Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,471 Year: 3,728/9,624 Month: 599/974 Week: 212/276 Day: 52/34 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
JonF
Member (Idle past 190 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 1410 of 1498 (879111)
07-11-2020 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 1403 by dad
07-10-2020 2:13 PM


Re: missing rings
No cabin has rings from Noah's time I would guess.
Guess all you want. The sequence that formed the green line covers the last 10,429 years.
You seem to be arguing a generality here and not specific to the time in question say about 4500 or 5000 years ago.
First you chide me for using 5,000 years ago, and now you chide me for not specifically using 5,000 years ago. Make up your mind and stick to it.
The sequence covers the last 10,429 years. Are you capable of understanding that 4,500 years ago and 5,000 years ago are both included in that time frame?
The issue is that it only woks in this nature where trees grow at the rates they now do
And, in your fantasy, carbon 14 decayed at the same rate as trees grew rings. And ice layers in Greenland and the Antarctic were laid down at the same rate that tree rings grew. And corals grew at the same rate as tree rtings grew. And varves (annual layers) in lakes and seas throughout the world were laid down at the same rate as tree rings grew. And the decay rates of uranium and thorium were sped up to match the rate at which the tree rings gre.
All those phenomena and more agree about the last 40,00 years or so.Yeah, right.
Changing the fundamental makeup of the Universe to that extent would render life as we know it impossible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1403 by dad, posted 07-10-2020 2:13 PM dad has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1414 by dad, posted 07-12-2020 2:33 PM JonF has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 190 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 1470 of 1498 (879646)
07-19-2020 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 1414 by dad
07-12-2020 2:33 PM


Re: missing rings
You admit not knowing where the carbon samples were taken from, no? You assume it was from the pre 5000 deep rings
You really need to work on reading comprehension. I said "throughout the sequence". Which means from samples before and after 5,000 years. Do you really think professionals would 14C date only half the range?
Show us any tree that is several thousand years old, with carbon samples specifically taken from the area more than 5000 deep?
Why? We know that counting rings yielded many samples more than 5,000 years old. We know that 14C dating samples were taken from some of those trees and the 14C dates agreed with the ring-counting dates within a few percent. What difference would there be or knowledge gained by showing you a picture of a piece of wood?
How would I know there was any decay at all at the time?
You are forgetting key data. If there was no (or different) decay at the time the Universe would have been so fundamentally different that life as we know it would be impossible.. References given previously.
How would I know there was any decay at all at the time?
See above. I'm speaking of your fantasy of the most fundamental changes happening in the past, not today. Atoms would not have existed then if decay rates changed that much. Do you realize that atoms are essential for life as we know it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1414 by dad, posted 07-12-2020 2:33 PM dad has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1471 by dad, posted 07-19-2020 1:19 PM JonF has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024