Earth science curriculum tailored to fit wavering fundamentalists

I apologize in advance for this question because i know I've seen it answered multiple times on this forum but I just can't think of a search term that would return what I need.Let's suppose the viable dating range of a given RID method is 1 million years to 1 billion years.
Let's suppose I send in a rock #1 that is a half a million years old.
Let's suppose I also send in a rock #2 that is 2 billion years old.My recollection is that the lab will NOT send you a results saying that the first rock is 1 million years old (even though that may be what their equipment returned) but rather a return saying something like "Less than a million"? Same with the other rock ... "More than a billion".Would it be something likeRock 1: =< 1,000,000
Rock 2: => 1,000,000,000Is there some additional language a lab would put with this to note that the date range is outside the normal range return of their equipment/method.Thanks so much.JB

I've been asked this question by one of my wavering YEC fundamentalists and I want to make sure and get the answer right. I have searched this forum including the excellent thread " Self-Replicating Molecules - Life's Building Blocks", but can't seem to find a clear answer.Do we have current examples of self replicating molecules in the wild? Not lab created, but naturally occurring.And help would be greatly appreciated.Thanks
JB

Awesome answer. I already shared it with them.THANKSJB

A question for those dendro inclined.In all the YEC talk about multiple rings per year, I hear responses from knowledgeable dendro folk saying things like "it's far more common to have missing rings than multiple rings".I understand that 2 rings per year is rather easy to detect (cellular difference as I follow it), but does anyone have any idea how one could detect missing rings? I'm not talking about a situation where one tree among many might for some reason be one ring short in a common sequence (solved by crossdating), but rather where a large climate event might cause widespread loss of a year in all the trees in a say an entire region.Any thoughts?Thanks
JBEdited by ThinAirDesigns, : No reason given.

I'll say thanks to all three of you that responded here at once.So it sounds like, other than crossdating other references, there is no way to know if rings are missing. Unlike multiple rings, where there are cellular differences that can be used to differentiate from normal rings, there is not tell-tale evidence left behind in the tree of a missing ring.I suspected as much but wanted to make sure.Thanks.
JB

Today, while describing the issues with dating water based mollusks / seals, etc., I was asked why these same water based variables didn't apply to plants which uptake water through their roots. Seems like a good question and one I've never heard asked before.By searching "Do plants uptake C14 through roots" I found several studies about the uptake of C02 through the roots, but nothing directly dating related.Any suggestions on where I can go to learn how to answer that one?Thanks
JB

Thanks Coyote.Even though it can happen theoretically, it must not be much of an issue since I've never heard anyone complain about it before. I would think if it were common it would be discussed in papers and such.JB

Well, this just got interesting.I've just accepted the opportunity to question/debate Hugh Miller live (online) with my family watching. I have stated that the only topic I'm interested in debating are the famous Carnegie Samples.The time isn't set up yet (I asked for a few days to get my stuff together). Anyone else interested in watching or engaging is invited to do so.More later (and I'll have a ton of questions to ask y'all as well).Could be fun.JB

That's exactly what it is. But via email he's halfway convinced my family that it's not true and so they asked if I would debate him.Certain members of the family are on the fence and leaning my way. I want to use this to lean them even farther.JB

(from phone so short)Will be a text debate on a facebook group called "SDA Fight Club Arena" (SDA being Seventh Day Adventist)The SDA Fight Club is a place where current and former SDAs, and others discuss issues relevant to the church and members past and present. It's moderated to a "attack the idea but not the person" level and has a fair bit of science exchange. It has a higher 'past member' mix than 'current members' but still a fair share of the YEC faithful.The "Arena" is a separate area where everyone can see an exchange, but only those invited to the exchange can participate - this keeps exchanges on very specific topics cleaner with less side commenting to derail things.I would LOVE people with more knowledge than I have directly involved in this exchange with Miller and would try to work out logistics to suit that. It's not like it will be of the 'hour format' or anything formal like that ... It could go on for several days as we ask him questions as they come up and he answers them in his own time (just like here).Like any FB exchange, it is preserved and can be viewed at any time.

Sometime early in my time here at CvE, I read everything I could find on the Hugh Miller / Carnegie fiasco. At one point I remember actually seeing an image from the AZ lab that did the testing along with their notations as to the contamination of the sample. I can't find that report anywhere. Does anyone else remember such? Pointers?Thanks
JB

I'm looking for information on the following position posted below related to the geographic range of certain geologic formations.1: Is this described range true? I find many tapeat maps and the range is generally limited to North America so I assume it's not.
2: Is there some broader (or twisted) definition that would allow the expansion of range (or is it just straight made up)
3: Are such formations defined broadly by common events, or by some 'fingerprint', or ... ??Thanks:

quote:

---

Dr. Andrew Snelling, geologist with Answers in Genesis provides the following brief description of the layers exposed in the Grand Canyon. This is part of a series of articles written by Dr. Snelling for the Answers Magazine and can be found at Answers in Genesis .

​

We find rock layers that can be traced all the way across continentseven between continentsand physical features in those strata indicate they were deposited rapidly. For example, the Tapeats Sandstone and Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon can be traced across the entire United States, up into Canada, and even across the Atlantic Ocean to England. The chalk beds of England (the white cliffs of Dover) can be traced across Europe into the Middle East and are also found in the Midwest of the United States and in Western Australia.

---

BTW, Hugh Miller bailed on the public exchange he had initiallly offered and I described above before it even started.Apologies for not updating the group on that earlier.JB

The maps I find for the Tapeat show a far greater range than the listed range in Wikipedia, but nothing like Snelling describes. I haven't found anything other than local/regional maps for the redwall. Edited by ThinAirDesigns, : No reason given.

Crap -- yeah, I'm usually more aware of sources than that, but I just right clicked on one in Google images and copied the link.Sure enough when I look at each of them in Google images, all of that variety are coming from YEC sites.Thanks -- dropped the ball on that. I did find this one entertaining for obvious reasons -- WORLDWIDE (in the US):