|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1434 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 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
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.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
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
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
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!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4451 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
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
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1735 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
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.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lasthero Junior Member (Idle past 1965 days) Posts: 6 From: Charlotte Joined:
|
quote: 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.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
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?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1434 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
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: 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: 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: 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. 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)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1434 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
..
Edited by RAZD, : double postby 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)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
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.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Couldn't even be bothered to address the issues that defeated you eh?
Your loss.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Since my argument is that you have no support for your vapid beliefs, who cares?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Sorry if you thought you could claim things based on some belief you can't support. Get over it, Those days are gone now.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
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.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
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!!!!!!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024