Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1096 of 1498 (843413)
11-17-2018 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 1087 by Tanypteryx
11-16-2018 12:53 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 4 fantasy 0
You need to remember you may never claim anything at all about anything at all based on a same nature in the past that you cannot begin to support.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1087 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-16-2018 12:53 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1099 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-17-2018 1:51 PM creation has replied
 Message 1100 by edge, posted 11-17-2018 2:43 PM creation has replied

  
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1097 of 1498 (843414)
11-17-2018 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1082 by Coragyps
11-15-2018 8:01 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 4 fantasy 0
Ha. So you believe real hard. Somewhere, in hiding, unavailable to the 'educated' posters on this site making big claims...there are great close up pics of the pre 4500 pine tree rings.
Uh huh

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1082 by Coragyps, posted 11-15-2018 8:01 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1098 of 1498 (843415)
11-17-2018 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 1086 by Phat
11-16-2018 12:40 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 4 fantasy 0
So let's ignore actual evidence of an unprecedented spike in C14 levels I guess? That we we can validate your preconceived beliefs that you thought was science!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1086 by Phat, posted 11-16-2018 12:40 PM Phat has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 1099 of 1498 (843416)
11-17-2018 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1096 by creation
11-17-2018 1:40 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 4 fantasy 0
You need to remember you may never claim anything at all about anything at all based on a same nature in the past that you cannot begin to support.
You are the only one who needs to remember that. So far you have not been able to support anything.
Meanwhile millions of scientists around the world continue on as if you don't exist in this nature.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1096 by creation, posted 11-17-2018 1:40 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1109 by creation, posted 11-18-2018 3:00 AM Tanypteryx has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1705 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 1100 of 1498 (843419)
11-17-2018 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1096 by creation
11-17-2018 1:40 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 4 fantasy 0
You need to remember you may never claim anything at all about anything at all based on a same nature in the past that you cannot begin to support.
Did you really just write this?
This is just a ludicrous, hypocritical demand that makes mainstream YEC look almost sane.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1096 by creation, posted 11-17-2018 1:40 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1108 by creation, posted 11-18-2018 2:58 AM edge has not replied

  
lasthero
Junior Member (Idle past 1935 days)
Posts: 6
From: Charlotte
Joined: 03-21-2014


(4)
Message 1101 of 1498 (843439)
11-17-2018 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 1095 by creation
11-17-2018 1:38 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 5, fantasy 0
quote:
Lurkers
Notice that he did not even address the evidence about a historically unprecedented spike in C14 levels in the days of the bristlecone pin tree rings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ha.
Hoo ha.
Hi.
I'm a lurker.
I just wanted to let you know that, from an outside point of view, your arguments appear just as vapid as everyone you're arguing with keeps telling you they are.
That's all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1095 by creation, posted 11-17-2018 1:38 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1107 by creation, posted 11-18-2018 2:57 AM lasthero has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 1102 of 1498 (843445)
11-17-2018 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1048 by creation
11-13-2018 11:35 AM


