|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Easy peasy. Detrmining when a bottleneck 'happened' is based on current genes/DNA/genetics. Unless the nature was the same, why would molecules and atoms have behaved exactly as they now do? Why would the genetics of a former nature be the very same as now?? Proof?
I suspect that all DNA we have in any good shape is from the recent past and this nature. Got any from the KT era?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined:
|
Hi RAZD et al.
I have just read AIG's article by Snelling on the Hawaiian-Emperor chain and admit to being somewhat gobsmacked. He acknowledges that the radiometric dates for the seamounts are what you would expect for the rate of current movement, but blandly says the rate of movement, RM decay, and volcanic activity, all changed in lock-step to produce this result. The wilful blindness is breath-taking.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Let's review. You offered us some tattered/reconstructed parchment written by some unknown on the back of an actual ancient scroll, that has missing kings, many unknown kings, and a plethora of spook kings!
Because some of the kings on the list actually existed, you try to use tree ring chronology that assumes fast present nature tree growth to date those kings!You seem so desperate to use same nature past beliefs on tree rings, that you dredge up a spirit king inclusive list to try and make it appear as if the dates are good. You failed to provide any close up details on the only rings that mattered, the few hundred rings from the living tree, yet you made claims about the C14 they supposedly contain. Claims based on there having existed a same nature in the past that would have allowed the carbon to exist in nature only as it now would....etc etc. You avoid all responsibility for having to prove this nature you claim existed, and upon which ALL your religious correlations depend. You thought you could just plow along trying to explain all evidences and correlate them TO YOUR belief! I do not find it strange in any way that furniture from trees would contain the same pattern of C14 as trees from the time would!? The only issue is how C14 fit in nature and what it did, where it used to come from...etc etc..in other words C14 only has meaning in a nature we know! You have transposed the meaning from this nature to all former times for no reason. Edited by creation, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Great, so how about pre flood?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Origins so called sciences are beliefs used to explain evidences the godless ignorant way they prefer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
The fact remains that the biblical flood was said to have caused a great great extinction! Your fable about the KT layer also claims the same thing. The waters came from space and deep under the earth...iridium is said by science to come from there also! If the crater was left by some impact from under the earth to above, we would have the same striations etc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.8 |
creation writes: Origins so called sciences are beliefs used to explain evidences the godless ignorant way they prefer. Thanks, I figured you flunked science and you keep on confirming it.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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.8 |
creation writes: The fact remains that the biblical flood was said to have caused a great great extinction! Well, the bible claims that, but it's fiction so not evidence.
creation writes: Your fable about the KT layer also claims the same thing. No, actually that is YOUR fable about the KT layer. The theory that the K-Pg asteroid impact was the cause of a mass extinction 65 million years ago has multiple kinds of evidence to support it and says nothing whatsoever about you fictional biblical flood.
creation writes: The waters came from space and deep under the earth... More of your fictional flood story.
creation writes: If the crater was left by some mpact from under the earth to above, we would have the same striations etc. If? If? Good grief, there is no such thing as "some impact from under the earth to above." That doesn't even make sense. "The same striations etc."? What the hell are you talking about?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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi RAZD et al. I have just read AIG's article by Snelling on the Hawaiian-Emperor chain and admit to being somewhat gobsmacked. He acknowledges that the radiometric dates for the seamounts are what you would expect for the rate of current movement, but blandly says the rate of movement, RM decay, and volcanic activity, all changed in lock-step to produce this result. The wilful blindness is breath-taking. Well, it is AIG... and Snelling ... so one would expect misleading information and misinformation. What he is essentially saying is the evidence shows these things happening concurrently (in lockstep), which is what one would expect based on current knowledge. This is a consistent problem creationists have when trying to alter reality to fit into a young earth scenario -- explaining why these correlations exist. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1705 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
The fact remains that the biblical flood was said to have caused a great great extinction!
Heh, heh ... It is said by YOU, yes.
Your fable about the KT layer also claims the same thing.
The point being?
The waters came from space and deep under the earth...
According to you.
... iridium is said by science to come from there also!
Now you are going to draw some illogical conclusion?
If the crater was left by some impact from under the earth to above, ...
Something that has never been documented, observed or even predicted.
... we would have the same striations etc.
