Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 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 760 of 1498 (827620)
01-28-2018 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 758 by Percy
01-27-2018 8:26 PM


Re: Imaginary magic time flux delusions vs reality
percy writes:
This thread is in the Dates and Dating forum, which is a science forum,..
Except the content and OP are belief based only. That is not science.
You cannot claim a same nature in the past without evidence. You cannot spam item after religious item based on there having been a same state past without ever stopping to first prove there was.
Offering tree rings as proof of ages as if they were grown in this nature, without showing why or how is religion. Offering to collaborate that with some other belief based feature of a same state past is religion. It was pointed out that all collaborations here are from the same belief!
Rather than try and desperately call that science it seems you guys should be addressing the elephant in the room.
Dis I not ask razd and others to simply show even one of the supposed correlations that were NOT based on this one belief?! Why are you not capable of doing that?
Strange.
Edited by creation, : No reason given.
Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 758 by Percy, posted 01-27-2018 8:26 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 773 by Percy, posted 01-29-2018 12:32 PM creation has replied

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


Message 761 of 1498 (827621)
01-28-2018 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 759 by RAZD
01-28-2018 11:35 AM


Re: Still no evidence or cause to believe imaginary magic time flux
razd writes:
YOUR claim was that tree rings formed extra fast in your magical flux time fantasy. To bring the data into the squished timescale means condensing everything older than historical records -- which is kind of difficult when those records extend to 2660 BCE or 4,618 years ago and you want the whole timescale to fit inside 4500 years.
No. It is my claim you do not know and have chosen simply to believe in a certain state in the past. N dates you use have any other worth or reason for existing other than that belief. So don't know my dates that try and use bible dates.
https://mountaintwentyone.wixsite.com/home/timeline

This message is a reply to:
 Message 759 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2018 11:35 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 769 by RAZD, posted 01-29-2018 8:10 AM creation has replied

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


Message 762 of 1498 (827622)
01-28-2018 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 758 by Percy
01-27-2018 8:26 PM


Re: Imaginary magic time flux delusions vs reality
percy writes:
Radioactive decay in the past? Prove there was any then as there now is?
Oklo.
Great. So the Oklo fable is your defense!!!? So tell us how you know the whole site was dunked miles under the surface of the earth when needed, and then eons later, brought to the surface?? Hint? You can't...you just need it to be so. Correct?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 758 by Percy, posted 01-27-2018 8:26 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 763 of 1498 (827623)
01-28-2018 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 756 by RAZD
01-27-2018 3:24 PM


Re: Imaginary magic time flux delusions vs reality
razd writes:
Nope. I can touch, feel and measure tree rings for instance. Other people can touch, feel and measure tree rings. In fact this has been done multiple times as part of the scientific review.
That's funny earlier you failred to eben be able to post a detailed picture of tree rings from a tree that had more than 5000 rings!? Now we supposedly can touch them?
Then you have the nerve to accuse others of an inability to debate?
Smoke, meet mirror.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 756 by RAZD, posted 01-27-2018 3:24 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 776 of 1498 (840567)
10-02-2018 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 773 by Percy
01-29-2018 12:32 PM


Re: Imaginary magic time flux delusions vs reality
quote:
This is getting boring. Your answer to any evidence is, "That's just belief." You never address the evidence. That evidence is just belief is just something you need to believe in order to hold onto your religious beliefs, which have no evidential support at all.
You cannot claim a same nature in the past without evidence.
You cannot spam item after religious item based on there having been a same state past without ever stopping to first prove there was. Science doesn't know. You do not know how far any star is from earth, nor how long light takes to get here from it.
You see the light here, hence all reactions and having it obey laws etc is all seen/experienced/done here and only here. That does not address what time is or what time is like far far away.
quote:
Again, your criticizing science by calling it religion? Do you not get how that completely undermines your religiously based approach?
There are may religions and beliefs, the sad thing is when science pretends to be more.
quote:
Collaborations? Did you perhaps mean correlations? I'll proceed under that assumption.
If the tree rings were grown under different natural physical laws then there would be evidence of that.
Such as...?? There would still be rings.
quote:
Again, this is untrue. We've provided evidence that natural physical laws in the past were the same as today.
Untrue. Imagining time is the same where stars are with no proof is not evidence. Imagining trees grew in this nature is not evidence they did..etc.
quote:
You should not be mentioning the Bible, though it would be nice if you'd show it the proper respect by capitalizing it.
There is no possibility of discussion of creation without it.
quote:
No, that's not correct concerning when the natural fission reactions were taking place, which was near the surface, which we know since the concentrations of uranium and the interruptions of the fission reactions were due to groundwater.
In your invented scenario it was due to groundwater.
quote:
I couldn't find anything online about the geological history of the region, but it is very, very common for regions of net sedimentation to become deeply buried and later become reexposed after uplift and erosion. The Grand Canyon region is a great example.
Ridiculous. You need evidence for the claim the specific sites underwent this magic dunk/resurfacing. You invented it because your belief based fables required it. Period.
quote:
Yes, of course we can touch them. Here's an image of the stump of the Prometheus tree:
?? Where are the rings in the stump from exactly 5000 years ago? You offer a pile of junk?
If you could give an actual pic of the area in the sample taken from the tree that supposedly represents more than 5000 years (you have failed to do so for years now) you would need to show that said rings grew in this present nature. Face it, you lose.
quote:
See the Wikipedia article on the Prometheus tree for more details. We can bring as many of those details into this thread as you wish. The tree ring count is currently thought to be 4862, but because of missing rings (apparently not uncommon at that elevation) it is estimated that the Prometheus tree is older than 5000 years.
Ha ha ha. Missing rings. Great.
Well, let;s make it easy can you show a good close up of any rings over 4500 years? Ha.
Hard to believe creationists used to lose debates.
Edited by creation, : No reason given.
Edited by creation, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 773 by Percy, posted 01-29-2018 12:32 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 777 by ringo, posted 10-02-2018 12:51 PM creation has not replied
 Message 820 by RAZD, posted 10-07-2018 2:22 AM creation has replied

