A Question Rgarding Embedded Age

[RickG]

And again, I'll make this clear.

God does things decently and in order.

If that's deception to you, then I submit you have a real problem with decency and order.

In fact, you need a universe that can't be explained totally, or your precisous science will stagnate.

That's why discoveries make you guys tingle inside, and discoveries that pwn previous paradigms ... like Pluto was pwned ... make you guys salivate.

Science is like an iron.

Without wrinkes to iron out, an iron is ... well ... a fancy paperweight.

So you guys need a universe full of wrinkles, so you can iron it all out.

You quote me but don't answer the question you quoted. Instead you provide the above statement.

Again I ask, why the deliberate misrepresentations? I'm not talking about God, I'm talking about so called creation scientists.

 

[AV1611VET]

Again I ask, why the deliberate misrepresentations?

I've been here long enough to know that what you guys call "deliberate misrepresentations" are not deliberate misrepresentations at all, but another person's beliefs.

People here are so quick to call us "deceivers" (and their various synonyms), that the accusations don't really mean anything.

In fact, I expect them to come.

Jesus was called a "deceiver," and it's no different today.

I'm not talking about God, I'm talking about so called creation scientists.

"Creation scientists" is a contradiction in terms, as far as I'm concerned.

I suspect they are trying to convince you guys ... on your own level ... what they believe.

This compromising is backfiring though, and isn't working.

I wish they would stop it.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again:

I feel blessed that I'm an Independent Baptist, and not affiliated with those who try to cheapen our (and their) faith with the world's science.

 

[RickG]

I've been here long enough to know that what you guys call "deliberate misrepresentations" are not deliberate misrepresentations at all, but another person's beliefs.

No AV, the misrepresentation of the "Keith and Anderson 1963", and Strahler 1987, are deliberate misrepresentations. Both of those articles are describing the effects of the "reservoir effect, what causes it and how to avoid that problem. The YEC claim takes that discussion where it is stated that a live mollusk would date to 27,000 years if the reservoir effect is not taken into account.

The fact that that particular claim is still all over YEC world is an absolute confirmation that they approve of such deliberate misrepresentations. It is not an opinion. It is blatant dishonesty.

Here's some links. The first paper is the one misrepresented. The second one explains details of the reservoir effect not discussed in the previous paper. Both papers are by Keith & Anderson.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/141/3581/634.short
http://www.es.utoronto.ca/Members/anderson/anderson_bib/pdfs/Keith1964.pdf

 

[AV1611VET]

It is not an opinion. It is blatant dishonesty.

Do I lie about embedded age?

 

[Tellastory]

Tellastory

I might suggest you look at this site: Radiometric dating from a Christian prospective
Radiometric Dating

It might help answer many of your questions.

Dizredux

Thanks for sharing; a bit of hefty duty reading; but even from a "christian perspective", if it goes against the Bible timeline, then it is not a christian perspective, but I digress.

Let's address one key point in the article for assessing the age of anything past 6,000 years:

Ice Cores. One of the best ways to measure farther back in time than tree rings is by using the seasonal variations in polar ice from Greenland and Antarctica. There are a number of differences between snow layers made in winter and those made in spring, summer, and fall. These seasonal layers can be counted just like tree rings. The seasonal differences consist of a) visual differences caused by increased bubbles and larger crystal size from summer ice compared to winter ice, b) dust layers deposited each summer, c) nitric acid concentrations, measured by electrical conductivity of the ice, d) chemistry of contaminants in the ice, and e) seasonal variations in the relative amounts of heavy hydrogen (deuterium) and heavy oxygen (oxygen-18) in the ice. These isotope ratios are sensitive to the temperature at the time they fell as snow from the clouds. The heavy isotope is lower in abundance during the colder winter snows than it is in snow falling in spring and summer. So the yearly layers of ice can be tracked by each of these five different indicators, similar to growth rings on trees. The different types of layers are summarized in Table III.

