Real time or evo time?

[AirPo]

Name any dating method that does not require present physics.

dad's.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Please tell us that the poor little proton you measured was not on earth??!

Lots of irrelevant ranting that seems to be based on a fantasy that a experiment using protons here on Earth was not done on photons on Earth, dad, or the delusion that I cited the experiment !
The measurement of the radius of protons here on Earth that you cited out of the blue tells us nothing about any variation of the laws of physics in the far universe.

29 July 2016 dad: What looks like an insult about scientists faking data with "seek to make the universe conform to what is under your nose".

Rational people believe that the universe does not lie, dad. If the universe tells us that the laws of physics are the same in the far universe, e.g. distant stars emit light with the same spectral lines, then the laws of physics are the same in the far universe.

 

[RealityCheck01]

It is PART of the fable.

The silliness of geology being a fable is an automatic loss for you dad. It makes it look as if your education stopped before high school where topics such as mountain building pushing rock miles into the air are covered.
29 July 2016 dad: What looks like a lot of ignorance abut geology!

 

[RealityCheck01]

I don't know what time is.

29 July 2016 dad: Does not know what time is even when its definition is cited!
Ignorance about basic English: An event of the hand of a clock is at 12 o'clock. Another event of the hand of a clock is at 1 o'clock. A time of 1 hour has passed !

 

[Kylie]

Childishness aside, I am saying that when something is presented as science, it has to have real support that can be shown and posted.

And science does.

Opinion.

Maybe. But I've certainly never seen anything that would warrant me changing that opinion.

Peons.

Opinion.

Of course. There are hot spots today. There is evidence of massive volcanic activity in the past.

So this means two things...

The different state past was a state in which volcanic activity could occur, so we know that things like rock melting could happen, convection currents could happen. We can look at the old lava flows and see that they had a certain viscosity due to their shape, and we can look at the lines of the ground then, preserved in sediments etc and come to conclusions about what gravity was like back then.

And we know that the traces that were left by this past state volcanic activity are the same as the traces we'd expect to see from volcanic activity in the present state. I mean, the past state traces of volcanic activity could have been anything. Maybe streamers and confetti. And if so, we'd never realise that they were traces of volcanic activity. But the activity in the past state must have been very very similar to present state activity, since it left traces that are practically identical to the traces left by present state volcanic activity.

 

[RealityCheck01]

You can't measure in light years. You just do not know actual sizes or distances..

Whoops - we have you turning your assertion into a delusion, dad !
29 July 2016 dad: If there is no way to measure actual distances than the laws of physics changing in the far universe is a delusion.

And the delusion of "not know actual sizes" when a simple technique to measure actual sizes of stars has been given to you.

 

[RealityCheck01]

How about the size of the protons and etc you claim changed?

This is not about the size of protons: 28 July 2016 dad: The size of the gas clouds containing the methanol undergoing rotational transitions does not affect the transitions.
You do know that a gas cloud is not a proton? I suspect you do but displays of deep ignorance of geology and other science hints that you may not know the difference.

How about "the size of the protons and etc you claim changed" being a lie because I never clamed that?

It was you, dad, who cited that article about the measurement of the size of protons being different when measured by a new technique. I agree with the article - the measurements of the size of protons in recent experiments do not match the ones in earlier experiments - needs a !
No change in the size of "and etc" was claimed.

 

[RealityCheck01]

29 July 2016 dad: The movement of the reactors by geographical shifts does not affect the fact that the Oklo natural fission reactors existed.
The Oklo reactors could have never have moved and they would still be natural fission reactors !

 

[Kylie]

The ONLY fit is after one drenches all evidences in the assumption and belief that our laws existed in the past. The fit is all in the head, and circular.

No, it is not. The fact that you don't understand this only serves to illustrate that trying to have a discussion with you about this is a waste of time.

You were not there in Noah's day to plug a bathtub. I kid you not.

Shall we add "analogy" to the list of things you are unfamiliar with?

Unless you were there when the tub was filled, you are guessing based on current info only.

Then how do you explain that all the different techniques give the same result?

Thermodynamics and heat retention and such are totally dependent on the laws in place at the moment. You simply look at how long it 'would take' something to cool, in our physics today, and extrapolate backwards...that is religion, not science.

Because religion is bad, and no one should ever base their world view on a religion instead of science, should they? Is that what you are saying, dad? Is it?

And again, I point out that if there was a different state past, then the different techniques would no be in agreement.

False comparison, since you were not there nor was the tub before the change!