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


Message 778 of 1498 (840576)
10-02-2018 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 769 by RAZD
01-29-2018 8:10 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
Razd asked fishbowl boundary..
Since the fishbowl simply refers to the area man lives and has visited, even with probes, that makes the fishbowl quite big. Beyond this you cannot say time is the same as here. We have only one little observation point in this universe.
Edited by creation, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 769 by RAZD, posted 01-29-2018 8:10 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 779 by ringo, posted 10-02-2018 1:10 PM creation has replied

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


Message 780 of 1498 (840588)
10-02-2018 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 779 by ringo
10-02-2018 1:10 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
All the so called science fables on origins are made up nonsense. They have no depth. They are about as deep as a fishbowl. You CANNOT discuss what time is like in the far universe because you do not know even what time is here.
You cannot claim anything based on a same nature in the past unless you first prove one existed.
The cunningly devised fables that have been criminally called science are ALL based on the same beliefs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 779 by ringo, posted 10-02-2018 1:10 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 781 by ringo, posted 10-02-2018 3:51 PM creation has replied
 Message 782 by Tangle, posted 10-02-2018 4:16 PM creation has replied
 Message 783 by Taq, posted 10-02-2018 6:25 PM creation has replied

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


Message 784 of 1498 (840641)
10-02-2018 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 782 by Tangle
10-02-2018 4:16 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
to message 782
Easy to do. Show the method you use to get distance to far stars. It involves time. So when you use fishbowl time as the big measure for everything, assuming time is the same at all points in the universe, you are doing so ignorantly and with zero basis.
As for so called dating methods, they all use the present as the key to the past. They all use the present nature as the basis to extrapolate back..via radioactive decay, tree growth...etc etc etc.
This is religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 782 by Tangle, posted 10-02-2018 4:16 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 789 by Tangle, posted 10-03-2018 2:50 AM creation has replied

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


Message 785 of 1498 (840642)
10-02-2018 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 783 by Taq
10-02-2018 6:25 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
to post 783
Logic based on beliefs is religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 783 by Taq, posted 10-02-2018 6:25 PM Taq has not replied

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


Message 786 of 1498 (840643)
10-02-2018 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 781 by ringo
10-02-2018 3:51 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
to post 781
All so called correlations are based on the same belief...you pick one. Tree rings...starlight...decay...fossils...etc.
Bring it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 781 by ringo, posted 10-02-2018 3:51 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 787 by Percy, posted 10-02-2018 7:14 PM creation has replied
 Message 790 by ringo, posted 10-03-2018 11:42 AM creation has replied
 Message 879 by dwise1, posted 10-22-2018 1:57 AM creation has replied

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


Message 788 of 1498 (840664)
10-02-2018 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 787 by Percy
10-02-2018 7:14 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
ok

This message is a reply to:
 Message 787 by Percy, posted 10-02-2018 7:14 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 792 of 1498 (840704)
10-03-2018 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 790 by ringo
10-03-2018 11:42 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
The correlations on earth all are based on present nature. The stuff about the far universe is all based on time being the same there also. Yes distances to stars also is based on this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 790 by ringo, posted 10-03-2018 11:42 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 795 by ringo, posted 10-03-2018 12:40 PM creation has replied

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


Message 793 of 1498 (840705)
10-03-2018 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 789 by Tangle
10-03-2018 2:50 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
Yes, give or take some hundreds of years the earth was created around that long ago.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 789 by Tangle, posted 10-03-2018 2:50 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 794 by Tangle, posted 10-03-2018 12:36 PM creation has replied

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


Message 796 of 1498 (840755)
10-04-2018 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 795 by ringo
10-03-2018 12:40 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
Easy. When you assume slow deposition or growth for several items, naturally you get old ages.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 795 by ringo, posted 10-03-2018 12:40 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 799 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 12:11 PM creation has replied

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


Message 797 of 1498 (840756)
10-04-2018 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 794 by Tangle
10-03-2018 12:36 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
I heard about 4500 but there is room for interpretive difference.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 794 by Tangle, posted 10-03-2018 12:36 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 798 by Tangle, posted 10-04-2018 3:54 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