What striations are you talking about? It's pretty clear that you have not been reading our posts. That is convenient for you but very discourteous as well as anti-science of you. You spout random words such as 'iridium' and 'striations', and even 'above' and 'below' like a child's toys in a very small playpen. You really have no understanding of them, do you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1404 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thank you for confirming what I posted in Message 1215.
Let's review. You offered us some tattered/reconstructed parchment written by some unknown on the back of an actual ancient scroll, that has missing kings, many unknown kings, and a plethora of spook kings! Nope, I presented information from the accepted absolute Egyptian Chronology to date the artifacts.
quote: As I said, mocking the chronology does not refute the chronology nor does it address the correlation.
... you try to use tree ring chronology that assumes fast present nature tree growth to date those kings! ... Nope, I presented information from the scientifically accepted absolute (oak) tree-ring chronology that also dated the artifacts to the same time period (or slightly older within the margins of error), which you agree with:
I do not find it strange in any way that furniture from trees would contain the same pattern of C14 as trees from the time would!? ... Of course the wood in the artifacts could have come from older stock lumber before it was used to build furniture, but that just make the matching dates stronger. This also means that any concept involving fast tree ring growth has to explain how the furniture maker picked the exact to-the-minute sample of wood to make the artifact in order to make the correlation ...
... The only issue is how C14 fit in nature and what it did, where it used to come from...etc etc..in other words C14 only has meaning in a nature we know! Nope, the only issue is the correlation between independently determined chronologies (which is evidence of a consistent nature). Trees "breath" in CO2 from the atmosphere. The atmosphere contains isotopes of carbon, including Carbon-14, and use it to build molecules like Cellulose, (C6H10O5)n. Chemical molecules are blind to the isotopes involved, so the proportions of the different isotopes in the cellulose matches to proportions of the isotopes in the atmosphere at the time the molecules are assembled. After this occurs there is no known mechanism to change those proportions ... except decay. This means (as you have agreed) that two samples with the same age would have the same levels of C-14 in the cellulose. This means that an artifact's age can be determined by matching the actual factual measured decayed level of C-14 to the actual factual measured level of C-14 in the dendrochronology -- within the margin of error in measurement and within the margin of error caused by the wiggle pattern of atmospheric variation in C-14 content (from year to year caused by solar cycles, including the 11-year cycle). You have not explained how the pattern of C-14 in the tree rings can exist by any means other than as a record of annual variations in atmospheric C-14 during original ring growth. Multiple rings per day would have the same C-14 unless you can show a mechanism to alter this by the hour, all around the world at the same time. So you still have not explained the correlation, which demonstrates accuracy and precision in the data, regardless of how weak you think the information is to determine the dates. Wrong on all counts, but fascinating consistency in ignorance maintained in spite of contrary evidence. You keep misrepresenting what I post, and that means you don't understand it or you just don't care about being wrong or that you do it intentionally (troll behavior). You keep being a perfect example of what is wrong with creationist arguments and behavior. As I said in Message 1215: "This is a very strong piece of evidence that the ages presented here are valid and incontestable by creationists and their pipe-dreams of a young earth." The correlations win again. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : . Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1705 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
Well, it is AIG... and Snelling ... so one would expect misleading information and misinformation.
Yes, it is Snelling, a person known for massive cognitive dissonance since he acknowledges deep time in his previous day job as an economic geologist where he worked on Precambrian uranium deposits in Australia. So, it would be easy for him to dismiss old age dates and normal plate tectonics as having changed dramatically somewhere in the past so as to befuddle all of the scientists working in these areas. That way it's easy to selectively ignore huge amounts of data.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1705 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
Easy peasy. Detrmining when a bottleneck 'happened' is based on current genes/DNA/genetics. Unless the nature was the same, why would molecules and atoms have behaved exactly as they now do? Why would the genetics of a former nature be the very same as now?? Proof?
Why would they not? Please tell us how atoms and molecules did react in a previous state and then we can have a nice discussion about it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 734 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Oh, while you’re at it, creation, your comments on how other elements transform into iridium, in either this nature on in your previous nature? With a little detail, please.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
creation writes:
Strictly speaking, the Ark was intended specifically to prevent any extinctions from happening. The fact remains that the biblical flood was said to have caused a great great extinction!And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024