Biblical Creation vs Evolution- the age of the Earth

Discussion in 'Science' started by 1stvermont, Jul 23, 2018.

  1. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Biblical Creation and the age of the Earth

    When one considers that the most reasonable explanation for the fossils in various rock strata is a sudden catastrophic burial—[along with] the absence of transitional [fossil] forms in the rock strata, the presence of collagen in dinosaur bones supposedly hundreds of millions of years old, and the presence of measurable 14C in that collagen—it becomes very difficult to hold an old-earth view “
    -Dr. Cupps earned his Ph.D. in nuclear physics at Indiana University-Bloomington is Research Associate at ICR.


    There are about a hundred dating method that show the earth cannot be as old as the evolutionist need it to be. The data are well known in the scientific literature but do not make it to the school classrooms or on CNN. Here are some examples.

    Erosion Rates of Continents

    “if some facets of the contemporary landscape are indeed as old as is suggested by the field evidence they not only constitute denial of commonsense and everyday observations but they also carry considerable implications for general theory”
    -C R Twidale 1998 antiquity of landforms an “extremely unlikely” concept vindication Australian journal of earth sciences 45 ; 657-668


    The continents would have eroded away over 250 times if they were as old as the evolutionist say. Earths surface is constantly being eroded, this rate of erosion is easily measured , the average height reduction for all continents is 2.4 inches per thousand years.

    -J.N Holleman 1968 the sediment yield of major rivers of the world,water resources research 4:737 747 E W sparks 1986 geomorphology,in georaphies study S H Beaver ed london and new york: Longman group 509-510 J D Milliman and J P M Syvitski 1992 geomorphic/tectonic control of sediments discharge to the ocean: the importance of small mountainous rivers journal of geology 100 525-544 A Roth origins linking science and scripture hagerstown, MD review and herald publishing 264


    Using this rate the north American continent would be eroded flat to sea level in “a mere 10 million years”


    -S Judson and D F Ritter 1964 rates of regional denudation in the united states journal of geophysical research 69; 3395-3401 R H Dott Jr and R L Batten. Evolution of the earth fourth edition , new york,st Louis and san Francisco Mcgraw- Hill Book company 155


    Even using the slowest possible rates of erosion the continents would have eroded in 623 million years. The resulting measured rates [lower than normal ] would give only 9.6 million years until all above sea level continents would be totally eroded. As one evolutionist said

    “In geological terms, in other words, there ought to be no land forms or land surfaces of an age greater than 30MYA and certainly no older than the Cenozoic...yet many features that are several tens of millions, or even a few hundreds of millions of years old, remain....since these land forms exists, they must be possible.””
    -Twindale CR and Campbell EM Australian Land forms Understandings a low, flat, arid arid or a landscape Rosenberg publishing new south wales Australia 2005


    So they must reject observable testable science [erosion rates] to hold on to their belief in millions of years.

    Levels of Salt in the Oceans

    Giving best possible assumptions and generous calculations to the evolutionist the salt would have accumulated in the oceans in a maximum possible age of 62 million years. Many processes continually add salt to the oceans and seas, but salt is not removed as easily from the sea , resulting in a steady increase of salt in the oceans. This has been used as a way to date the earth since 1715 when it was first calculated to be maximum of 80 to 90 million years old. Today every kilogram of sea water contains about 10.8 grams of dissolved sodium, the oceans contain 1,370 million cubic kilometers of water making a total of 14,700 trillion tons of sodium in the oceans. Every year rivers and other sources dump 457 million tons of sodium into the oceans.

    -M ,Meybeck, 1979 concentrations des eaux fluvials en majeurs et apports aux oceans, revuede geologie dynamique et de geographie Physique 21 [3] 215-246 F.L sayles and P C Mangelsdorf,1979 Cation-exchange characteristics of amazon with suspended sediment and its reaction with seawater, geochimica et Cosmochica acta 43 767-779


    The rate of sodium output is only 27% of the input. Or 122 million tons each year using the most generous assumptions to evolutionist the maximum possible amount is 206 million tones each year.


    -F.L sayles and P C Mangelsdorf,1979 Cation-exchange characteristics of amazon with suspended sediment and its reaction with seawater, geochimica et Cosmochica acta 43 767-779
    S.A Austin and D R Humphreys 1990 the seas missing salt proceedings of the second international conference on creationism vol 2 R E Walsh and C L books,eds Pittsburgh Pa creation science fellowship 17-33


    Assuming the oceans originally had no sodium and given the best possible assumptions and rates for evolutionist, than the current sodium would have accumulated in less than 62 million years. Far less than the 3 billion they claim the oceans to be. Also more recent studies show salt is entering much faster than previously thought, showing more groundwater which is higher concentration of salt is being discharged via river flow more than 40% than the previously thought 10%.

    -W S Moore 1996 Large groundwater inputs to coastal waters reveled by 226 Ra enrichments Nature, 380 [6575] 612-614 T M church 1996 An underground route for the water cycle Nature 380 [6575] 579-580


    Additional calculations for for many seawater elements give much younger ages for the ocean.
    http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-ocean-says-no/


    Galaxies Wind Themselves up too Fast

    The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless disc of stars instead of its present spiral shape.Yet our galaxy is supposed to be at least 10 billion years old. Evolutionists call this ‘the winding-up dilemma’, which they have known about for fifty years. They have devised many theories to try to explain it, each one failing after a brief period of popularity. The same ‘winding-up’ dilemma also applies to other galaxies.For the last few decades the favored attempt to resolve the dilemma has been a complex theory called ‘density waves’.The theory has conceptual problems, has to be arbitrarily and very finely tuned, and lately has been called into serious question by the Hubble Space Telescope’s discovery of very detailed spiral structure in the central hub of the ‘Whirlpool’ galaxy, M51.


    Ocean Floor Sediments

    sediments are being eroded from the continents by a average of 24 billion tons as a low estimate. It is estimated that the ocean floor has a average depth of less than 400 meters.

    -WW Hay et al 1988 mass/age distribution and composition of sediments on the ocean floor and the global rate of sediment subduction journal of geophysical research 93 [b12] 14,933-940

    There is only one know way to remove sediments from the ocean floor by subduction, it is estimated that about 1 billion tons per year of sediments are subducted.

    -WW Hay et al 1988 mass/age distribution and composition of sediments on the ocean floor and the global rate of sediment subduction journal of geophysical research 93 [b12] 14,933-940

    The other 23 tons accumulate at the ocean bottom, at that rate the sediments would have accumulated in just about 12 million years. According to evolution these processes have been occurring for 3 billion years.


