• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Dinosaurs would still be here.

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,639.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It does matter--that's one of the things scientists have to take into account when they do radiometric dating. Did you believe they never thought of it?
To be honest, I do not know.

they use this to date rock at mt saint helens. and determined this rock to be millions of year old. although it was only a few years old.

Radiometric dating process has been questioned for years.. But some people keep holding onto it. why??
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
9,252
4,709
82
Goldsboro NC
✟272,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
To be honest, I do not know.

they use this to date rock at mt saint helens. and determined this rock to be millions of year old. although it was only a few years old.
Who's they?
Radiometric dating process has been questioned for years.. But some people keep holding onto it. why??
Because the people who are holding on to it know how it works.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,338
7,533
31
Wales
✟436,076.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
they use this to date rock at mt saint helens. and determined this rock to be millions of year old. although it was only a few years old.

What do you mean by this statement? Volcanic eruptions don't create brand new rocks and elements each time, especially not the Mount Saint Helens eruption.
 
Upvote 0

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,639.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What do you mean by this statement? Volcanic eruptions don't create brand new rocks and elements each time, especially not the Mount Saint Helens eruption.
Oh I see. so magma which explodes from under the earth and forms new rock are not brand new elements..

ok.. see what I mean?
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,338
7,533
31
Wales
✟436,076.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Oh I see. so magma which explodes from under the earth and forms new rock are not brand new elements..

ok.. see what I mean?

If it erupts from the earth, it's lava, not magma. Lava is just magma that goes from being underground to being above ground. It's not really a brand new element.
 
Upvote 0

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,639.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
If it erupts from the earth, it's lava, not magma. Lava is just magma that goes from being underground to being above ground. It's not really a brand new element.
so this element underground is emitting carbon 14 or whatever the whole time it is down there?
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,338
7,533
31
Wales
✟436,076.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
so this element underground is emitting carbon 14 or whatever the whole time it is down there?

Since anything found underground is made from silicon, such as rocks and lava, and carbon 14 comes from carbon based lifeforms...
 
Upvote 0

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,639.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Since anything found underground is made from silicon, such as rocks and lava, and carbon 14 comes from carbon based lifeforms...
This does not make sense.

Answer: Cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere are constantly converting the isotope nitrogen-14 (N-14) into carbon-14 (C-14 or radiocarbon). Living organisms are constantly incorporating this C-14 into their bodies along with other carbon isotopes. When the organisms die, they stop incorporating new C-14, and the old C-14 starts to decay back into N-14 by emitting beta particles. The older an organism's remains are, the less beta radiation it emits because its C-14 is steadily dwindling at a predictable rate. So, if we measure the rate of beta decay in an organic sample, we can calculate how old the sample is. C-14 decays with a half-life of 5,730 years.

So if the cosmic rays are not getting to this lava flow. how is it decaying?

can you answer these?

Question, how can you measure how old LAVA is? The most familiar method is radiocarbon dating, also known as Carbon-14. Charcoal is produced when plant material is buried by lava flows. Living plants and animals take in carbon from the air, most of which is the stable isotope C-12 and a tiny amount of the unstable isotope C-14.

so if this is true. How old were the plants in the lava fields produced by Mt St Helens? which from reports I have seen date them to millions of years?

we also have this

Carbon-14 decay cannot be used to directly date lava because lava itself does not contain organic material necessary for carbon-14 dating;
instead, scientists use carbon-14 dating on trapped organic material like charcoal within the lava flow to estimate the age of a relatively young lava flow, as carbon-14 is only effective for dating materials up to around 50,000 years old.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,338
7,533
31
Wales
✟436,076.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
This does not make sense.

Answer: Cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere are constantly converting the isotope nitrogen-14 (N-14) into carbon-14 (C-14 or radiocarbon). Living organisms are constantly incorporating this C-14 into their bodies along with other carbon isotopes. When the organisms die, they stop incorporating new C-14, and the old C-14 starts to decay back into N-14 by emitting beta particles. The older an organism's remains are, the less beta radiation it emits because its C-14 is steadily dwindling at a predictable rate. So, if we measure the rate of beta decay in an organic sample, we can calculate how old the sample is. C-14 decays with a half-life of 5,730 years.

So if the cosmic rays are not getting to this lava flow. how is it decaying?

can you answer these?

Question, how can you measure how old LAVA is? The most familiar method is radiocarbon dating, also known as Carbon-14. Charcoal is produced when plant material is buried by lava flows. Living plants and animals take in carbon from the air, most of which is the stable isotope C-12 and a tiny amount of the unstable isotope C-14.

so if this is true. How old were the plants in the lava fields produced by Mt St Helens? which from reports I have seen date them to millions of years?

we also have this

Carbon-14 decay cannot be used to directly date lava because lava itself does not contain organic material necessary for carbon-14 dating;
instead, scientists use carbon-14 dating on trapped organic material like charcoal within the lava flow to estimate the age of a relatively young lava flow, as carbon-14 is only effective for dating materials up to around 50,000 years old.