If there was a change, why do the different techniques agree?

No. Again you look at what the per minute cooling realities are today in our state, and then assign a time based on that for something cooled in another state. No can do. FIRST you must prove there was a same state past, and until then you may NOT use it for the past.

The proof is in the fact that the different techn iques all agree with each other. This would not happen if the laws of nature had been different in the past.

False. In neither case is the 'indication' of how long anything took to do anything right, since BOTH are based on the same religious error! The only place they seem to meet is in your religious fantasy that never was and cannot be proven.

No.

There is nothing to suggest that the rate of cooling and the rate of leaking would have the same ratio to each other that they have today.

As above, you base both things on the SAME belief.

No. If they had been different in the past, they would not all give the same results.

False, as shown science has ONE way and only one way all the time. That way is a blind godless belief in a same state past, and imposing that error and belief on all evidences across the board. Then they have the unmitigated audacity to turn around and try to say many different ways agree! What a con job, a sleight of hand!

Then explain why different dating techniques always give the same results. You can't.

Unless you know, do not speak. That rule applies to science too. Yet they yap.

You do not know the things you claim. Matthew 7:3.

Ice in space? By the way, notice that the rocks here are IN this state? Why, praytell would rocks anywhere look like they were from another state NOW? They are under our forces and laws now too.

Ah yes. The water level in the flood went high enough to get into space and turn to ice, and yet Noah and his ark, being at the surface of the water, somehow managed to survive this exposure to outer space.

Wow, so plausible.

You make the same mistake in whatever facet of evidences you look at...you assume present nature. Who says that genetics were the same then? Who says that the way things divided, or reproduced or whatever would have been the same as now?? Why would they live 1000 years almost if things were the same then?? You have no DNA from anyone back then. Again, you preach blind faith.

Who says they were different? You and your claims that you can't support. Who says they were the same? The fact that everything we see in reality matches what we would expect to see if they had always been the same.

What was the age of maturity then, and the gestation period!!!!?? You do not know! Hoo ha.

Oh, and I suppose you are an expert on such things.

He did.

And Harry Potter communicates with you too. Listen to him.

Why God changed from the spoken word to written is not probably fully known to us. I might guess personally that there WAS no written language before Babel! Everyone communicated in the former state. I think Babel was around the time of the state change. After that, man started to speak different tongues. Perhaps that could be one more reason for the nature change!? Notice earliest history where man went to basically drawing pics to communicate, and that later became hieroglyphics? I suspect this was a direct result of the incident with the tower of Babel. On a side note, that would maybe explain why remains of that tower were not found. If that was the time of the state change, presumably the continents moved then also! That means uplift, mountain building, subduction, etc etc. The original valley might have gotten dunked?! Ha

Wow, guesswork with no actual evidence to support it. That convinces me!

 

[Kylie]

The flaw in all of that is that you don't know what happened before all that. The entire premise is actually based on uncertainty, and not without limits.

What happened before is irrelevant, because it was reset by my actions.

If I go in and fill up the bathtub, it doesn't matter if I am starting with a tub that is completely empty or half full. Because the clock resets and starts again when I turn the tap off.

Likewise for the heating of the lightbulb. It is reset when I turn it on and heat the bulb up to maximum, and then the clock starts again when I turn the light off and it begins cooling once more.

 

[Kylie]

If somebody is scientifically illiterate, they can postulate whatever nonsense they like, without having to contend with contrary evidence; because they wouldn't understand - or even want to understand - why it is contrary evidence.

And, if they did understand it, they would dream up some ad hoc hypothesis to try and explain it away. Which hypothesis would itself be untenable, and so it would go on.

Tell me about it!

 

[dad]

Lots of irrelevant ranting that seems to be based on a fantasy that a experiment using protons here on Earth was not done on photons on Earth, dad, or the delusion that I cited the experiment !

If the lab was not o eart where was it? On the far side of the universe?!

The measurement of the radius of protons here on Earth that you cited out of the blue tells us nothing about any variation of the laws of physics in the far universe.

So if the radius in deep space is a certain size, praytell how can you know that here?

29 July 2016 dad: What looks like an insult about scientists faking data with "seek to make the universe conform to what is under your nose".

That is what they are all about.

Rational people believe that the universe does not lie, dad.

Rational people believe God doesn't lie, and they do not interpret creation with the ungodly belief system science does.

If the universe tells us that the laws of physics are the same in the far universe, e.g. distant stars emit light with the same spectral lines, then the laws of physics are the same in the far universe.