    Decay of Earths Magnetic Field

    10,000 years ago it would have been so strong the planet would have disintegrated--its metallic core would have separated from its mantle. The strength of the magnetic field has been reliably and continually measured since 1835. From these measurements, we can see that the field's strength has declined by about seven percent since then, giving a half-life of about 1,400 years. This means that in 1,400 years it will be one-half as strong, in 2,800 years it will be one-fourth as strong, and so on. There will be a time not many thousands of years distant when the field will be too small to perform as a viable shield for earth. Calculating back into the past, the present measurements indicate that 1,400 years ago the field was twice as strong. It continues doubling each 1,400 years back, until about 10,000 years ago it would have been so strong the planet would have disintegrated--its metallic core would have separated from its mantle. The inescapable conclusion we can draw is that the earth must be fewer than 10,000 years old. Compare this "clock" with others used to estimate earth's age. This method utilizes a long period of measurement, amounting to over one-tenth of a half-life, whereas radioisotope decay has been accurately measured for only about 100 years, while its half-lives are typically measured in the billions. The short half-life should be favored by uniformitarians for it minimizes the chances that something dramatic has happened to change things, since longer spans are more susceptible to out-of-the-ordinary events. Magnetic field decay also involves a whole earth measurement, and on this large scale it cannot be easily altered or "contaminated," as could any rock selected for radioisotope dating. The young-earth implications are even stronger when the energy of the field is considered rather than its strength, for the energy's half-life decays each 700 years.

    http://www.icr.org/article/earths-magnetic-field/
    http://creation.com/the-earths-magne...earth-is-young

    Earth-Moon System

    the tides when the moon would have close enough would have drowned all life on earth twice a day and shattered the moon. How long has the moon been receding? Friction by the tides is slowing the earth’s rotation, so the length of a day is increasing by 0.002 seconds per century. This means that the earth is losing angular momentum.7 The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum says that the angular momentum the earth loses must be gained by the moon. Thus the moon is slowly receding from Earth at about 4 cm (1½ inches) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. The moon could never have been closer than 18,400 km (11,500 miles), known as the Roche Limit, because Earth’s tidal forces (i.e., the result of different gravitational forces on different parts of the moon) would have shattered it. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance.8 NB: this is the maximum possible age — far too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks) — not the actual age.
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/home.../2006/0811.asp

    Comets Disintegrate too Quickly

    According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about 5 billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical ages of 10,000 years. Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets come from an unobserved spherical ‘Oort cloud’ well beyond the orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system, and © other improbable interactions with planets slow down the incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets observed.4 So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations. Lately, there has been much talk of the ‘Kuiper Belt’, a disc of supposed comet sources lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto. Even if some bodies of ice exist in that location, they would not really solve the evolutionists’ problem, since according to evolutionary theory the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were no Oort cloud to supply it. [For more information, see the detailed technical article Comets and the Age of the Solar System.]

    -Steidl, P.F., ‘Planets, comets, and asteroids’, Design and Origins in Astronomy, pp. 73–106, G. Mulfinger, ed., Creation Research Society Books (1983) 5093 Williamsport Dr., Norcross, GA 30092

    Human Population Growth

    It is relatively easy to calculate the growth rate needed to get today’s population from Noah’s three sons and their wives, after the Flood. With the Flood at about 4,500 years ago, it needs less than 0.5% per year growth.That’s not very much. Evolutionists claim that mankind evolved from apes about a million years ago. If the population had grown at just 0.01% per year since then (doubling only every 7,000 years), there could be 1043 people today—that’s a number with 43 zeros after it. Say each individual is given ‘standing room only’ of about one square meter per person. However, the land surface area of the whole Earth is ‘only’ 1.5 x 1014 square meters. If every one of those square meters were made into a world just like this one, all these worlds put together would still ‘only’ have a surface area able to fit 1028 people in this way. This is only a tiny fraction of 1043 (1029 is 10 times as much as 1028, 1030 is 100 times, and so on). Those who adhere to the evolutionary story argue that disease, famine and war kept the numbers almost constant for most of this period, which means that mankind was on the brink of extinction for most of this supposed history.10 This stretches credulity to the limits.

    http://creation.com/where-are-all-the-people

    Geneticists recently analyzed human gene differences
    -Tennessen, J. et al. 2012. Evolution and Functional Impact of Rare Coding Variation from Deep Sequencing of Human Exomes. Science. 337 (6090): 64-69.

    The research team investigated the amount of diversity among today’s human genes and how long it took to reach the current amount of diversity. They concluded that human genes diversified recently. The authors wrote, “The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago.”
    Recent studies indicate that mutationns, most of which are nearly harmless, accumulate at a rate of at least 60 per human generation.
    - Conrad, D. et al. 2011. Variation in genome-wide mutation rates within and between human families. Nature Genetics. 43 (7): 712-714. Genesis 9:19.

    The rapid explosion of human genetic diversity over the last 5,100 or so years easily fits the biblical model
    if the evolutionary timeline is true, then human population growth and genetic diversity were miraculously unchanged for a few million years before suddenly exploding in just the last few thousand years. What are the odds that every married couple would have had almost exactly two offspring—just enough to replace the parents—survive into the next generation for over two million years or 100,000 straight generations?
     
    usfan likes this.
  2. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Dinosaur Blood Vessels

    “Our findings challenged everything scientists thought they knew about the breakdown of cells and molecules. Test-tube studies of organic molecules indicated that proteins should not persist more than a million years or so; DNA had an even shorter life span.”
    "Why are these materials preserved when all our models say they should be degraded?"
    -Schweitzer, M. H. 2010. Blood from Stone: How Fossils Can Preserve Soft Tissue. Scientific American. 303 (6): 62-69.


    Hemoglobin and proteins decay rates from observable science proves they cannot be millions of years old. Some cannot last 2.7 million years frozen.

    There are also many bacteria dna etc that have been found that also could not last that long
    -Schweitzer, M.H. et al., Heme compounds in dinosaur trabecular bone, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 94:6291–6296, June 1997. Return to text.
    http://creation.com/sensational-dinosaur-blood-report
    Schweitzer, M.H. et al., “Biomolecular characterization and protein sequences of the Campanian hadrosaur B. canadensis”, Science 324(5927):626–631, 1 May 2009 | DOI: 10.1126/science.1165069,
    Return to text.“Proteins, Soft Tissue from 80 Million-Year-Old Hadrosaur Show that Molecules Preserve Over Time”, http://www.physorg.com/news160320581.html, accessed 3 May 2009

    collagen found dated as 80ma , yet proven cannot last more than 2.7 ma frozen.