The very bottom paragraph says it all. Only organic material takes in carbon and produces carbon 14 since they are carbon based lifeforms. Coal, which still contains carbon 14 since it was made from carbon based lifeforms, can be carbon dated, but carbon 14 only has an effective half-life measurable up to 50,000 years, by which point it is essentially dead.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,182
3,189
Oregon
✟956,943.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
actually it is not proven, and it is questioned by many people.

Again, No one was there 50 million years ago (if the earth was even here)

radiometric data demands everything is the same 50 million years ago as it is today. if it is not. then the data can not be trusted.

I can go on and on and on.
You clearly have no understanding of radiometric science.
Ice age occurred after the flood.

300 different lava flows? and

lol

I was not here 50 million years. ago. nor was anyone else. But I do have this

We have the history of the earth in the Earth itSelf that tells the story. And yes, the Earth was here 50 million years ago.
radiometric data demands all things have been the same since the beginning of creation.
Why would they be? That makes no sense at all.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,182
3,189
Oregon
✟956,943.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
Question, how can you measure how old LAVA is?
Lava is the hot flowing rock we see coming out of volcanoes. The correct term you need to use is Basalt. Basalt is the rock that Lava forms into when it cools. It's the Led isotopes that's often tested in basalt. But there are other ways as well.

Here's a video on the process:

 
Upvote 0

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,639.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You clearly have no understanding of radiometric science.


We have the history of the earth in the Earth itSelf that tells the story. And yes, the Earth was here 50 million years ago.

Why would they be? That makes no sense at all.
Thats fine if you believe this

I don;t. I used to. But then I saw stuff which changed my view after studying it for many years.
 
Upvote 0

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,639.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Which sadly is not factual at all.
Are you trying to convince yourself or me?

Again, I used to believe as you do. using the same interpretation of evidence you do.

I have since changed that view.. And I doubt you will convince me to change back.

So really. I see no point in continuing. You will believe as you do and I will believe as I do.. and nothing will convince either of us any different
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,182
3,189
Oregon
✟956,943.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
Thats fine if you believe this

I don;t. I used to. But then I saw stuff which changed my view after studying it for many years.
I'm unable to deny what the Earth is telling us about itSelf. So yes, I believe the Earth over the creation story of an ancient middle-eastern tribe of desert dwellers.

But as far as geochronology for determining the age of rocks, you don't know the subject.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,338
7,533
31
Wales
✟436,076.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Are you trying to convince yourself or me?

Again, I used to believe as you do. using the same interpretation of evidence you do.

I have since changed that view.. And I doubt you will convince me to change back.

So really. I see no point in continuing. You will believe as you do and I will believe as I do.. and nothing will convince either of us any different

Not trying to convince anyone, just stating a fact.

I'd love for you to try and convince me that radiometric dating is wrong because I've done the studying and I've not seen a single piece of evidence to show why it's claimed to be wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,639.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'm unable to deny what the Earth is telling us about itSelf.
Neither am I

We just interpret what the earth is saying

where you see buillions of years.

I see an earth remade by noah's flood.

So yes, I believe the Earth over the creation story of an ancient middle-eastern tribe of desert dwellers.

But as far as geochronology for determining the age of rocks, you don't know the subject.
I know it is flawed. and has been called into question by many a people.

But it is not the only reason I do not agree with your YEC model.
 
Upvote 0

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,639.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Not trying to convince anyone, just stating a fact.
According to what you believe
I'd love for you to try and convince me that radiometric dating is wrong because I've done the studying and I've not seen a single piece of evidence to show why it's claimed to be wrong.
lol. I am not here to prove anything to you. I think you have shown nothing I say will convince you. so why should i even bother.

again, Radiometric data is just one peace of the puzzle in how I see geology and the earth and what happened.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,338
7,533
31
Wales
✟436,076.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
According to what you believe

lol. I am not here to prove anything to you. I think you have shown nothing I say will convince you. so why should i even bother.

again, Radiometric data is just one peace of the puzzle in how I see geology and the earth and what happened.

And that's your opinion and you're welcome to it. Just don't expect that on a science forum, people aren't going to not take issue with it, especially from people who actually know about the subject.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,300
52,680
Guam
✟5,164,957.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Not trying to convince anyone, just stating a fact.

I'd love for you to try and convince me that radiometric dating is wrong because I've done the studying and I've not seen a single piece of evidence to show why it's claimed to be wrong.

Father: What'cha got there, son?
Son: A lead pipe.
Father: Did you know that, 4.47 billion years ago, that lead you're holding was U₂₃₈?
Son: Really?
Father: Yup -- it takes 4.47 billion years for Uranium to decay into Lead.
Son: Then why is U₂₃₈ still around?
Father: Um ... uh ... go ask your mother.
 
Upvote 0