Since you have not the foggiest clue how distant, that moots your point. Since whatever light from anywhere that we see is only and always HERE INSIDE our space and time, the negates your point also.

 

[dad]

The silliness of geology being a fable is an automatic loss for you dad. It makes it look as if your education stopped before high school where topics such as mountain building pushing rock miles into the air are covered.
29 July 2016 dad: What looks like a lot of ignorance abut geology!

Since you seem to be claiming geology tells us those certain sites took a magic elevator ride miles under and offer no proof at all, you get a gong!

 

[dad]

This is not about the size of protons: 28 July 2016 dad: The size of the gas clouds containing the methanol undergoing rotational transitions does not affect the transitions.

Then you lose, since you know not the size since you know not distance. What you offer is religion and godless fantasy about how time exists in the unknown far universe. ONLY if time exited there as here could distance be known, or sizes.

Hoo ha!

 

[dad]

29 July 2016 dad: The movement of the reactors by geographical shifts does not affect the fact that the Oklo natural fission reactors existed.

Except you could say the empire state building shifted miles under also, the thing is ..prove it! What can you tell us that is unique about the area where the sites are (now totally submerged under water, conveniently for you) that evidences that IT was dunked miles under and resurfaced?

The Oklo reactors could have never have moved and they would still be natural fission reactors !

Yeah yeah yeah, you just fantasize that the site moved miles under and up again when needed. What a farce.

 

[dad]

No, it is not. The fact that you don't understand this only serves to illustrate that trying to have a discussion with you about this is a waste of time.

We understand what you post. Vague balderdash. Pretentious twaddle. Unsupported.

Then how do you explain that all the different techniques give the same result?

Easy peasy. They ALL use the same state past belief. Nothing else. Ever. 100%.

Because religion is bad, and no one should ever base their world view on a religion instead of science, should they? Is that what you are saying, dad? Is it?

I am saying people should not commit fraud and claim a belief is science.

And again, I point out that if there was a different state past, then the different techniques would no be in agreement.

The ONLT tecnique is the blind belief in the unproven same state past. They use that on everything. One trick pony.

There is nothing to suggest that the rate of cooling and the rate of leaking would have the same ratio to each other that they have today.

Or to suggest otherwise...so?

No. If they had been different in the past, they would not all give the same results.

If you spray paint a bunch of dolls red, then they all are red.

Ah yes. The water level in the flood went high enough to get into space and turn to ice, and yet Noah and his ark, being at the surface of the water, somehow managed to survive this exposure to outer space.

No, the tremendous pressure of exploding founts of the deep are thought to have resulted in some cases in water and material carried by the water being sent to space. There is also the thought that the great wind after the flood may have had some sort of space based origin, and maybe resulted in some ejecta as well?

Who says they were different?

Or the same?

You and your claims that you can't support. Who says they were the same? The fact that everything we see in reality matches what we would expect to see if they had always been the same.

False. Only is one biased and willingly embraces tainted evidences.

Wow, guesswork with no actual evidence to support it. That convinces me!

Since you are cheerleading so called science blindly here, that is no surprise.

 

[dad]

What happened before is irrelevant, because it was reset by my actions.

If I go in and fill up the bathtub, it doesn't matter if I am starting with a tub that is completely empty or half full. Because the clock resets and starts again when I turn the tap off.

Likewise for the heating of the lightbulb. It is reset when I turn it on and heat the bulb up to maximum, and then the clock starts again when I turn the light off and it begins cooling once more.

You were not in Noah's bathtub.

 

[AirPo]

Since you seem to be claiming geology tells us those certain sites took a magic elevator ride miles under and offer no proof at all, you get a gong!

Reality check, she's gong less.

 

[AirPo]

You were not in Noah's bathtub.

But I bet Noah was in yours.

 

[ScottA]

What happened before is irrelevant, because it was reset by my actions.

If I go in and fill up the bathtub, it doesn't matter if I am starting with a tub that is completely empty or half full. Because the clock resets and starts again when I turn the tap off.

Likewise for the heating of the lightbulb. It is reset when I turn it on and heat the bulb up to maximum, and then the clock starts again when I turn the light off and it begins cooling once more.

Not true. That position assumes everything but your own part.

Example: If I come across a bicycle and use it for a time and then leave it again where I found it - I know very little...except that I used a bicycle that I didn't make, buy, or have a right to take authority over. That makes me a user - not an authority on bicycles.