    -Schweitzer, M.H. et al., “Biomolecular characterization and protein sequences of the Campanian hadrosaur B. canadensis”, Science 324(5927):626–631, 1 May 2009 | DOI: 10.1126/science.1165069,

    http://www.biochemist.org/bio/02403/0012/024030012.pdf

    It has been pointed out many times that fragile, complex molecules like proteins, even if hermetically sealed, should fall apart all by themselves from thermodynamic considerations alone in well under the 65 million years that evolutionists insist have passed since Schweitzer’s T. rex specimen was entombed.

    -Nielsen-Marsch, C., Biomolecules in fossil remains: Multidisciplinary approach to endurance, The Biochemist, pp. 12–14, June2002. Return to text.Doyle, S., The real ‘Jurassic Park’? Creation 30(3):12–15, 2008.

    also dna and material that should have decayed away has been found in these supposed ancient ice cores

    -Willerslev, E. et al. 2007. Ancient Biomolecules from Deep Ice Cores Reveal a Forested Southern Greenland. Science. 317 (5834): 111-114.
    http://www.icr.org/article/bacteria-...from-greenland
    Loveland-Curtze, J., V. I. Miteva and J. E. Brenchley. 2009. Herminiimonas glaciei sp. nov., a novel ultramicrobacterium from 3042 m deep Greenland glacial ice. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 59: 1272-1277.

    half life of collagen at 7.5 Celsius last 130 thousand years. Optimal preservation conditions.

    -Nielsen marsh c bimolecules in fossil remains multidisciplinary approach to endurance the biochemist pp 12-14 june 2002
    also responds to claims of contamination.
    Joc 27 [1] 2013

    “when you think about it, the laws of chemistry and biology and everything else that we know say that it should be gone, it should be degraded comepletley”
    -Schweitzer m nova scince nov may 2009 cross/tv/21726



    Polystrate fossils

    [​IMG]

    Often trees are petrified connecting multiple layers of rock strata supposed separated by hundreds of millions of years proving 100% positive they were deposited around the same time not over millions of years.

    Bent Rock Strata

    [​IMG]


    all these layers at certain spots are bent showing they all formed while wet around the same time otherwise they would have harden and broke.

    In many mountainous areas, strata thousands of feet thick are bent and folded into hairpin shapes. The conventional geologic time scale says these formations were deeply buried and solidified for hundreds of millions of years before they were bent. Yet the folding occurred without cracking, with radii so small that the entire formation had to be still wet and unsolidified when the bending occurred. This implies that the folding occurred less than thousands of years after deposition”
    -Austin, S.A. and J.D. Morris, ‘Tight folds and clastic dikes as evidence for rapid deposition and deformation of two very thick stratigraphic sequences’, Proc. 1st Internat. Conf. on Creationism Vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1986) pp.3–15. Address in ref. 12



    Flat Gaps

    [​IMG]


    “Paraconformities, or flat gaps, pose a serious problem for the concept of long geologic ages. On the surface of our restless earth, during the period of the gap with the proposed millions of years of weathering, tectonic activity, and drifting of continents, you have either deposition or erosion of the sedimentary layers. If there is deposition there is no gap because the layers just keep building up. If there is erosion the contact surface (underlayer) should be highly irregular, and not flat. The flatness of the gaps indicates little time has occurred at the gaps.The flat gaps, with their incredibly widespread sedimentary layers just above and below, severely challenge the many millions of years proposed for the standard geologic time scale. The complete absence of the deep erosion expected at these gaps over their alleged long ages is very difficult to explain within the long-age uniformitarian paradigm.”
    -‘Ariel A. Roth Flat gaps’ in sedimentary rock layers challenge long geologic ages



    Measurable C-14 Within Ancient Samples

    If the radioactive element carbon-14 breaks down quickly—within a few thousand years—why do we still find it in fossils and diamonds? It’s a dilemma for evolutionists, who believe the rocks are millions of years old.

    “Even if every atom in the whole earth were carbon-14, they would decay so quickly that no carbon-14 would be left on earth after only 1 million years. Contrary to expectations, between 1984 and 1998 alone, the scientific literature reported carbon-14 in 70 samples that came from fossils, coal, oil, natural gas, and marble representing the fossil-bearing portion of the geologic record, supposedly spanning more than 500 million years. All contained radiocarbon “
    -Dr. Andrew Snelling holds a PhD in geology from the University of Sydney


    Paul Giem, “Carbon-14 Content of Fossil Carbon,” Origins 51 (2001): 6–30.

    It has even been found in diamonds.

    -R. E. Taylor and J. Southon, “Use of Natural Diamonds to Monitor 14C AMS Instrument Backgrounds,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 259 (2007): 282–287
    J. R. Baumgardner, “14C Evidence for a Recent Global Flood and a Young Earth,” in Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research InitiativeHYPERLINK "http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v6/n1/carbon-14#fnMark_1_14_1", eds. L. Vardiman, A. A. Snelling, and E. F. Chaffin (El Cajon, California: Institute for Creation Research, and Chino Valley, Arizona: Creation Research Society, 2005), pp. 587–630. D. B. DeYoung, Thousands . . . Not Billions: Challenging an Icon of Evolution, Questioning the Age of the Earth (Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 2005), pp. 45–62.


    Here are some quick links to hundreds of young earth dates

    http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answ...e-evidence
    http://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa
    http://www.drdino.com/media-categories.p...inars&v=10
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...erse-video
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4005.asp
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...universe-2
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...lar-system
    http://creation.com/lunar-volcanoes-rock...-timeframe
    http://www.icr.org/i/pdf/af/af0907.pdf
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles...blue-stars
    http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedi...s_ev_4.htm
     
  3. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Deep time the Creator God of the Evolutionist

    "It is no secret that evolutionists worship at the shrine of time. There is little difference between the evolutionist saying ‘time did it’ and the Creationist saying ‘God did it.’ Time and chance is a two-headed deity. Much scientific effort has been expended in an attempt to show that eons of time are available for evolution."
    —Randy Wysong, The Creation-Evolution Controversy (1976), p. 137.