Page 17

Ice cores are obtained by drilling very deep holes in the ice caps on Greenland and Antarctica with specialized drilling rigs. As the rigs drill down, the drill bits cut around a portion of the ice, capturing a long undisturbed "core" in the process. These cores are carefully brought back to the surface in sections, where they are catalogued, and taken to research laboratories under refrigeration. A very large amount of work has been done on several deep ice cores up to 9,000 feet in depth. Several hundred thousand measurements are sometimes made for a single technique on a single ice core.

A continuous count of layers exists back as far as 160,000 years. In addition to yearly layering

That's an assumption that it is a yearly layering.

Follow if you will that the Bible account of the world wide flood is true and Peter did referenced that the world was covered by water in 2 Peter 3.

From the report in the Bible and what we see in nature without reading the evolutionary perspective into it:

The moon is slowly moving away from the earth; of which I say started at the time of the global flood as that moon did not have any impact craters when it was created, thus pointing to the cause of it moving away from the earth.

There are impact craters on the earth, one big one off of the coast of Nova Scotia: they too all happened at the time of the global flood as the impact would result in the fountain of the deep rising up, forming the mid-Atlantic ridge mountain, which in the time of Peleg did sink as the water that was all in one place when the world was created began filling parts of the one land that sank below sea level, dividing the land.

All of these impact craters would cause a plate shift.

The supervolcanoes and other volcanos as a result would be spewing volcanic debris into the air adding to the debris from the impact craters.

The moon known now for creating the rise & fall of tides and moving away from the earth would have an effect on the mist that God provided to water the earth and thus causing that list to rise & condense to form clouds and thereby rain has come for the first time.

We see how water reservoir as discovered by science can give fossils an older dating than it actually is. That would also apply to fossils as found buried in sentiments.

Now out of all of that chaos, how can science expect to get an accurate dating on anything when the global flood has dramatically changed the rate of decay in everything?

Now in relations to the ice core samplings: I say it is assuming it is a yearly layering only when things has settled down enough from that global flood for a regular pattern to develop. Imagine a greenhouse planet going through dramatic changes, starting off with an instant freeze as one can attest to the frozen mammoths found with greeneries still in its mouth.

Now having been a greenhouse planet, would there not be a flashes of heat and cold happening as the chaotic weather that has developed would hardly relate to normalcy to what our yearly weather for a pattern to discern?

The same goes for tree rings.

Genesis 7:24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

Genesis 8:1And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged; 2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; 3 And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.

So the ice shelf was formed, but no one can say if it had started forming by "yearly layering" out of all that mess from the global flood event any more than those tree rings going beyond the 6,000 years Biblical marker was a yearly ring.

And I do point out that global warming may just be the earth getting back to what it used to be before the flood, but without that mist covering the whole earth like a protective blanket, I can see how fervent heat will be coming on the earth soon, albeit, I am sure there is more to that than just that when the supervolcano at Yellowstone erupts and a great earthquake will occur wherein the world responds to the Bridegroom when He visits.

Luke 12:49 I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?

Luke 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. 29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; 30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. 31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. 32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. 33 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. 34 And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. 35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth. 36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

I do thank you for sharing, brother, but I point out that because of the global flood, no science can account for the decay rate of anything, let alone date anything when they are not taking the chaotic event of the global flood in account. So therefore I take the word of God over men's even whne they try to do science from a "christian" perspective.

 

[RickG]

Do I lie about embedded age?

AV, I am talking about the people who originate the material. Not those posting in forums such as this.

 

[RickG]

Wow Tellastory, are you trying to discredit ice core chronology now? Did you see my thread on the lost squadron?

 

[AV1611VET]

AV, I am talking about the people who originate the material. Not those posting in forums such as this.

Well, they need to knock that stuff off.

In my opinion.

 

[dad]

You have failed to show an understanding of the terms.

I understand they are stuck in this state. I dare anyone to demonstrate that they do apply to the far past or even the far universe. You may be impressed by 40 cent terms someone tosses out with no follow up. I am not.

 

[dad]

Your past state universe doesn't even qualify as smoke. It is a pure fabricated fantasy backed by zero evidence.

No one expects science to be able to read evidence do they? They divine evidence like tea readers, all according to their bent little religion.

