Two types of science

Hi marc9000,Let me focus on one aspect of your topic while I let others take care of the rest. I will start with three trees growing in the Sierra Nevada, White mountains in California, all Bristlecone Pines:http://www.rmtrr.org/oldlist.htm

quote:

---

Notes on dates:
* tree is still living as of 2012; age given is additional years since it was first sampled when this is known.
** tree is dead; age is at time of death.

Tree species	age	type	ID	Location	Collector(s), Dater(s), Reference
Pinus longaeva	5062*	XD	-	White Mountains, California, USA	Ed Schulman, Tom Harlan
Pinus longaeva	4845*	XD	"Methuselah"	White Mountains, California, USA	Ed Schulman, Tom Harlan
Pinus longaeva	4844**	XD	WPN-114,"Prometheus"	Wheeler Peak, Nevada, USA	Currey 1965

---

Can you tell me what process of scientific information gathering cannot be used to count the rings in these three trees, to measure the thicknesses of the rings in these trees, to determine the patterns of ring thickness as a function of ring count, and to compare these patterns for each of the three trees?Can you tell me what process of scientific information gathering cannot be used to determine that these are annual rings and thus conclude that the earth has been in existence at least as long as these trees have been alive, undisturbed by any cataclysmic event?I conclude that the earth is at least 5,064 years old this year based on this objective empirical evidence. If you don't reply, that's fine, but it may indicate that you have no answer to this set of questions.I await your reply.

---

Edited by RAZD, : splgEdited by RAZD, : .

And you can start with determining the distance to SN1987A.How Good Are Those Young Earth Arguments?: Supernova SN1987A and the Speed of Light

I'll try to keep it concise. Not sure how a book or a worldview should be a test for scientific information gathering, but ok -- onward:So doing this pattern matching we find that each of the three living trees have the same pattern of ring width vs ring count. But that's not all:There are also dead Bristlecone pines, some still standing that have over 7000 tree rings, still preserved by the high and dry climate at the top of these mountains. We don't know from just looking at them when they died: it could be 50 years ago (minimum - they were found in 1960) or 100 years ago ...So is there any problem with applying the same process of scientific information gathering to count the rings in these additional standing dead trees, to measure the thicknesses of the rings in these trees, to determine the patterns of ring thickness as a function of ring count, and then to compare these patterns for each of the three trees ... any by this process determine when these standing dead trees died by matching their patterns with the three living trees ... ?... let's say for the sake of argument that the tree ring pattern for a 7,000 ring dead standing tree matches rings from the living trees at the 60th tree ring and also for each ring back to the the earliest ring of the 5,064 (2014) year old living tree ... so the tree ring count would then reach back 7,060 years into the past.So is there any problem with applying the same process of scientific information gathering to determine that these are also annual rings in the standing dead trees and thus conclude that the earth has been in existence at least as long as these trees have been standing, undisturbed by any cataclysmic event ... back to 5,037 BCE at least?Again, based on this objective empirical evidence, I conclude that the earth is at least 7,060 years old this year (2014) .If you don't reply, that's fine, but it may indicate that you have no answer to this set of questions.Again I await your reply.

What our eyes and our instruments detect are particles emitted by the stars in the same way those particles are emitted by the sun.The Hubble Telescope detects light with photon sensors and can "see" frequencies that the human eye cannot detect.Heat can also be detected by humans and heat detectors, and they can detect the heat of the sunlight hitting the earth.These instruments have the advantage of being able to quantify the intensity of heat\light particles, record those intensities and allow us to compare them with different stars or galaxies.These particles are objective empirical evidence that we observe directly. Their direction gives an idea of the location for the source. And these measurements and angular references are repeatable and testable.Thus we can collect and record the photons that come from SN1987A, and we can measure the angle between the star core and the ring, and we can measure the time delay between light bursts from the star nova event directly, and from the ring when 'lit up' by the bursts and then traveling to earth. This information gives us all the information needed to determine the distance to this star.Edited by RAZD, : clrty

Yet billions of years is not necessary to show that 10,000 years is invalid.And this evidence shows that no cataclysmic event disturbed the growth of those trees during that time. No flood reached that location in this time. It would seem that the output is different for different people using the same input, so their model is of questionable value.And when you get OECs using the same basic model but getting vastly different results it would seem that the model has no predictive value.

Just curious marc9000 That seems to be a Christian group attacking school education programs, rather than some atheist agenda\conspiracy attacking Christians. Ah, so it would be okay to use the buddhist approach: all is illusion.Edited by RAZD, : ..Edited by RAZD, : ...

The plan of living organisms is to survive ... they expend a lot of resources to follow that plan.The purpose of living organisms is to reproduce as often as possible ... this too is pursued with the expenditure of a lot of resources.