    “time is in fact the hero of the plot...given so much time the impossible becomes possible, the possible probable and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait time itself performs mircels”
    -George Wald “the origins of life” physics and chemistry of life


    “Consider (1) Deep Time has characteristics and powers that belong to God alone. In fact, the parallels are truly amazing! For example, Deep Time has the power of creation. According to His followers, he has made stars, planets, and galaxies. He has made canyons, and mountains. Deep Time separated the continents and oceans. He has made all living creatures through his servant – Evolution. Indeed, Deep Time took the elements of this world, and from that dust he made man. These are all powers and actions that are rightly reserved for God alone (Nehemiah 9:6, Psalm 33:6, Job 38:4, Psalm 104:5-8, Genesis 1:9-10, Genesis 1:20-25, Genesis 2:7).But it doesn’t end there. Deep Time is also said to have tremendous power to direct the course of events in the universe. Deep Time creates and destroys species and civilizations at a whim. He gives life and takes it away. He continually shapes the earth as he sees fit – changing deserts to lush gardens, and gardens to deserts. Deep Time existed long before man, and will continue long after man, or so we are told. Again, these are characteristics that are rightly attributed only to God (Acts 17:26, Job 42:2, Isaiah 46:10, Isaiah 45:7, Amos 3:6, Acts 17:25, 1 Timothy 6:13, Job 1:21, Isaiah 51:3, 43:19-20, Genesis 13:10, Deuteronomy 29:23, Genesis 17:1, Deuteronomy 33:27, Isaiah 43:10, Revelation 22:13).But according to his disciples, nothing is too difficult for Deep Time! He is able to do any miracle! Consider this famous quote from Dr. George Wald, “Time is the hero of the plot. … Given so much time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible becomes probable, the probable becomes virtually certain. One only has to wait; time itself performs the miracles.” Yes, the gradual evolution of dust into people may seem impossible. But with Deep Time, all things are possible! He is the “hero of the plot!” Compare this with the characteristics associated with the biblical God (Matthew 19:26, Jeremiah 32:17).(2) Disciples of Deep Time worship him with reverence and awe. They may deny this with their words, but their actions indicate that they do cherish this god above all others. This makes sense: if indeed Deep Time does have the powers and abilities that his disciples attribute to him, then he should be worshiped. Such worship takes place in the schools and universities, where Deep Time’s wonderful works are praised all the day long.The worship of Deep Time is found in many a science textbook too. Sandwiched in between the discussions of science will be stories about the amazing feats of Deep Time. A little science here, and an amazing story there. Although Deep Time has nothing to do with science, often the science and the stories are interleaved such that it can be difficult to tell where one begins and the other ends! The mixture makes for an entertaining, though deceptive read.Devotees take their religion very seriously. Deep Time must not be questioned. That would be sacrilege! Those who fail to worship at the altar of Deep Time are ridiculed, and face being expelled from the classroom. Textbooks that fail to acknowledge the supreme lordship of Deep Time are not likely to be used, or even published. Those who wish to work as professors must swear allegiance to Deep Time and His servant Evolution if they want to be hired.Deep Time is not the Living God. Nor is Deep Time an aspect of God, a creation of God, or an ally of God. Deep Time exists only as a concept, created by the mind of men. He has no literal existence. Although his disciples ascribe to him many of the characteristics of the biblical God, it is clear that Deep Time is fundamentally different than the God of the Bible.”
    -Jason Lisle Deep time the God of our age
     
  4. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Radiometric Dating

    "Radiocarbon is not quite as straightforward as it may seem. The technique does not in fact provide true ages, and radiocarbon results must be adjusted (calibrated) to bring them into line with calendar ages".
    -Dr Sheridan Bowman's book for the British Museum, "Radiocarbon Dating" Diggings, August, 1990 p:8]


    What they are measuring is not ages but rather a ratio of a “parent” element to a “daughter” element, that alone cant give you a age. The parent element in the rock decays at a observable rate under normal conditions into its daughter element. Only when the evolutionist adds his assumptions does he believe he can get a “age” from the rock. These unprovabel assumptions are the downfall of radio metric dating as a claim to prove the earth is older than the biblical account. All the assumptions used have been at one time or another have been shown false. In fact evolutionist will claim that past rates such as the mitochondrial DNA mutation rates were different in the past.

    Assumptions

    1] That each system is a closed system. Nothing can contaminate the parent or daughter products being measured.
    2] Each system most initially have contained no daughter components, which is unprovable.
    3] The process rate must always be the same.
    Some other assumptions. If any change occurred in past ages in the blanket of atmosphere surrounding our planet this could greatly effect the clocks in minerals.

    Carbon dating assumptions

    1] The air around us has for the past several million years, had the same amount of atmospheric carbon that it now has.
    2] The very large amount of oceanic carbon has remained constant.
    3] Cosmic rays from outer space have reached the earth in the same amounts in the past as now.
    4] Both the rate of formation and rate of decay of carbon 14 have always in the past remained in balance.
    5] The decay rate of carbon 14 has never changed.
    6] Nothing has ever contaminated any specimen containing carbon 14.

    “It [c-14 ]is not an infallible technique, and, as any field archaeologist knows, contamination of the sample is always a serious possibility. Trusting the method to produce an “absolute date” for a single artifact was absurd.” -Current Anthropology, Vol. 24, No. 3 (June, 1983), p. 307.

    7] No seepage of water or other factor has brought additional carbon 14 to the sample since death occurred.
    8] The fraction of carbon 14 which the living thing possessed at death is today known.
    9] Nitrogen is the precursor to C=14, so the amount of nitrogen in the atmosphere must have always been constant.
    10 Earth's magnetic field: Earth's magnetic field was the same in the past as it is today

    “A stronger magnetic field is significant because the magnetic field partly shields the earth from the influx of cosmic rays, which change nitrogen atoms into radioactive carbon-14 atoms. So a stronger magnetic field in the past would have reduced the influx of cosmic rays. This in turn would have reduced the amount of radiocarbon produced in the atmosphere. If this were the case, the biosphere in the past would have had a lower carbon-14 concentration than it does today...So if you mistakenly assume that the radiocarbon levels in the atmosphere and biosphere have always been the same as they are today, you would erroneously estimate much older dates for early human artifacts, such as post-Babel wooden statuettes in Egypt. And that is exactly what conventional archaeology has done.”
    -Dr. Andrew A Snelling Rapidly Decaying Magnetic Field



    For more on the decay of the magnetic field see here
    https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis....etic-Field.pdf

    Other Issues

    Radiometric dating falls outside of the realm of science since science must be observable. The rocks and their decay from parent to daughter has not been observed through the samples entire supposed millions or billions of years since its formation. Radiometric dating would not work unless the evolutionist already had an earth history time line in place. When you send the sample in they ask you what layer it was found in and with which fossils. Otherwise they would not know what dates are “good” and what are “bad” since variations occur. Any date that returns in contradiction to the fossils and evolutionary time line, is than declared a “bad” date and disregarded as contaminated or some other excuse.

