Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is the YEC answer to the lack of shorter lived isotopes?
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 128 (77208)
01-08-2004 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by agrav8r
01-08-2004 6:34 PM


This is called an ad hoc rationalization. If radioactive atoms were discovered today and the implication of dating rocks using the half-lives of these isotopes became apparent, you would claim that they would show that the earth was young. Since that has not happened, you must invent scenarios that keep your presuppositions intact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by agrav8r, posted 01-08-2004 6:34 PM agrav8r has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by agrav8r, posted 01-08-2004 7:18 PM Loudmouth has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 128 (105663)
05-05-2004 6:09 PM


Summary
Just to pull things together (both for me and John Paul):
1. Elements with short half-lives are observed after supernovae and novae activity. They are naturally occuring within the universe.
2. Solar system formation is observed in nebulae. The formation of our solar system is an extrapolation of observations. To posit another theoretical frame work for solar system formation one needs to have the same weight of observed evidence. No one has done so.
3. Magnesium-26 within an aluminum lattice can only be explained by the decay of Aluminum-26. The lack of naturally occuring modern Aluminum-26 with a half life of 770,000 years indicates an old earth.
It seems like an open and shut case to me. Also, short lived isotopes are created by man on earth. Some of these elements, and their halve-lives were at one time theoretical, but are now proven. And how do humans make these radioactive elements? Through nuclear reactions like those found in stars. I would say that the lack of short lived radioactive isotopes ARE a problem for the YEC position.
This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 05-05-2004 05:10 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by John Paul, posted 05-20-2004 11:28 PM Loudmouth has replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 128 (110716)
05-26-2004 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by John Paul
05-20-2004 11:28 PM


Re: Summary
quote:
One thing to remember- the earth can be made up of materials that are old, or have been through a process that has made them appear to be old, and still have been formed relatively recently. Such would be the case with Dr. Humphreys' cosmology.
Or space aliens could have tinkered with our planets mineral make up in a way that could make it look younger than it really is. Ad hoc hypotheses are fun, aren't they?
To be serious, what observations led to the theory of a young earth made of materials that were artificially changed to look old?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by John Paul, posted 05-20-2004 11:28 PM John Paul has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024