My Canoe Challenge

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I'm trying to show maturity without history...

Keep trying, maturity will come

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

It'll suffice.

If things are 'mature' because the material they are made out of has been around far longer than they have, then by extension, since everything is made of stuff that's been around since the big bang, everything is equally 'mature', and 'the word is meaningless in this context.

 

[AV1611VET]

If things are 'mature' because the material they are made out of ...

QV please:

Please define "mature" in this context. I bet you can't give a definition which supports your silly semantic game.

Able to do what is expected of it.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

QV please:

OK, thanks.

 

[lesliedellow]

Ex materia.

So Why was the dust apparently 4.6 billion years old?

 

[AV1611VET]

So Why was the dust apparently 4.6 billion years old?

Beats me!

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Beats me!

You still haven't explained what the relevance of 1000yrs of history for the tree is.

Like I said, you can't supply a definition of mature which supports the point you are trying to make.

 

[Kylie]

It'll suffice.

I disagree. I think you've chosen that definition solely because it advances your own point of view. There's no good reason to conclude that the best definition of "Mature" is "able to do what it's intended to do." That definition actually fits the word "Capable," and maturity isn't needed for capability.

 

[AV1611VET]

I disagree. I think you've chosen that definition solely because it advances your own point of view. There's no good reason to conclude that the best definition of "Mature" is "able to do what it's intended to do." That definition actually fits the word "Capable," and maturity isn't needed for capability.

Sounds like you're making an argument for YEC.

 

[Kylie]

Sounds like you're making an argument for YEC.

How in the world do you reach that conclusion?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I cut down a 1000-year-old tree, hollow it out and make a canoe out of it; all in a day's time.

How old is the canoe when I'm finished?

The answer is: Who cares?! You should be arrested for trespassing and destroying a valued landmark in a National Conservation Park!

 

[Kylie]

If you are talking about the CANOE itself, then it has no maturity, but then again, it has no history either.

I disagree.

QV please:

Please define "mature" in this context. I bet you can't give a definition which supports your silly semantic game.

Able to do what is expected of it.

That's a very unusual definition of "mature". Do you have anything to show that this is the best definition?

It'll suffice.

I disagree. I think you've chosen that definition solely because it advances your own point of view. There's no good reason to conclude that the best definition of "Mature" is "able to do what it's intended to do." That definition actually fits the word "Capable," and maturity isn't needed for capability.

Sounds like you're making an argument for YEC.

How in the world do you reach that conclusion?

I'd love it if you could answer this AV.

 

[Opdrey]

The answer is: Who cares?! You should be arrested for trespassing and destroying a valued landmark in a National Conservation Park!

'Round where I live cutting down an old-growth tree can get you into a LOT of trouble!

 

[Opdrey]

....

 

[Bungle_Bear]

So now we have a 1-day old canoe, made from a 1000-year-old mature log.

So, in essence, we have a canoe that is mature, but without a history.

Would you say this is correct?

Can't believe I'm going back to this, but it occurs to me that you have this completely wrong. You have a canoe with 1000 years of history (inherited from the log) no matter how much maturity you want to give it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Can't believe I'm going back to this, but it occurs to me that you have this completely wrong. You have a canoe with 1000 years of history ...

But not as a canoe.

My car is made of metal.

Is my car six thousand inherited years old?

 

[Opdrey]

My car is made of metal.

Is my car six thousand inherited years old?

No, your car is not 6000 years old by any stretch of the imagination. Literally no one on earth or on any known planet would consider the car to be the age of the component metal.

There's no "inherited years of age", nothing like that.

Geologists OFTEN find conglomerates which are made up of smaller chunks of older rocks. The important thing to know is what is the age of the conglomerate? It isn't dated radiometrically by dating the clasts that make up the rock. That would only give an age of the original rock which may be millions or billions of years older. The key is "when was the conglomerate made" and that is the age of the conglomerate.

I really am struggling with this "challenge" because it makes zero sense. Perhaps if we were in a locked psych ward or were smoking some of the devil's lettuce but other than that it really doesn't make any sense to ask it or pose it.

 

[AV1611VET]

I really am struggling with this "challenge" because it makes zero sense. Perhaps if we were in a locked psych ward or were smoking some of the devil's lettuce but other than that it really doesn't make any sense to ask it or pose it.

The challenge shows that an object can have two ages: one existential and one physical.

The canoe is zero years old existentially, but one thousand years old physically.

 

[Opdrey]

The challenge shows that an object can have two ages: one existential and one physical.

That isn't how it works. I am aware of literally no one who considers there car to be millions of years old because the original Fe atoms come from a banded iron formation that formed in the Pre-Cambrian.

There is no 'existential' age to the canoe. There is an age for the material and and age for the canoe. They are two different things relating to to unrelated topics.

[qutoe]
The canoe is zero years old existentially, but one thousand years old physically.[/QUOTE]

Nope. There is no one in the world (except maybe you?) who calculates it like that. I'm sorry.

Instead of posting "challenges" for things you just made up for yourself, why don't you say "Hey, I've just made up a new way of looking at this or that"? When you couch it as a "challenge" you make the critical error that other people have the same thoughts as you do. That is clearly not the case here.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The challenge shows that an object can have two ages: one existential and one physical.

The canoe is zero years old existentially, but one thousand years old physically.

That depends where you start - the atoms and molecules that make up the tree would be much older than the tree... So, by your 'physical age' method, the canoe is billions of years (or for YECs, 6 thousand years) old physically.