    “No evidence contrary to the accepted framework is allowed to remain. Evolution stands, old earth ideas stand,g no matter what the true evidence revels. An individual fact is accepted or rejected as valid evidence according to its fit with evolution...observation plays second fiddle to the assumptions ”
    -John Morris The Young Earth


    The KBS Tuff is a great example. The KBS Tuff was originally dated 230 million years old. The evolutionist exspalined it away as excessive decay because it did not match with the fossils. Than it was given a new date of 2.6 million years dated by 3 separate methods that all confirmed and was used as a great example of the proof and accuracy of radiometric dating. But than a human fossil was found in the layer and they know redated the layer at 1.8 million years confirmed by radiometric dating yet once more. Another great example is Santo Domingo rock formation in Argentina argon/argon dated at 212 million years. This date agreed with the surrounding ages of rock the fossil wood from a extinct species of tree. However bird tracks were also found but were explained away as some bird type dinosaur and the age for the formation was published in the journal Nature in 2002. Than other evolutionist showed the tracks were from a modern sandpiper [not yet evolved] a small common bird. The rocks were redated to 37 million years old by lead/uranium dating to match the bird tracks. The former dates were explained away as faulting. The fossils decide the age not the radiometric dating. Dates are only accepted if they go along with what evolutionist already claim the age of a layer.

    "‘If a C-14 date supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is completely ‘out-of-date,’ we just drop it."
    -T. Save-Soderbergh and *Ingrid U. Olsson, "C-14 Dating and Egyptian Chronology," Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology, ed. *Ingrid U. Olsson (1970), p. 35 [also in *Pensee, 3(1): 44].


    "In the light of what is known about the radiocarbon method and the way it is used, it is truly astonishing that many authors will cite agreeable determinations as 'proof' for their beliefs ... The radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates. "This whole blessed thing is nothing but 13th century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read"."
    -Written by Robert E. Lee in his article "Radiocarbon: Ages in Error" in Anthropological Journal Of Canada, Vol. 19, No. 3, 1981 p:9]


    Most samples are only tested by one method, when multiple methods are applied you often get contradictory results. If one matches the predetermined age, it is accepted and the rest are rejected. Radiometric dating would disprove the evolutionary time line of earth history if it were not for evolutionist preconceived ideas about ages and fossils and their willingness to throw out any “date” that does not conform to their beliefs. Worse still, some published and accepted dates are imaginary. Take the example of German anthropologist Reiner Von Zieten who over his 30 year career “systematically falsified the dates on this and numerous other “stone age remains.” Some of the fossils he used were fake fossils, others were a few hundred years old that he claimed were as old as Neanderthals. He was unable to use the radiometric dating equipment he claimed he used to date fossils with and was only found out when he tried to sell his universities fossil collection to a U.S Museum. Added that carbon dating and radiometric dating can also be used to show the earth is young.

    Some of the results from observable history

    “If it doesn't work whenever it can be checked for essentially all recently formed rock date old. How dare we assume this assumption is trustworthy when no checks can be applied”
    -John Morris the Young earth


    Freshly-killed seals have been dated at 1,300 years. Other seals which have been dead no longer than 30 years were dated at 4,600 years. -W. Dort, "Mummified Seals of Southern Victoria Land," in Antarctic Journal of the U.S., June 1971, p. 210.)

    living mollusks (such as snails) had their shells dated, and were found to have "died" as much as 2,300 years ago.
    - M. Keith and *G. Anderson, "Radiocarbon Dating: Fictitious Results with Mollusk Shells," in Science, 141, 1963, p. 634.

    Mortar from Oxford Castle in England was dated by radiocarbon as 7,370 years old, yet the castle itself was only built 785 years ago.
    -E.A. Von Fange, "Time Upside Down," quoted in Creation Research Society Quarterly, November, 1974, p. 18.

    10 years after the Mount Saint Helen explosion rocks were potassium argon dated at 350,000 years. Different methods gave different results with an average age of 2.8 million.

    Mount Ngaruuhoe from 1954 was potassium argon dated at 3.5 million years old. Another sample gave “ages” of .8 million years.

    A 1800-1801 Honolulu flow in Hawaii returned ages of 2.6 and 2.96 million years.

    1969 lava flows in Africa were rubidium-strontium dated 773 million years old
    -k bell and jlpowell 1969 strontium isotopic studies of alkalic rocks the potasium rich lavas of the biruga and toro-ankole regions east and central equatorial africa journal of petrology 10 536-572

    Mt Etna was tested 24 years later and dated at .35 million

    A living water snail taken from an artesian spring in Nevada was given as assessed age of 27,000 years.
    -Science, Vol. 224, April 6, 1984 p:58-61

    Sunset Crater, an Arizona Volcano, is known from tree-ring dating to be about 1000 years old. But potassium-argon put it at over 200,000 years
    -G.B. Dalrymple, ‘40 Ar/36 Ar Analyses of Historical Lava Flows,’ Earth and Planetary Science Letters 6, 1969, pp. 47-55

    Wood was cut out of living, growing trees and tested. Although only a few days dead, it was dated as having existed 10,000 years ago. - B. Huber, "Recording Gaseous Exchange Under Field Conditions," in Physiology of Forest Trees, ed. by K.V. Thimann, 1958.)

    "A mastodon skeleton found at Ferguson Farm near Tupperville, Ontario, provided a radiocarbon age of 8,900 for the collagen fraction of bones and a radiocarbon age of 6,200 for high organic-content mud from within the skull cavities. It is unlikely that this skeleton could have survived exposure for 2,700 solar years before emplacement in peat."
    -Robert H. Brown, "Radiocarbon Age Measurements Re-examined," in Review and Herald, October 28, 1971, pp. 7-8.

    "Even the lava dome of Mount St. Helens [produced in 1980] has been radiometrically dated at 2.8 million years [H.M. Morris, ‘Radiometric Dating,’ Back to Genesis, 1997]."
    —James Perloff, Tornado in a Junkyard (1999), p. 146

    Dried seal carcasses less than 30 years old were 'dated' as 4,600 years old.
    -Antarctic Journal of the United States, Vol. 6, October, 1971 p:210

    a coal mine in Queensland Australia potassium argon dated at 39-58 million years and carbon dated at 30-45,000 years old.
    -See the young earth John Morris
     
    usfan likes this.
  5. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Other dates

    "For the volcanic island of Rangitoto in New Zealand, potassium-argon dated the lava flows as 145,000 to 465,000 years old, but the journal of the Geochemical Society noted that ‘the radiocarbon, geological and botanical evidence unequivocally shows that it was active and was probably built during the last 1000 years.’ In fact, wood buried underneath its lava has been carbon-dated as less than 350 years old
    -Ian McDougall, *H.A. Polach, and *J.J. Stipp, ‘Excess Radiogenic Argon in Young Subaerial Basalts from Auckland Volcanic Field, New Zealand,’ Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, December 1969, pp. 1485, 1499]

    In a supposed 20 million year old granite received a uranium thorium lead date 97 million years and a zircon dat of 1,483 million years
    - r.r parish 1990 u-pb dating of monazite and its applications to geological problems Canadian journal of earth sciences 27 1431-1450

