to post here, but I will give them the link in case they feel a need to do so.

Here is the link to the thread and post.

http://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control=msg&t=6288

I notice all of the points are solidly based on the same belief. A belief in a same state past.So really all that needs to be done here is to illustrate how all the points are actually religion, and not knowledge based or any real science.

I would point out that in his summation on 'the bottom line' he says this

"All these methods show the same pattern of climatological changes for the periods of overlap..."

Now that point has no real validity when we consider that the actual issue is not the overlapping climate changes, but the length of time this took. Yes, a pattern of changes exists. Now the question is, in what way does that support the old age, no God, no flood so called sciences belief system any more than a creation friendly, bible friendly approach?

The moderation on the other forum I find unacceptable and biased, so there is no way I would or could discuss anything there.

So here we are...

I notice all of the points are solidly based on the same belief. A belief in a same state past.So really all that needs to be done here is to illustrate how all the points are actually religion, and not knowledge based or any real science.

Always amusing when creationists try to turn science into religion.

Not a belief, but a basic hypothesis of all science: that in the absence of any cause or reason to think otherwise, it is most rational to think that the universal laws that govern the behavior of things act in the past in a manner consistent with the way we observe them behaving today.

As a scientific hypothesis it is based on evidence that we can observe for the consistency of behavior, and as long as those tests do not refute the hypothesis or demonstrate severe anomalies we can have confidence that this is the best approximation we have to date for how things work.

This denial of the science is similar to his arguments about whether we can know time outside the solar system, and trying to mess time up doesn't make the evidence go away, nor does it explain the consilience in results obtained.

I would point out that in his summation on 'the bottom line' he says this

"All these methods show the same pattern of climatological changes for the periods of overlap..."

This is from Message 12 so he has skipped over all the evidence and not tried to refute a single point.

Not a stellar start.

Now that point has no real validity when we consider that the actual issue is not the overlapping climate changes, but the length of time this took. Yes, a pattern of changes exists. Now the question is, in what way does that support the old age, no God, no flood so called sciences belief system any more than a creation friendly, bible friendly approach?

To begin with old age earth does not mean no god etc. There are many OEC (old age creationists).

Second we start with counting annual layers not just climate changes, the matching climate changes show the correlation between the annual layer methods.


In terms of clarity and to provide the latest information on these methods I will be replying on a news thread, as it appears that 'time' may not stay on topic or address the issues here.

So I plan to post my replies here, let him know and then copy his replies here and continue.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by RAZD, posted 02-05-2017 12:33 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

RAZD
Member
Posts: 18864
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 2 of 3 (798765)
02-05-2017 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
02-05-2017 12:07 PM


Single Trees
See The Age of the Earth, Message 1 for introduction to the topic of age counting, and Message 2 for definitions of words that will be used.

The Oldest Known Non-Clonal Trees

You might think that measuring the age of trees is a simple matter of just counting the rings. In practice it is a bit more complicated. As a starting point we can begin with the oldest non-clonal trees in the world -- all Bristlecone Pines from the White Mountains of the Sierra Nevada:

  • the "Methuselah" tree(1), with an estimated germination date of 2832 BCE
  • the "Prometheus" tree(2) (aka WPN-114), with a measured age of 4862 when cut down in 1964 for research, however this is a minimum age because the core of the tree is missing, giving it a minimum germination date of 2898 BCE (but likely older).
  • the "Schulman's" tree(3) (my name for the tree because Edmund Schulman took the core samples and he was a pioneer in dendrochronology in the area), with an estimated germination date of 3051 BCE
  • the "Ancient Sentinels"(4) - standing dead trees, as old as 7,000 years, however we have no information on their germination dates at this point.


An "Ancient Sentinel"(5)

At this point we don't know from the information available when the ~7,000 year old sentinel trees died -- it could have been last year, 10 years ago, maybe 100 years ago, or more - so they represent a floating chronology, while the still living trees, Methuselah and Schulman's, represent absolute chronologies. Likewise, Prometheus represents an absolute chronology because the year it was cut down is known, so we know the age of the last formed ring.

Unless otherwise noted the ages of these trees were measured by counting annual rings from multiple core samples of the trees. This can lead to some minor inaccuracies, for example from missing sections of partial rings (resulting in an undercount). Cutting down the tree and using the whole cross-section is a different way to determine the age of a tree, and it avoids some of the problems with cores, so they are more accurate. Thus while it is unfortunate that Prometheus was cut down, we can benefit from the confidence gained by comparing the results with cored trees.

Note that these systems are similar so we should expect similar results. The real challenge will be to explain the consilience in results from other more independent systems, which we will get to later. This is just the beginning.

The earth is at least 5,067 years old (2017)

The minimum age for the earth is at least 5,067 years old (2017), based on the accurate and precise tree rings of Schulman's Tree extending back to 3051 BCE, and it is probably older, due to the ~7,000 year old "Ancient Sentinels." This also means that there was no major catastrophic event that would have disturbed their growing on top of these mountains.

Compare this to YEC models (6,000 years for those using Archbishop Usher's assumption filled calculations of a starting date of 4004 BCE), as this chronology extends to 3,051 BCE with no flood damage.

Enjoy.



References
  1. Anon, Wikipedia.com (website), , Methuselah, last modified 22 December 2013 , [2013, December 23]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methuselah_%28tree%29
  2. Anon, Wikipedia.com (website), , Prometheus, last modified 12 December 2013 , [2013, December 23]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_%28tree%29
  3. Anon, Wikipedia.com (website), ikipedia.com, Oldest Trees, last modified 18 December 2013, [2013, December 27]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_trees
  4. Ara (website), Ancient Trees, 14 Feb 2012 [2013, November 23]: http://www.ashtarcommandcrew.net/...topics/the-ancient-trees
  5. Anon, Wikipedia.com (website), Bristlecone pines, last modified 21 December 2013, [2013, December 27]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristlecone_pine

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 02-05-2017 12:07 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

Admin
Director
Posts: 12523
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 3 of 3 (798785)
02-05-2017 2:06 PM


Time can debate here when his suspension expires. Up to him.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017