As for the recorded past of God, that is above your paygrade to comment on intelligently.

I kid you not.

 

[AV1611VET]

I understand they are stuck in this state. I dare anyone to demonstrate that they do apply to the far past or even the far universe. You may be impressed by 40 cent terms someone tosses out with no follow up. I am not.

Prove it.

Prove your distant state past, or admit that your common ancestors swang around in the jungle, beating their chests.

 

[dad]

Yes it does "dad".

No it doesn't Rick. So there.

Carbon 14 is a cosmogenic nuclide formed formed in the upper atmosphere through the interaction between cosmic ray neutrons from deep space and nitrogen.

Nope. Not unless you mean just in this present nature! You cannot claim that the reactions (governed by the laws of nature and forces) were the same in the former nature! Period.

This involves a neutron capture by the nitrogen (14N) and the loss of a proton to form 14C.

Lurkers, see what I mean!? he cites a present state atomic interaction!

Who says neutrons were captured exactly as they are now? Bottom line here is that you believe in a same state past. Whoopee do. Some of us have our own religion thank you very much. Don't peddle yours as knowledge fact or real science.


I mean that.

 

[AV1611VET]

No one expects science to be able to read evidence do they? They divine evidence like tea readers, all according to their bent little religion.

As for the recorded past of God, that is above your paygrade to comment on intelligently.

I kid you not.

Ouch!

Well-stated.

 

[dad]

Prove it.

Prove your distant state past, or admit that your common ancestors swang around in the jungle, beating their chests.

Ha. Prove God sent Jesus or you resulted from flatworms having sex!

 

[RickG]

No one expects science to be able to read evidence do they? They divine evidence like tea readers, all according to their bent little religion.

As for the recorded past of God, that is above your paygrade to comment on intelligently.

I kid you not.

Yeah I know dad. You like science, except when it doesn't agree with your beliefs. Then you have to make stuff up like physics was different before the flood. That's not even worth addressing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ha. Prove God sent Jesus or you resulted from flatworms having sex!

Ewww!

I'll withdraw the challenge!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by dad

No one expects science to be able to read evidence do they? They divine evidence like tea readers, all according to their bent little religion.

As for the recorded past of God, that is above your paygrade to comment on intelligently.

I kid you not.
​

Yeah I know dad. You like science, except when it doesn't agree with your beliefs. Then you have to make stuff up like physics was different before the flood.
That's not even worth addressing.

Touche.



.

 

[dad]

Yeah I know dad. You like science, except when it doesn't agree with your beliefs.

I try to treat other beliefs (like science) with all the respect they deserve. But don't ask me to like them!

Then you have to make stuff up like physics was different before the flood.

?? Hey, If you have cancer cells and were dying, and God healed you totally, would that not involve changing the cells and etc? You cannot impose normal present state physics as some be all end all for eternity and ignore God...or His past and future. Really.

Science tells us somewhat of how the present state works. That's about it. So called science attempts to extend that and tell us how the future and past worked! That is the line in the sand. That is where the phonies get left behind. That is where the lie says bye bye to truth.

So don't tell us how neutrons supposedly did stuff in the far past.

 

[dad]

Ewww!

I'll withdraw the challenge!

Yet I have had honest evolutionary folks tell me that the common ancestors really were their kinfolk, and that they exist as a result of these ancestors. They flat out admit they think they are here because of flatworm sex.

That should set off alarm bells in the human intellect. I agree with you, such a thought is yukky.

 

[RickG]

No it doesn't Rick. So there.


Nope. Not unless you mean just in this present nature! You cannot claim that the reactions (governed by the laws of nature and forces) were the same in the former nature! Period.


Lurkers, see what I mean!? he cites a present state atomic interaction!

Who says neutrons were captured exactly as they are now? Bottom line here is that you believe in a same state past. Whoopee do. Some of us have our own religion thank you very much. Don't peddle yours as knowledge fact or real science.


I mean that.

dad, with your comments, I honestly have a very hard time reconciling you are for real. Frankly, I don't believe you are, which is why I rarely respond to your posts which are pure fantasy.