    The same sample gave a range of 343 million to 4,493 million
    -a.w webb 1985 geochrondogy of the masgrate block minerals resources review south australia 155 23-27

    an age of 9.588 billion older than earth was received in an argon sample
    -Tim Harrison 1981 excess ar in metamorphic rock broken hill new south wales earth and planetary science letters ss 123-149

    Okudaira et al. measured isochron ages of a rock called amphibolite sampled from south-east India. With the rubidium-strontium method they obtained an age of 481 million years but with samarium-neodymium the age was almost double at 824 million years -Okudaira, T., Hamamoto, T., Prasad, B.H. and Kumar, R., Sm-Nd and Rb-Sr dating of amphibolite from the Nellore-Khammam schist belt, S.E. India: constraints on the collision of the Eastern Ghats terrane and Dharwar-Bastarcraton, Geological Magazine 138(4):495–498, 2001; http://geolmag.geoscienceworld.org/c...ract/138/4/495

    The same rock in the grand canyon gave dates of 6 million, 17 million and 65 million years. Another rock was dated as 1.5 billion years old and 6,000 years old.
    -Institute for creation researcher rate group http://www.icr.org/rate/

    the Grand Canyon's Brahma schist rock layer, ranging from 1.2 to 1.8 billion years--a 600-million-year difference
    http://www.icr.org/article/radioisot...s-another-dev/

    a maximum possible age of 516 million was given to what was a supposed to be 1,100 million rock layer of the grand canyon. Rocks suppose to be 100 million were samarium-neodymium dated at 1.7 billion
    -Dr. Andrew Snelling Earth’s Catastrophic Past p809-820 2009

    a difference of 1.3 billion came from the same rock sampled in Australia
    -Dr. Andrew Snelling Earth’s Catastrophic Past p823 2009

    A team of researchers gave a presentation at the 2012 Western Pacific Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 13–17, at which they gave 14C dating results from many bone samples from eight dinosaur specimens. All gave dates ranging from 22,000 to 39,000 years This was a joint event of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and the Asia Oceania Geosciences Society (AOGS) Carbon-14 dated dinosaur bones - under 40,000 years old Carbon-14 dating of bones from 8 dinosaurs -
    -August 15, 2012 presentation by Dr. Thomas Seiler at the AOGS-AGU (WPGM) 2012 conference in Singapore.

    http://newgeology.us/BG02-A012 Abstract.pdf

    "Muscle tissue from beneath the scalp of a mummified musk ox found in frozen muck at Fairbanks Creek, Alaska, has a radiocarbon age of 24,000, while the radiocarbon age of hair from a hind limb of the carcass is 17,200.
    -Robert H. Brown, "Radiocarbon Age Measurements Re-examined," in Review and Herald, October 28, 1971, pp. 7-8.

    uranium thorium lead dated 1,753 million in a sample suppose to be 21 million
    -ir parrish and r tirrul 1989 u-po age of the baltoro granite northwest himalayans and implications for monazite u-pb systematicks geology 17 1076-1079

    128 ages were recorded anywhere from 161 million years to 514 million
    -cs pickles 1997 determination of high spatial resolution argon isotope variations in metamorfic biotipes geochemica et cosmoshimica acta 61 3809-3833
    p807

    The Rate Group dated zircons that gave ages of 1 billion and 6,000 by two separate methods.
    A basalt in the grand canyon gave ages of k-Ar 10,000 1.17 million 3.67 million 2.63 million and 3.6 million and a rb-sr of 1.143 billion
    -see John Morris the Young earth p 52

    The scientists who did the Rangitoto tests dated 16 volcanoes in all. Eleven of these were able to be compared with carbon-14 dates. In every case the potassium-argon dates were clearly wrong to a huge extent. Similar conflict was found by researchers in Hawaii. A lava flow which is known to have taken place in 1800-1801—less than 200 years ago—was dated by potassium-argon as being 2,960 million years old. Bones 30,000 years old were found lying above wood dated at 16,000 years
    -Ceram, 1971, p.257-259

    A survey of the 15,000 radio carbon dates published through the year 1969 in the publication, Radiocarbon, revealed the following significant facts:
    "[a] Of the dates of 9671 specimens of trees, animals, and man, only 1146 or about 12 percent have radiocarbon ages greater than 12,530 years.
    " Only three of the 15,000 reported ages are listed as 'infinite.'
    "[c] Some samples of coal, oil, and natural gas, all supposedly many millions of years old have radiocarbon ages of less than 50,000 years.
    "[d] Deep ocean deposits supposed to contain remains of most primitive life forms are dated within 40,000 years.
    Six C-14 ages were determined from a core in an attempt to date the formation of the Bering land bridge. The dates ranged from 4390 to 15,500 B.P. [years Before Present].

    "The first problem was that the results were so disarranged from bottom to top of the core that no two samples were in the same order. Then the oldest date was discarded because it was inconsistent with other tests elsewhere.
    "Then the remaining dates were assumed to be contaminated by a fixed amount, after which the authors concluded that the delta under study had been formed 12,000 years ago. This is what happens to men who operate without an alternative.
    -Erich A. von Fange, "Time Upside Down," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, June 1974, p. 17.


    Wood from Jurassic rocks in the UK, said to be 190 million years old, gave an age of 24,000 years using carbon dating.
    -Tas Walker http://creation.com/geological-conflict

    an age of 3,500 million was given in what was supposed to be 426 million old rock
    -is williams 1992 some observations on the use of zircon u-pb geochronogy in the study of granite rocks transactions of the royal society of edinburgh 447-458

    The youngest rocks in grand canyon was dated 1,153 by rubiduim strontium, that is the same age as the oldest rocks in grand canyon 1,111 and 1,060 for the oldest rocks
    -Dr. Andrew Snelling Earth’s Catastrophic Past 843 2009

    A 15,000 year difference appeared in the assessment of samples from a single sample block of peat.
    -New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, Vol. 21, No. 4, 1978 p:463-466]

    Thirty eight laboratories worldwide carbon-dated samples of wood, peat and carbonate, and produced differing dates for similar objects of the same age. The overall finding of the comparative test was that radiocarbon dating was 'two to three times less accurate than implied by their error terms'. Ages of objects assessed by this method cannot therefore be viewed as being credible. -Nature, September 28, 1989 p:267; New Scientist, September 30, 1989 p:10]

    The data from one of the San Juan Basin dinosaur limb bones showed a range of "ages" from roughly 15 to 85 million years. Some of the calculated "ages," though, lined up with the already assumed age of 64 million years, and these data were hand-picked to represent the "age" of the fossil. Thus, the technique was called "the first successful direct dating of fossil vertebrate bone"—a classic case of circular reasoning. -Fassett, J. E., L. M. Heaman and A. Simonetti. 2011.
    Direct U-Pb dating of Cretaceous and Paleocene dinosaur bones, San Juan Basin, New Mexico. Geology. 39 (2): 159-162.