Re: Correlation validation by Egyptian Chronology
There may have been ruptured conduits of the deep (founts) that brought stuff UP. Also, maybe some iridium in the waters from above. Who knows?
So..impact in some areas..yes...from above or below? Who knows?
Actual working geologists and chemists.
Do you have some evidence they don't?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1048 by creation, posted 11-13-2018 11:35 AM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1105 by creation, posted 11-18-2018 2:55 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 1103 of 1498 (843462)
11-18-2018 1:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1095 by creation
11-17-2018 1:38 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 6, fantasy 0
It is not my opinion that science uses a same state past basis for models. ...
Science uses what works, and the conclusion from many scientific investigations is that there has been very little, if any, variation in the basic behavior of the universe in the past, ie -- no significant changes. If there were evidence of changes then they would be used.
Your opinion that using the same state amounts to religion is just that -- your opinion.
... Nor is it my opinion history and the bible indicate great differences in the past on earth.
Sorry, that is blatantly your opinion. History certainly does not show any changes to the way things work, and the bible is not a work of science or history.
It is your opinion/belief that no other beliefs are allowed or matter regarding tree rings. Gong!
What is allowed is what the evidence shows, and so far the evidence shows age by annual rings, and this has been verified and validated by several independent groups. Science is based on evidence not personal opinions.
You have not provided any evidence the trees grew slow!!! You just assumed and believed blindly. The same way you assume and blindly believe in your one belief in all other areas!! The fact you turn around and try to conflate/confuse/combine several areas of evidence with that sole belief and have the unmitigated gall to try and call this exercise in religious fanaticism 'correlations ' is appalling.
It's what the evidence shows. The FACT of correlations is not an invention, it is an observation: two different sets of data, same results for specific dates of artifacts or events.
You cannot change the evidence by willful thinking or opinion.
You have been told before that any dark/light patterns in very old pines (which you failed to even be able to show us at all) if grown in the former nature and fast, obviously would not represent seasons of the year.
There is no former nature. There is no evidence that shows there was a change in nature. The evidence shows there is no change in nature.
You have not provided any evidence of change in nature.
You know NOTHING about what processes were involved or even if there was photosynthesis in place at the time...etc etc so you cannot tell us that dark/light patterns at that time had to represent seasons! You are talking out your hat.
Says the person who talks as if his personal fantasy is real.
What we know is that the rings consistently have the seasonal patterns of annual rings and they they show growth at the same basic annual rate ring after ring.
We also know that the same patterns grow in the Irish oaks and the German Oaks and their independent dendrochronologies show correlations with the Bristlecone pine tree rings.
?? No. We do not know any details about the older than 4500 tree rings of the pines from your posts. Did I miss something? Tell us about THOSE rings...details please! Ha.
You appeal to blind unquestioning faith alone, and have used the disguise of science in doing so! You are now busted.
You show a graph that lumps all the rings together. Let's see JUST the data for the pre 4500 'year' old rings!!!! Nothing else matters.
What matters to you concerns me not in the slightest, although it might be instructive to see what other Christians think about the matter:
quote:
Are tree-ring chronologies reliable?
The following article is abstracted from The Biblical Chronologist Volume 5, Number 1. Full details and references can be found there.
Basic Concepts of Dendrochronology
The science of constructing chronologies from tree rings is called dendrochronology. The basic concepts involved are not complex. Modern trees are known to produce one growth ring per year. This is a result of the annual cycle of seasons. (The idea that ancient trees grew more than one ring per year will be discussed below.) Therefore, by coring a living tree and counting rings from the present backwards, it is possible to determine the year in which each ring grew.
The annual growth rings vary in thickness each year depending on environmental factors such as rainfall. By matching ring-width patterns in a specimen of known age (starting with living specimens) to ring-width patterns in an older specimen, the proper placement of the older specimen is determined. Tree-ring chronologies have been extended to 10,000 years before present in this way.
European Tree-ring Chronology
While American scientists were building bristlecone pine and Douglas fir chronologies, European scientists were actively building a very long tree-ring chronology using oak trees. The more recent part of the chronology was constructed from oak logs used in various historic buildings. ...
The European oak chronology provided an excellent check of the American dendrochronologies. The two were obviously independent. Ring-width patterns are determined by local environmental factors, such as temperature and rainfall. The patterns in America could not bias the work on patterns in Europe, because the specimens came from two different local climates, separated by an ocean. The scientists worked independently of one another. Also, oak trees and bristlecone pine or Douglas fir trees are very different. Bristlecones, for example, are evergreens which grow very slowly, at high altitude, in a cold, arid environment, and live for thousands of years. None of these things are true of the oaks used in the European chronology. They are deciduous, grow relatively rapidly, at low altitudes, in relatively warm, moist environments, and live for only hundreds of years.
If the science of dendrochronology was characterized by significant random error, the American and European tree-ring chronologies would certainly disagree with each other. In fact, a comparison of the European and American chronologies showed very close correlation. The pattern of radiocarbon in the rings showed a maximum divergence, even at very old ages, of only around 40 years. This objective, quantitative test of dendrochronology showed it to be reliable and accurate.
Multiple Rings Per Year?
These checks show that tree-ring chronologies are not subject to significant random error. However, some critics of dendrochronology go on to suggest that trees in ancient history grew multiple rings per year, perhaps due to Noah's Flood, for example. A number of evidences argue strongly against such a claim.
First, the agreement of independent chronologies from separate continents discussed above must be taken into account. If Noah's Flood, or some other phenomenon caused trees to grow multiple rings per year, it must have affected different species in widely separated locations in exactly the same way. This does not seem likely.
Second, radiocarbon dates on objects of known age have confirmed the reliability of radiocarbon dating, and hence dendrochronology, when applied to the last 2,000 years, at least. The radiocarbon dates on the Dead Sea Scrolls are a good example. Thus we know that trees growing in the last 2,000 years or more haven't been growing multiple rings per year.
Third is an argument which is perhaps the most definitive falsification of the idea that trees grew more than one ring per year in ancient history. Here is a greatly condensed version of this argument.
Our sun occasionally goes through periods of quiescence. During these periods few sunspots are seen on the sun's surface and the solar wind is reduced. This lets more cosmic radiation into the upper atmosphere of the earth, which allows more radiocarbon to be produced in the atmosphere. These periods of quiescence occur in two varieties, one lasting an average of 51 years, and the other lasting an average of 96 years.
How does this relate to tree-rings? During these periods of quiescence, atmospheric radiocarbon concentrations are higher. This difference in radiocarbon concentration is recorded in tree rings which are growing during the period of quiescence. If trees were growing two or three rings per year at the time one of these episodes occurred, two or three times as many rings would be affected than if trees were only growing one ring per year. In other words, if trees were growing one ring per year, a 51-year period of solar quiescence would affect 51 tree rings. If trees were growing three rings per year, a 51-year period of solar quiescence would affect about 153 rings. Thus, a record of ring growth per year is preserved in the number of rings affected by these periods of solar quiescence.
In fact, at least 16 of these episodes have occurred in the last 10,000 years.These 16 episodes are more or less evenly distributed throughout those 10,000 years. In all cases, the number of rings affected is grouped around 51 or 96 rings. Thus it is clear that, for at least the last 10,000 years, trees have been growing only one ring per year. The suggestion that dendrochronology is invalidated by growth of multiple rings per year is thus falsified.
Note that these sun cycles are in addition to the 11 year cycle. Looks like they disagree with you and your opinion of what history and the bible indicate.
And I have suggested that you contact the authors of the peer reviewed scientific papers to address your specific questions. There is both the Intel group and the University of Arizona, among others.
Curiously I have been in contact with some of the dendrochronologists, and they were helpful in providing additional information that I have included in the thread. They were happy to reply.
Great, so let's see the C14 info for the rings pre 4500!!
Its in the graph.
The link I posted suggests that most C14 details in trees are from the more recent times ( ..to ..several hundred years BC)
I could not find any link in your posts.
We have no idea HOW C14 was 'gotten' in the former nature. Once again you seek to impose current nature realities onto the unknown nature in the past...for no apparent reason.
You have not explained any alternative. Just saying it happened differently is not an explanation. You have not provided any evidence of a different nature, and no reason to think it was significantly different.
No one says that several hundred rings from both nearby dead trees, and the innermost core of living trees are from the same time!! Canard. Strawman.
Fast growing trees with hundreds of rings could, however represent decades or a century...etc!
Therefore, the rings from the so called 5400BC in my link could represent trees mere decades before the time of the early bristlecone pines!
In other words the actual dates for the so called 5400BC rings could be closer to 4500 years.
As for false/missing rings, please do not tell us what former nature trees would do! How would you know? Your on trick religious pony is to attribute current nature features to the old trees by faith!!
Your understanding of dendrochronology is pathetically vapid and any comments you make based on are likewise pathetically vapid.
Your mental wanderings are not evidence that things were different.
You cannot convert anything because of annual rings!! (unless there was annual rings).
Your lack of understanding trully seems to inhibit your ability to understand what is posted.
quote:
Conventional radiocarbon ages (BP)
A radiocarbon measurement, termed a conventional radiocarbon age (or CRA) is obtained using a set of parameters outlined by Stuiver and Polach (1977), in the journal Radiocarbon. A time-independent level of C14 activity for the past is assumed in the measurement of a CRA. The activity of this hypothetical level of C14 activity is equal to the activity of the absolute international radiocarbon standard.
The Conventional Radiocarbon Age BP is calculated using the radiocarbon decay equation:
t=-8033 ln(Asn/Aon)
Where -8033 represents the mean lifetime of 14C (Stuiver and Polach, 1977). Aon is the activity in counts per minute of the modern standard, Asn is the equivalent cpm for the sample. 'ln' represents the natural logarithm.
Aon represents the level of C14 for 1950 in organic samples that obtained carbon from the atmosphere.
As you can see the conversion to a "c14 age" is a purely mathematical process. This means we can take reported C14 conventional age and convert it back to the level of C14 found in the sample.
Now...if you want to post actual content of actual rings pre 4500 let's see the data! How would we accept that your graph looked at all rings, rather than some sort of averaging scheme? Let's see the goods.
What was measured was shown in the graph. There are other graphs that extend the calibration of C14 data to ~50,000 years ago (see (Message 5):
quote:
In the case of the Lake Suigetsu Lake Varves they present a calibration curve as well, and we can use this to represent the Carbon-14 environment in the same way we did for the tree-rings - as an indicator of what the levels of Carbon-14 were when the organic samples were alive and growing.
Just a moment... (3)
quote:

Fig. 1. (A) Radiocarbon calibration up to 45,000 yr B.P. reconstructed from annually laminated sediments of Lake Suigetsu, Japan. The small circles with 1s error represent the 14C ages against varve ages. For the oldest eight points (>38,000 years, filled circles), we assumed a constant sedimentation during the Glacial period. The green symbols correspond to the tree-ring calibration (2, 15), and the large red symbols represent calibration by combined 14C and U-Th dating of corals from Papua New Guinea (squares) (8), Mururoa (circles), and Barbados (triangles) (7). The line indicates that radiocarbon age equals calibrated age.
We are only concerned here with the open blue circles and their match to the green tree-ring data. We can note in passing, however, that the other data (red open squares and triangles) span from the dendrochronology to the lake chronology, and operate as a validating correlation link between them.
Now you have more correlations to explain, and you haven't even tackled the previous correlations in any adequate way.
Two points.
1) Let's see the markers for the pre 4500 year rings then!!
2) Remember that any patterns in trees grown in the former state do not equal patterns in this nature. What grows in a summer here, for example, might have grown in the cool of the day there for all we know.
Lurkers
Notice that he did not even address the evidence about a historically unprecedented spike in C14 levels in the days of the bristlecone pin tree rings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ha.
Hoo ha.
I expect the lurkers are laughing as well ... but at you and your inadequate explanations of the correlations and your clutching desperately to little tid-bits of information rather than the whole set of evidence for old age.
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 1095 by creation, posted 11-17-2018 1:38 PM creation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1106 by creation, posted 11-18-2018 2:56 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 1110 by creation, posted 11-18-2018 3:04 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1104 of 1498 (843463)
11-18-2018 1:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1095 by creation
11-17-2018 1:38 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 6, fantasy 0
..
Edited by RAZD, : double post

