|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
Charley writes: Interpretation of ice cores is another example where different assumptions, using the very same data, result in quite different conclusions. You can develop a system of celestial mechanics based on a geocentric solar system. You can develop a set of equations based on cold transfer instead of heat transfer, or explain the propagation of light via luminiferous aether. You can even have some modest success if you constrain your observations and ignore certain areas of inconvenient nonconformance and tack on some nonsensical terms here and there. Different conclusions sure, however science is concerned with the right conclusions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
This topic is about age correlations from multiple sources.
You just regurgitate a link that talks about a poster board and I am suppose to be impressed. What now if I bury you with 100 links to peer reviewed papers that demonstrate deep time old earth, based on multi-source correlating rate evaluations? Do I win? To address this I would recommend you:
You can start here. http://www.nmsr.org/humphrey.htmRATE's Ratty Results: Helium Diffusion Doesn't Support Young-Earth Creationism Dr. Humphreys Feels the Pressure Nevertheless from your reference:
ICR writes: The visiting scientists did not necessarily agree with the conclusions but the authors received no major negative comments Oh that is positive. The other scientist are polite and somehow that is proof positive that this guy is on to something.
ICR writes: We hope these researchers will spread the word that Creationist scientists are conducting quality work and have solid evidence for a completely different paradigm about the age of the earth. Try getting a job in the oil patch with a YEC badge. This must say something like maybe the "solid evidence" is not where they want to put their money. Really I wonder if the creationist are so cocksure that they are right why don't they start an oil exploration company using YEC methods and Christian investors and clean up. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
charley writes: Your interpretation of the correlations does support an old earth (your simply banning any evidence to the contrary, etc...) And this is where you can present this banned evidence that is being overlooked.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
Interesting link.
andrill writes: The sediments shown here are made almost entirely of the remains of diatoms single-celled plants (algae) that lived in the surface waters of the ocean, where there was enough light to grow. When these plants died, the hard parts of their tiny bodies settled through the water to the ocean floor. Because each diatom is about the size of a grain of sand, the sediments you see here are made of the tiny shells of millions and millions of individual diatoms. This sample was taken 540 ft below the ocean floor. At first blush forget about the issue if the layers represent years or "storms" as YEC would have it; just the sheer number of the diatoms are impossible to form in within the boundaries of a young earth. In addition there are huge deposits of diatomacious chert and shale throughout the world.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
This implies that hundreds of millions of years of radioactive decay (at today's rates) had to have occurred in a matter of a few days! Well now that neatly solves the mystery of where all of the flood water went. It was turned into plasm and ejected into space as the energy release in such a short time would have been enormous! I sense a AiG paper here somewhere.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
Massive unsupported subjects. Convincing.
Pick one of these (any one) and develop the logic on how it exclusively demonstrate a young earth and stick around to defend it, if you are able. No cut-n-paste, massive unsupported lists or link diarrhea. This thread is about age correlations there other threads concerning young/old earth such as:
REAL Flood GeologyYoung earth explanations for Angular Unconformities Incompatibility of Geology with YEC YECs, how do you explain meandering canyons? Or start your own if you are prepared. You are welcome here. There are very very few YEC geology oriented posters here and those that are seem to be all fired up after reading some YEC propaganda. They quickly melt and run away after being exposed to some daylight. Edited by iceage, : No reason given. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
jesusfighter writes: As such, its completely unreliable to trust a Geologist who adheres to radiometric dating procedures to attempt to prove the age of a rock being such and such an age, since the methods do not provide that such a benefit to the Geologist. The oil industry seems to trust modern geology, as does the mineral exploration industry. Paleontologist use dating to predict where to find fossils, with positive results.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
Why is it whenever any of your posts sound semi-intelligent, it is when you plagiarize?
The qualities you have displayed in your short time here are:
You are a credit to your faith...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
I am enjoying your magnum opus you are crafting.
Unfortunately, the typical YEC will just roll their eyes back into their head after the first installment. I would like to see your "Carbon-14 Correlations to Lake Varves" as a stand alone topic as it is straightforward and with convincing correlations. Just where are all informed intelligent YEC'ers? The norm is that one will pop in, cut-n-paste something (confident they are going to rip the heathens a new hole) and then find themselves unable to defend their position and then quietly leave. The shallowness of the YEC position is glaring.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5905 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
cfo writes: In addition, Charles Darwin ignored the experts in his day (Lord Kelvin) and augmented fantastically the age of the Earth in accordance to the needs of modification evolution. And Charles Darwin was correct and Lord Kelvin was very wrong as history demonstrates - Lord Calvin did not know about the internal heat generated by radioactive decay. Another example of Charles Darwin insight and genius.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024