    fossil wood carbon dated at 20.7 to 28.8 thousand years old, the limestone it was in dated at 183 million
    -Snelling A geological conflict young radiocarbon age for ancient fossil wood creation 22 [2] 44-47 2000

    isochron ages of 481 million and 824 million years same rock
    -bkudaira et al sm-nd and rb-sr dating of amphibelite from the nellore-khammam schist belt.se india constraints on the collision of the eastern gnats terrane and dharwar-bastar craton
    geological magazine 138 [4] 495-498 2001

    "an age of 24,600 BP for a supposed Cretaceous mosasaur humerus bone 70 million years old
    -Lindgren, J. et al. 2011. Microspectroscopic Evidence of Cretaceous Bone Proteins. PLoS ONE. 6 (4): e19445. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%...l.pone.0019445

    martian rock ALH84001 originally dated at 4.5 billion years old, than re-dated at 400 million by other radiometric dates to fit the new theory.
    -Kerr R.A 1996 ancient life on mars? Science 273 864-866 Lapen T J et al 2010 a younger age for ALH8001 and its geochemical link to shergottie sources in mars. Science 328;347-351


    Radiometric dating in support of a young earth

    That c-14 is still found fossils,diamond and various samples that are claimed to be millions and even billions of years old, indicates itself a young earth.


    “Radiocarbon (carbon-14) is a very unstable element that quickly changes into nitrogen. Half the original quantity of carbon-14 will decay back to the stable element nitrogen-14 after only 5,730 years. (This 5,730-year period is called the half-life of radiocarbon, Figure 1).1 2 At this decay rate, hardly any carbon-14 atoms will remain after only 57,300 years (or ten half-lives).So if fossils are really millions of years old, as evolutionary scientists claim, no carbon-14 atoms would be left in them. Indeed, if all the atoms making up the entire earth were radiocarbon, then after only 1 million years absolutely no carbon-14 atoms should be left!”
    -Dr Andrew Snelling Carbon-14 in Fossils and Diamonds


    Pieces of fossilized wood in Oligocene, Eocene, Cretaceous, Jurassic, Triassic, and Permian rock layers supposedly 32–250 million years old all contain measurable radiocarbon, equivalent to “ages” of 20,700 to 44,700 years Similarly, carefully sampled pieces of coal from ten U.S. coal beds, ranging from Eocene to Pennsylvanian and supposedly 40–320 million years old, all contained similar radiocarbon levels equivalent to “ages” of 48,000 to 50,000 years. Even fossilized ammonite shells found alongside fossilized wood in a Cretaceous layer, supposedly 112–120 million years old, contained measurable radiocarbon equivalent to “ages” of 36,400 to 48,710 years. Yet diamonds have been tested and shown to contain radiocarbon equivalent to an “age” of 55,000 years.
    -A. A. Snelling, “Radiocarbon Ages for Fossil Ammonites and Wood in Cretaceous Strata near Redding, California,” Answers Research Journal 1 (2008): 123–144. R. E. Taylor and J. Southon, “Use of Natural Diamonds to Monitor 14C AMS Instrument Backgrounds,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 259 (2007): 282–287 J. R. Baumgardner, A. A. Snelling, D. R. Humphreys, and S. A. Austin, “Measurable 14C in Fossilized Organic Materials: Confirming the Young Earth Creation-Flood Model,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism, ed. R.L. Ivey Jr. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship, 2003), pp. 127–147. J. R. Baumgardner, “14C Evidence for a Recent Global Flood and a Young Earth,” in Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative, eds. L. Vardiman, A. A. Snelling, and E. F. Chaffin (El Cajon, California: Institute for Creation Research, and Chino Valley, Arizona: Creation Research Society, 2005), pp. 587–630 B. DeYoung, Thousands . . . Not Billions: Challenging an Icon of Evolution, Questioning the Age of the Earth (Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 2005), pp. 45–62.
    10 coal samples from evolutionary dating at 40 million to 350 million years all radiocarbon dated around 50,000
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/Publ...,6438,226.aspx


    Excessive decay in the past?

    “Recent experimental evidences verify that the decay rates of radioisotopes can very significant from the current accepted values- by as much as 1 billion times faster when exposed to certain environmental factors.”
    -Dr Cupps PHD Nuclear Physics Clocks and Rocks


    Creationist explanation for the old ages is simply that the decay rates have not been constant throughout all of history. That there was a event or multiple events that accelerated the decay rates in the “clocks” of the rocks. In lavatory experiments we have been able to produce billions of years of decay in hours. Decay rates can be changed by a factor of trillions. Polonium halos prove millions of years of radioactive decay in micro seconds hours and days in earth history. One rock dated by the rate group shows that one rock decayed 1.5 billion “years” worth of decay in 6,000 years . argon age of 5 billion years can be obtained in 3 to 10.5 hours. Diamonds have been argon dated 6 billion years older than earth
    -s zushu m ozima o nith 1986 k-ar isochron dating of zaire cubic dimonds nature 326 710-712


    radiohalos show at least 100 million years of decay in days at most weeks minutes in some cases
    heat can produce accelerated decay radioactive decay
    p847
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/Publ...,6438,226.aspx

    many mechanism can cause radioactive decay, decay rates can be changed by a factor of trillions p 848
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/Publ...,6438,226.aspx

    polonium halos from 3 different layers 35 million to 245 million years old had to form within months of each other
    -R.L gentry wh cristie dh smith jf emery sa renalds r walker ss christy radiohalos in colified wood new evidence relating to the time of unranium introduction and colaification science 194 315-318
     
  6. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Fossils and Geological Column Millions of Years old?

    "The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply, feeling the explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work brings results. This is supposed to be hard-headed pragmatism."
    —*J.E. O’Rourke, "Pragmatism versus Materialism and Stratigraphy," American Journal of Science, January 1976, p. 48.

    “And this poses something of a problem. If we date the rocks by their fossils, how can we than turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossils record”
    -Niles Eldridge the rethinking of Darwinian evolution


    The fossils date the rock, and evolution dates the fossils.... circular reasoning, instead of proceeding from observation to conclusion, the conclusion interprets the observation which “proves” the conclusion...thus the rocks date the fossils, and the fossils date the rocks. The unquestioned assumption of evolution provides the context for the entire process”
    -John Morris The Young Earth Master Books 2007


    Rocks are not dated buy their appearance, as all types are found in all layers. They are not dated by minerals, as minerals of all type can be found through the whole column. They are not dated by location, as rock formation of older ages are found on younger “ages” all the time and more often strata “ages” are missing totally. Only 4% of earth has a total of 10 layers. They are not dated buy dating method. They are dated by the index fossils but these fossils alone cant give you a date, only the preconceived assumptions of evolution can. It is all done with circular reasoning. The rocks date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks. Without index fossils there could be no geological column.