Just establishing the groundwork. Glad you agree that matching tree rings from the dead standing trees to the tree rings from the living trees produces valid, testable, reproducible chronologies. Easy: there is also a lot of dead wood lying on the ground. This wood would have floated away if there had been a flood.The pieces of dead lying on the ground wood can also be measured, and the pattern of ring thickness with ring count determined as was done for the living trees and the dead standing trees.So is there any problem with applying the same process of scientific information gathering to count the rings in these pieces of dead lying on the ground wood, to measure the thicknesses of the rings in these wood pieces, to determine the patterns of ring thickness as a function of ring count, and then to compare these patterns for each of the three living trees and the dead standing trees ... and by this process determine when these dead lying on the ground pieces fit into the chronology by matching their patterns with the three living trees and the dead standing trees ... ?When we do this, the pieces fit into a chronology that overlaps the rings from the living trees and the dead standing trees and other pieces of dead lying on the ground wood with plenty of overlap and plenty of corroboration from other pieces also matching for the same ring count... so the tree ring count would then reach back to 6,700 BCE, or 8,714 years into the past (2014)..So is there any problem with applying the same process of scientific information gathering to determine that these are also annual rings in the pieces of dead lying on the ground wood and thus conclude that the earth has been in existence at least as long as these trees and pieces of dead lying on the ground wood have been there, undisturbed by any cataclysmic event ... back to 6,700 BCE at least?The name for this field of science is dendrochronology. It is testable, reproducible and falsifiable.Again, based on this objective empirical evidence, I conclude that the earth is at least 8,714 years old this year (2014) .If you don't reply, that's fine, but it may indicate that you have no answer to this set of questions.Again I await your reply.(I'm not as interested in replying to the rest, so I'm stopping here for conciseness)

The beneficial effect of religious intolerance on world peace would be a good start ...... oh wait.

Connecting to AppStore

quote:

---

Description

​

The best way to get anger under control and to stop hurting loved ones is to carry your anger management program with you. The iPhone Anger App from Personal Power Path.com is with you at all times, especially when you need it the most.

---

Oh snap! You are so busted as an intellectual elitist snob, ramoss Amazing how well this describes politics in general, the GOP on Bengazi, the budget and 'Bama, and the Tea Party on anything (and I certainly hope they are 'on' something ... ..)

Sorry, must comment: No, marc9000 -- that is what ID claims is true, they set themselves up. All anybody need do is ask for substantiation of that claim. Science is founded on evidence. Which has been done.Edited by RAZD, : .

Its like a poe.

From your lack of response to Message 77 I am going to assume that your response is similar to your previous responses: And we are now at a point where the earth is at least 8,714 years old this year (2014), another small step in the overall process .The next step is to look at other dendrochronologies, now that we have established the valid scientific basis for this process of scientific information gathering and determination from the evidence available.For instance there is an oak dendrochronology from Ireland that extends back to 7980 BCE, or 9930 BP (before 1950), slightly longer than the Bristlecone Pine chronology.And there is a second oak dendrochronology from Germany that extends back to 10,429 BP (before 1950) or 8489 BCE.Again, a modest increase in the overall age for the earth to accommodate such growth and history documented in the tree rings.Note that at 8489 BCE we are 10,502 years into the past (there is no year zero) from 2014 CE. Again, we see a continuous record from dead and living samples of wood, from three different locations on the earth. The period of submersion would have been much longer than just the 40 days and nights, as there were some 150 days after the end of the rain ceased before the purported flood dissipated to the point where the purported ark found land.Trees don't live underwater for long. Repeatable, testable and falsifiable. It is science after all.Again, based on this objective empirical evidence, I conclude that the earth is at least 10,502 years old this year (2014) .If you don't reply, that's fine, but it may indicate that you have no answer to this set of questions - or that you concur with them.Again I await your reply.

Curiously the environment there is very dry and it is so high that there are few organisms. Comparing that to swampy areas is a mistake. Deserts have been known to preserve mummies, and this is little different. How do you suppose fossils of old wood develop?The fact that patterns match is all that matters, it is the same process that was used on the standing dead trees. Wouldn't you expect that trees older than the dead standing trees would have fallen over? Ah, grabbing an excuse to avoid dealing with the information. Typical creo move. Let me repeat: Why does it seem that a lot of creos get hung up at this age level?Repeatable, testable and falsifiable means that it is not just assumption or "scientific guesses" marc9000, it is data collection, facts tabulated into a coherent form. Something you can do, a child can do, a computer can do. Computers can't guess.If it were guesswork then testing that should show errors from bad guesses correct?Wouldn't that testing and identification of numerous errors show that the system is flawed? And this is still only the beginning. Running away won't change the age of the earth.And as I've said before, if you don't reply, that's fine, but it may just indicate that you have no answer to this set of questions, something that is also implicit in your response Because that is the kind of thing people say when they have no response but don't want to admit it (even to themselves).You aren't even curious about the testing and falsification ... that's kind of a sad lack of curiosity imho.