|
QuickSearch
Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] |
EvC Forum active members: 67 (9028 total) |
| |
Michael MD | |
Total: 884,122 Year: 1,768/14,102 Month: 136/624 Week: 20/95 Day: 20/13 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Age of mankind, dating, and the flood | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 233 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
In other words you are saying that scientist are conspiring to falsify data on a global scale? Really? Again, I suggest you read Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 and then provide me with some rational for the correlations that isn't just wishful thinking -- on based on actual objective empirical evidence. See the graph in Message 134 and tell me why the age vs depth slopes change at the same point for both varve layer and C-14 age ... Enjoy. by 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 233 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Perhaps you would like to attempt to discuss this on Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1, which starts with dendrochronology and the correlations between tree ring data and ages. l have pointed you towards this thread several times, as you really need to address the correlations issue. Enjoy by 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) • • •
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 934 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Mindspawn has not been doing well on refuting current radiometric dating methods, and I doubt he will be participating much more in these threads.
I think that he has run out of "what ifs" to try to rationalize his beliefs, and is hesitant to participate any further because those beliefs might not be able to withstand the evidence we've been providing. At this point we're seeing one of several typical creationist retreats: in this case the problem is blamed on unfair moderation, rather than the poor quality of his arguments. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 233 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
yeah, figured I was getting in a little late here (I been busy)
Otherwise known as cognitive dissonance resolution by externalizing it into a conspiracy. Enjoy by 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) • • •
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
That would be a most charitable explanation. It's also possible that mindspring consciously bailed out of a discussion that was over his head and used moderator failings to cover his tracks. How long do you think mindspring would last in a discussion where simply saying "I believe" followed by made up "facts" would not be acceptable? "I believe there are salt water spring tides in Lake Suigetsu" In the Flood thread and in bluegene's genetics thread, mindspring limited his role to presenting "plausible" alternative to mainstream interpretation where "plausible" was defined as anything mindspawn could post. In this thread, mindspawn correctly and fairly would have been called to present evidence for any of these "I believes". There was nothing for him to do here but bail as each of those "I believes" was completely unsupportable by evidence. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Coyote, you are welcome to start a one on one public discussion if you would like. I feel bad that this thread was started by you in response to my request and yet I haven't given it the attention it deserved. Other than the moderation problem there are just too many posts in these public forums for me to keep up with.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 233 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
There is "The Great Debate" forum, made for one on one debates, with no other participants allowed.
Enjoy by 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) • • •
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 19993 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Sorry for the taking so long to respond, I've been very busy.
Yes, of course it's well known. No one ever denied this. No one ever said that saltwater intrusion doesn't happen. That you are issuing a rebuttal of a claim never made is yet another indication of your comprehension issues. You claimed that varve layers would form from spring tides. I responded that the cores were taken from the center of lake Suigetsu around 3 miles from the ocean where the bottom is 20 meters above sea level. You were asked for evidence that tides could cause varve layers 3 miles from the ocean and 20 meters above sea level. You instead replied with the non sequitur, "Saltwater intrusion into the water table is well known." Well, duh. By the way, you rebutted yourself in your own response when you quoted from Transient groundwater dynamics in a coastal aquifer: The effects of tides, the lunar cycle, and the beach profile:
It's a mere footnote that fiction has a greater influence on your beliefs than facts - we see this here all the time. What is truly perplexing is why you expect to convince anyone else with barely a single fact on your side. --Percy
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member Posts: 6173 Joined: |
Hum, I missed that. But I see it now.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 934 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
There is no moderation problem. There is only your habit of posting imaginary "what-ifs" as if they were evidence, coupled with chasing any convenient rabbit hole you can fall into. If you had any serious evidence you would have posted it by now. The issue of this thread is the accuracy of radiocarbon dating, but you have wandered into fantasies about sea water intrusion into one varve series while ignoring all the evidence that points to radiocarbon dating being sufficiently accurate to demolish both the young earth and global flood at 4,350 years ago claims. But, I'll play the game of a one-on-one thread if you like. However, I'm not going to chase you down rabbit holes. You'll stick to the topic or you'll be talking to yourself. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 19993 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
But that's not what you're doing. You're claiming that processes that are merely legitmate processes that actually exist are the ones actually responsible in contradiction to all evidence. Then you're ignoring, or just as often misunderstanding or misinterpreting, the evidence. Follow the evidence where it leads. (And use the correct definition of terms, like "correlated" and "terrestrial".) --Percy Edited by Percy, : Clarify.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 233 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
One single tree older than that is sufficient to invalidate that claim. Amusingly there are three such trees known so far: From Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 quote: As of today those trees would be:
and: quote: So Schulman's tree would be
AND the consilience of tree ring data, climate effect on ring thickness and 14C data of these 3 trees all show the validity of both dendrochronology and 14C age measurements for this period. Other trees extend this data even further into the past: quote: Which means that -- as a minimum there has been no world killing flood for 7,000 years ... since the tree germinated and grew to old age and died. Tying it in to the ages measured by the above three trees would make it even older, identifying when the tree died by matching rings with the living trees via the science of dendrochronology. This is, of course, discussed in greater detail on Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1. The correlation with 14C data is discussed on Message 4: quote: Enjoy by 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) • • •
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 2157 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Just because someone believes MANKIND is only ~6k years old doesn't mean that he believes the EARTH is that young. The Bible gives the account of the creation of the "Heavens and the Earth" BefORE it begins talking about the creative days. The Earth's creation could have been BILLIONS of years before God turned his attention to the Earth.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 2157 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
So, according to EVOLUTIONISTS, the dating techniques are perfectly good to prove EVOLUTION right.
"Beware the sound of one hand clapping" -Stephen Meyer And furthermore, wherever did you get the idea that the FLOOD KILLED ALL VEGETATION? What do you think Noah saw when coming out of the ark, a MOONSCAPE?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Explain how it would have not destroyed all vegetation. You can do an experiment at home: grow 2 plants (any will do) side by side. Once both have reached about maturity, submerge one of them in water and leave it there for ~30 days and leave the other out and continue to tend to it. What do you think will happen? Do non-water based (edit: aquatic) plants survive with no CO2 to breathe? Can non-water based (edit: aquatic) plants survive submerged under water for 40 days? Take great caution because this is the science section of EvC, so your faith is useless as is "magic" or "god works in weird and wacky ways". Also, typing in capitals doesn't bolster your argument. It makes you look like a loon. Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given. Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither and die. We are eternal, the pinnacle of evolution and existence. Before us, you are nothing. Your extinction is inevitable. We are the end of everything.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021