Carbon Dating DOESN'T work beyond 4500 years

Not that I don't believe you, but this is the first time I've heard of cold water being magnetic. Do you have a citation for this? I'd like to know more. That's not quite the point. The point is that since ages derived from radiocarbon dating, denderochronology, coral reef analysis, and other dating systems line up so well with each other, it's not enough for creationists to point out how each of these dating methods could be inaccurate individually. A mechanism must be proposed that explains why they're inaccurrate to the same identical degree.(Edited to fix spelling. - Crashfrog)[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 04-28-2003]

By the same token, the spillway argument is not very conclusive. Clearly, since it contains feature of both spillways and long, meandering river carving, it can't be used to confirm either theory. It's just not a very clear-cut case, by your argument. Thus it's a little disingenuous of you to use it as evidence for your position, since you said it couldn't really be used as evidence for any position. You remember that plate tectonics we keep talking about, where the Earth's plates keep running into each other and lifitng land masses above the oceans? So, why would you assume that all present land masses would have to have always been there? Some of the land masses have arisen since Pangea's breakup.You may be interested to know that Africa is growing. There's a rift in the middle of it (the Great Rift Valley) where the plates are slowly drawing away from each other. It's an area of intense vulcanism. Thus, if we extrapolate backwards, we find that Africa would be smaller at the time it was a part of Pangea.So far you've yet to present any kind of geological evidence that hasn't been the result of your failure to consider plate tectonics. Is there something about tectonics you reject? Your argument here doesn't make any sense. Death is death. If what you say is true than they couldn't have died from a flood, either. No matter how catastrophic the flood was, it couldn't have resulted in instant fossilization - if every clam dies with an open shell, then even clams killed by your flood should have open shells. Clearly, then, it's possible for clams to die with closed shells.We know that the Himalayas are uplift mountains. We've observed them growing, ever so slowly. There's nothing in your evidence to suggest that the clams didn't die and get fossilized on an ocean floor that much, much later became a mountain due to uplift. Your argument is simply fallacious.

Funny that you seem to remember your earth science only when it appears to serve your purposes.The coast is not always the first to uplift. That depends on the characteristics of the faultline between the two plates. Anyway it's a lot like pushing the end of a carpet. The carpet will wrinkle, but not always at the place where you're pushing. Sure, and times when the tree has less rings. You seem to gloss over those situations. Because, taken on average, for the time periods that dendrochronology and radiocarbon dating overlap, they tend to converge on the same dates. Your excuses for how these methods could be individually inaccurate doesn't explain how they could be inaccurate in the same way, to the same degree, for the vast majority of cases.

Oh. Well then, here you go then!

See, the funny thing is, first-year physics majors measure the speed of light - in fact, you can do it yourself at home with a microwave and a bar of chocolate, no shit! - and they've never seen it "slowing down." It's the exact same speed that it always has been.So, given that I've seen the evidence that the speed of light is the same as it's always been, why should I take your word about it "slowing down"? We have observations going back as far as 2 billion years that confirm that the speed of light, and the rates of radioactive decay, are the same. Sorry. It would be funny, if it were true.Most hominid fossils are from Africa, although the more recent ones are from Europe. (I think. There are certainly plenty in both Africa and Europe.)