Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 125 (8732 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-20-2017 8:12 AM
279 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume:
Total: 798,927 Year: 3,533/21,208 Month: 1,928/1,605 Week: 128/376 Day: 31/97 Hour: 2/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2829303132
33
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18125
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 481 of 483 (797629)
01-24-2017 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
01-06-2007 4:40 PM


bump for new member time ...
To address this issue of correlations, and to bring this issue to the fore, this topic starts with ones that have direct methods of counting ages due to annual layers, how those annual layers validate each other and how several radiometric methods enter into the mix -- correlations not just with age but with climate and certain known instances that occurred in the past and which show up in these records just where they should be.

The challenge for the creationist is not just to describe how a single method can be wrong, but how they can all be wrong at the same time and yet produce identical results - when the errors in different systems should produce different random results.

So time, care to take a crack at it? Start with Message 1 for the ground rules of this thread, then proceed to the dendrochronology section:

  • Message 2 - The minimum age of the earth is 8,000 years by annual tree rings in California.
  • Message 3 - The minimum age of the earth is 10,434 years by annual tree rings in Europe (different environment, different genus, not just different species and from two different locations ).
  • Message 4 - The minimum age of the earth is 12,405 years by adding more annual tree rings in Europe (different environment and species), confirmed by carbon-14 levels in the samples (different information from the same sources).

Enjoy


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 01-06-2007 4:40 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18125
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 482 of 483 (798253)
02-01-2017 10:35 AM


Information for Micah8294
Welcome to the fray Micah8294,

in your proposed thread Some questions for atheists... you ask

2. how do evolutionists overcome the issues about the age of the earth (i'm sure you've heard the arguments)

This thread (written in 2007) is about the many ways that we determine age from objective empirical evidence, starting with simple system where layers can be counted. Please read Message 1 and Message 2 to get started.

You can see a proposed newer version at The Age of the Earth. This new thread would update and add information that has become available since 2007, when this thread was written. If you are interested in debate on this newer thread (you won't be able to reply to that thread until it is promoted), please message me or ADMIN.

Enjoy

... as you are new here, some posting tips:

type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:

quotes are easy

and you can type [qs=RAZD]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:

RAZD writes:

quotes are easy

or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:

quote:
quotes are easy

also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window.

For other formatting tips see Posting Tips
For a quick overview see EvC Forum Primer
If you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0

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)

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18125
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 483 of 483 (798754)
02-05-2017 11:09 AM


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

So this is to debate with 'time' on two different forums, 'time' on the link above, and me 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.

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 on Cross forum evolution debate on Age of the Earth, let him know and then copy his replies there and continue. If that thread is promoted, then others will be able to participate.

Enjoy

ps - with 483 posts and little recent activity I think it is time to close this thread and move to The Age of the Earth with updates and new information.

Edited by RAZD, : .

Edited by RAZD, : time to close this one


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)

  
RewPrev1
...
2829303132
33
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017