Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III)
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 183 of 357 (393403)
04-04-2007 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by Reserve
04-04-2007 10:09 PM


Haven't you already been embarrassed by this?
Odd.
LiesByGenesis claims:
Under these conditions, a palaeoanthropologist has a degree of control over the results. He is free to reject dates that do not fit the evolution scenario of the fossils.
I don't understand why you are repeating the same charge when a similar claim was refuted in last thread.

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by Reserve, posted 04-04-2007 10:09 PM Reserve has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 192 of 357 (393675)
04-06-2007 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 187 by Reserve
04-05-2007 4:28 PM


Sad. So sad.
Hey, Reserve, I have an idea for you. Instead of simply reading and quoting creationist websites, why don't you actually read the original papers that the sites are citing? That way, you can see for yourself whether the reporting is accurate before you post here and get embarrassed.

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Reserve, posted 04-05-2007 4:28 PM Reserve has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 256 of 357 (443377)
12-24-2007 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by Creationist
12-24-2007 6:28 PM


Re: It just keeps adding up -- the earth is OLD.
First of all, both the varves and tree rings are used to calibrate carbon-14 so as such they are not independent confirmation of each other.
No -- first the varves and tree rings are matched up, one varve to one ring. Once we do that, then we measure the C14 in organic matter associated with, say, the 10,000th varve, and then measure the C14 with the 10,000th tree ring. No reason why both of these should give the same C14/C12 ratio -- yet they do. Each varve has the same C14/C12 ratio as its associated tree ring. The 12,000th varve gives the same C14 readings as the 12,000th tree ring.
A remarkable coincidence unless each varve and its associated tree ring were formed at the same time, and so incorporated the same ambient CO2 with the same amount of C14.
And why would tree rings and lake varves match up one-to-one so precisely like this? Another amazing coincidence, unless each one really does represent annual events.

"The guilty one is not he who commits the sin, but the one who causes the darkness."
Clearly, he had his own strange way of judging things. I suspect that he acquired it from the Gospels. -- Victor Hugo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Creationist, posted 12-24-2007 6:28 PM Creationist 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