Deep Time

[Loudmouth]

Not if a worldwide flood washed all the atoms away.

Water doesn't remove Pb from zircons, or Ar from tektites. Also, removing the daughter product would only make the rocks look younger, not older.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Relativity has nothing to do with radiometric dating.

Perhaps you would like to start a thread on radiometric dating. This is a tread about "deep time".

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Perhaps you would like to start a thread on radiometric dating. This is a tread about "deep time".

Yes, with relation to the Earth. Not the universe at large. Just the Earth.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Yes, with relation to the Earth. Not the universe at large. Just the Earth.

This maybe a surprise to you but according to Sagan we are star dust. That means many of the elements that make up this earth were created in other stars toward the end of their life. There is no separation between the earth and the universe as they are all one and the same.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This maybe a surprise to you but according to Sagan we are star dust. That means many of the elements that make up this earth were created in other stars toward the end of their life. There is no separation between the earth and the universe as they are all one and the same.

But we're not talking about Sagan or the Universe.
We are talking about deep time with specific relation to the Earth.

 

[joshua 1 9]

We are talking about deep time with specific relation to the Earth.

What about it? Just what is it that you are wanting to talk about?

 

[toLiJC]

Thank you for quoting specifically what I asked for in this thread and ignoring it completely. Is there a dating method you would like to discuss or express concerns about? Discussing the topic of this thread would be much appreciated.

what to say about the dating methods since angels of satan could materialize whole ancient cities, which have even been found in archaeological excavations and considered to be historical, including cities that were neither real nor ever existing - they could even materialize many prehistoric strata full of fossils - how to ever trust in the dating methods under such circumstances?!

Blessings

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What about it? Just what is it that you are wanting to talk about?

Read the OP again:

Mainstream science and "creation science" differ considerably with respect to geologic dating methods. The scope of this thread is to look at what the "creation science" literature has to say about geologic dating methods and their validity.



Keep in mind that this thread is specific about the science and only the science. Its intent is not to question anyone's religious beliefs or have any discussion pertaining to any religion. Stick to the science and only the science. Citing or posting scripture is off topic for this thread.

 

[joshua 1 9]

But we're not talking about Sagan or the Universe.
We are talking about deep time with specific relation to the Earth.

According to the opening post we are talking about creation science and that is a part of creation science. Creation science deals with the universe not just geology.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

According to the opening post we are talking about creation science and that is a part of creation science. Creation science deals with the universe not just geology.

But the OP specifically mentioned geology, which has to do with Earth.
Ergo, we are talking about the Earth, and only the Earth. How hard is to understand?

 

[RickG]

what to say about the dating methods since angels of satan could materialize whole ancient cities, which have even been found in archaeological excavations and considered to be historical, including cities that were neither real nor ever existing - they could even materialize many prehistoric strata full of fossils - how to ever trust in the dating methods under such circumstances?!

Blessings

Look toLiJC, I specifically stated in the OP the Mainstream Science Dating Methods and the description of those methods by Creation Science are at odds with one another, and what I want to discuss in this thread is those disagreements and only those disagreements. Why do they disagree and what evidence do they have to support their disagreements? I do hope this explanation helps you to understand what I am asking for. God bless.

 

[RickG]

According to the opening post we are talking about creation science and that is a part of creation science. Creation science deals with the universe not just geology.

joshua, I specifically stated geologic dating methods in the OP. Please stay on topic.

 

[toLiJC]

Look toLiJC, I specifically stated in the OP the Mainstream Science Dating Methods and the description of those methods by Creation Science are at odds with one another, and what I want to discuss in this thread is those disagreements and only those disagreements. Why do they disagree and what evidence do they have to support their disagreements? I do hope this explanation helps you to understand what I am asking for. God bless.

and i just explained what at least one of the disagreements on the part of the "Creation Science" is

Blessings

 

[joshua 1 9]

joshua, I specifically stated geologic dating methods in the OP. Please stay on topic.

Then "geologic dating methods" should have been the title of the thread. If your going to call the thread "deep time" then don't be surprised if people want to talk about "TIME" because that is what your thread is about. Maybe you should start another thread with a title that is more appropriate to the discussion you are wanting to have.

 

[RickG]

and i just explained what at least one of the disagreements on the part of the "Creation Science" is

Blessings

No it is not, satan is not mentioned in any of creation science literature concerning geologic dating methods at all. Is there a particular geologic dating method you wish to discuss?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Look toLiJC, I specifically stated in the OP the Mainstream Science Dating Methods and the description of those methods by Creation Science are at odds with one another

I showed that they are not at odds with one another. There is no conflict between science and religion. You keep trying to fabricate a conflict when it does not exist between mainline religion and mainline science. Atheist twist science and they twist religion and they pretty much get everything mixed up and confused. Then you get Independent Christians that at best only have two year degrees in religion and nothing in science and the whole thing is a recipe for disaster.

Main line churches require their pastor or priest to have a graduate level Divinity degree. Science usually has a graduate level Philosophy degree. Sometimes medical doctors do research. Sometimes Phd's like to call themselves doctors but a real doctor has a medical degree and they are required to do an internship and a residence after they get their degree.

Of course you have a situation where people want to sell books to make money so they try to create a controversy to generate interest in their book. Sort of like World Wide Wrestling. There are a lot of books out there that are pretty much a waste of time. Is that what you are Rick an author? Are you trying to create a controversy that does not exist so you can sell books?

 

[RickG]

Then "geologic dating methods" should have been the title of the thread. If your going to call the thread "deep time" then don't be surprised if people want to talk about "TIME" because that is what your thread is about. Maybe you should start another thread with a title that is more appropriate to the discussion you are wanting to have.

Deep time is mentioned in the geology literature quite often, I have never seen the term used in astronomy. Nevertheless, I have made it quite plain what is and what is not to be discussed in this thread. You participating in this threads topic is welcome and appreciated.

 

[RickG]

I showed that they are not at odds with one another. There is no conflict between science and religion. You keep trying to fabricate a conflict when it does not exist between mainline religion and mainline science. Atheist twist science and they twist religion and they pretty much get everything mixed up and confused. Then you get Independent Christians that at best only have two year degrees in religion and nothing in science and the whole thing is a recipe for disaster.

JOSHUA! How many times does this have to be explained to you? Once again here is the OP. Please note the bold emphasis.

"Mainstream science and "creation science" differ considerably with respect to geologic dating methods. The scope of this thread is to look at what the "creation science" literature has to say about geologic dating methods and their validity.

Keep in mind that this thread is specific about the science and only the science. Its intent is not to question anyone's religious beliefs or have any discussion pertaining to any religion. Stick to the science and only the science. Citing or posting scripture is off topic for this thread."​

 

[joshua 1 9]

JOSHUA! How many times does this have to be explained to you?

About as many times as I have to explain to you that the discussion is based on the title of the thread and not your opinions and your posts.

 

[lasthero]

About as many times as I have to explain to you that the discussion is based on the title of the thread and not your opinions and your posts.

It's Rick's topic.

The discussion IS based on his posts. Specifically the first one. That's how threads work.