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 1095 by creation, posted 11-17-2018 1:38 PM creation has not replied

  
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1105 of 1498 (843467)
11-18-2018 2:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1102 by AZPaul3
11-17-2018 5:05 PM


Re: Correlation validation by Egyptian Chronology
They see iridium that science says usually is found in space/asteroids etc, and deep in the planet.
They have no info on where the KT iridium came from all over the planet. They suspect, they believe ....
It is the info they lack that damns their models.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1102 by AZPaul3, posted 11-17-2018 5:05 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1112 by AZPaul3, posted 11-18-2018 6:46 AM creation has replied

  
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1106 of 1498 (843468)
11-18-2018 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 1103 by RAZD
11-18-2018 1:08 AM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 6, fantasy 0
Couldn't even be bothered to address the issues that defeated you eh?
Your loss.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1103 by RAZD, posted 11-18-2018 1:08 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1115 by RAZD, posted 11-18-2018 8:16 AM creation has replied

  
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1107 of 1498 (843469)
11-18-2018 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 1101 by lasthero
11-17-2018 4:31 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 5, fantasy 0
Since my argument is that you have no support for your vapid beliefs, who cares?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1101 by lasthero, posted 11-17-2018 4:31 PM lasthero has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1111 by lasthero, posted 11-18-2018 5:44 AM creation has replied

  
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1108 of 1498 (843470)
11-18-2018 2:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1100 by edge
11-17-2018 2:43 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 4 fantasy 0
Sorry if you thought you could claim things based on some belief you can't support. Get over it, Those days are gone now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1100 by edge, posted 11-17-2018 2:43 PM edge has not replied

  
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1109 of 1498 (843471)
11-18-2018 3:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1099 by Tanypteryx
11-17-2018 1:51 PM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 4 fantasy 0
They also go on as if God does not exist, history does not exist, spiritual life does not exist...etc etc.
The issue is not whether the insane go on...the issue is what the insane claim as science here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1099 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-17-2018 1:51 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1116 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-18-2018 12:35 PM creation has replied

  
creation
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1110 of 1498 (843472)
11-18-2018 3:04 AM
Reply to: Message 1103 by RAZD
11-18-2018 1:08 AM


Re: Prometheus evidence vs fantasy, Prometheus 6, fantasy 0
You 'extend' the C14 and all other things only in your beliefs. In reality nothing about the slow tree rings growth along with the current nature functions of C14 can be extended anywhere, anytime, anyhow..beyond where this nature has existed. The question is how long ago you can prove it did exist as YOU claim. ..Not how many foolish ways you can apply your beliefs to various evidences so that they appear to your made up little religious mind to all be correlated!!!!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1103 by RAZD, posted 11-18-2018 1:08 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1114 by RAZD, posted 11-18-2018 7:14 AM creation has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024