    “But wait a minute! We cannot even use 99 percent of the fossils to date them by, since we can find the same type of fossils in one stratum as in many others! And in each stratum are millions of fossils, representing hundreds and even thousands of different species of plant and/or animal life. The result is a bewildering maze of mixed-up or missing strata, each with fossil prints from a wide variety of ancient plants and animals that we can find in still other rock strata.What are these magical fossils that have the power to tell men finding them the DATE—so many millions of years ago—when they lived? These special "index" fossils are generally small marine invertebrates— backboneless sea animals
    -Vance Terrell Science vs Evolution


    “Any rock containing fossils of one type of trilobite (Paradoxides) is called a "Cambrian" rock, thus supposedly dating all the creatures in that rock to a time period 600 million years in the past. But rocks containing another type of trilobite (Bathyurus) are arbitrarily classified as "Ordovician," which is claimed to have spanned 45 million years and begun 480 million years ago The dating of each stratum—and all the fossils in it—is supposedly based on index fossils, when it is actually based on evolutionary speculations, and nothing more. "The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone."
    —-Randy Wysong, The Creation-Evolution Controversy (1976), p. 31.


    We find living index fossil these are suppose to date certain layers of rock millions of years old, yet there alive today.

    “A circular argument arises interpret the fossils record in terms of a particular theory of evolution. Inspect the interpretation and note that it confirms the theory, well, it would, wouldn't it”
    -Tom Kemp new scientist a fresh look at the fossil record

    "The charge that the construction of the geologic scale involves circularity has a certain amount of validity."
    —*David M. Raup, "Geology and Creationism," Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, March 1983, p. 21.


    Is there a geological column?

    The geological column is found only one place, in government textbooks. Most all fossil bearing sea creatures are on the continents not in the ocean, fossils today are not forming on continents so the present cannot be the key to the past. Today we do not form vast sedimentary layers spread across continents, marine creatures in vast graveyards. So the present is not key to the past.

    “it seems axiomatic that the harder you look at a rock the more incomplete its stenography appears to become”
    -torres h.s some personal thought on stratigraphic precision in the 20th century the earth inside and out,some major contributions to geology in the 20th century geological survey London no 192 p251-272 2002

    “85% of earths surface does not even have three layers in the right order we are always finding older layers on top of younger layers and all mixed up”
    -Holt biology p285 1989


    “if the whole column were together it would be 100 miles think”
    -Holt biology

    “if the layers are different ages why is there no erosion marks between layers”
    -Merrill earth science 1993 p114 no evidence of aging


    “if there was a column, unfortunately no such column exist”
    -hbj earth science 1989 p326


    a worldwide study on all strata was done by John Woodrappe's world research project it was published in creation research society quarterly. He found fossils do not tend to overlay one another in successive strata ,instead they tend to be mixed together in successive strata . 1/3 span 3 or more levels. there is not an orderly progression of strata from bottom to top higher strata . Instead they are found here and there in what approximates a chance arrangement such fossils are often clumped at a great horizontal distance from the index fossils they are suppose to overlay. only small % of all localities of any given fossil override or are overlain by any other sigal fossil of another geological period. Thus fossils of different gemological periods invariably tend to shun each other geographically and this in itself may be taken as prima facie evidence that all fossils are ecological and/or biogeographic equivalents of each other- negating all concepts of evolution geologic periods and geologic time.
     
  7. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    66,610
    Likes Received:
    10,767
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wow. That's quite a collection of crackpots.

    Can you explain the White Cliffs of Dover?
     
    trevorw2539 and Cosmo like this.
  8. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Indeed, however i think it better fits in a future thread.
     
  9. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    79,807
    Likes Received:
    8,487
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL!!!!

    total refusal to deal with a challenge.
     
    Margot2 and Cosmo like this.
  10. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Or more likely as the other thread showed, you do not like to stay on topic but since i think you are not up to date on creation models, you think they are the same subject. Had he said the earth must be older than 10,000 years because the chalk beds take longer to form, than I would respond. If you want to word it like that I shall respond as well. Otherwise it is a question of how they formed, a very important topic that needs its own thread.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2018
    usfan likes this.
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    21,724
    Likes Received:
    3,060
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is the "Gish Gallop" at play.

    You're attempting to "win" an argument by presenting enough volume of garbage that refuting each element of the garbage takes too long.

    But in the end, all you have is a pile of garbage.
     
    Margot2, dairyair and Cosmo like this.
  12. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    21,724
    Likes Received:
    3,060
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's the rest of the "Gish Gallop" in full swing.

    You dump a load and then suggest each element requires someone else to start a thread!
     
    Margot2 and Cosmo like this.
  13. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    66,610
    Likes Received:
    10,767
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The White Cliffs of Dover are a PERFECT study in evolution.
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  14. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    5,570
    Likes Received:
    1,349
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Belief is never influenced by evidence.
     
    XploreR likes this.
  15. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,366
    Likes Received:
    5,447
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Heh...there is ONLY ONE "Creation Model" and it is in the Bible(s).
     
    Margot2 likes this.
  16. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    10,429
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What exactly did you expect to achieve with this thread? This is meant to be a discussion forum but you’re not going to achieve any kind of discussion by just blindly dumping swathes of copy-pasted material covering multiple different areas and claims. For anything constructive, you’d need to pick a specific topic, explain your position in your own words and actually raise questions or ideas for other to respond to.
     
    Margot2, trevorw2539 and WillReadmore like this.
  17. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    26,821
    Likes Received:
    19,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually where are TWO creation myths in the bible and they don't agree with one another. ;)

    Genesis chapters 1 and 2 each have a version of creation but the order is different thereby setting up a conflict for the OP to resolve.

    Which came first? Animals and plants or humans?

    Did the biblical creation myth "evolve" from one chapter to the next?

    If the the OP wants to claim that his creation myth is accurate he is going to have resolve all of the contradictions and fallacies that it contains.

    https://www.news24.com/MyNews24/The...fallacies-scientific-issues-and-more-20120517

     
    Mr_Truth and tecoyah like this.
  18. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,366
    Likes Received:
    5,447
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The earth must be older than 10,000 years because the chalk beds take longer to form....please address this.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  19. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    66,610
    Likes Received:
    10,767
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I see you have studied your bible seriously.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  20. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    66,610
    Likes Received:
    10,767
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, the formation of the Cliffs of Dover took a million years or more.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.

Share This Page