First of all, my claim does not melt like wax just because I personally do not know the intricate details about it.
Hey maybe on some other thread get someone that does. We can talk.
Secondly, I think it's a bit rich that you have the nerve to criticize me for making sweeping claims when you have produced nothing but general claims and provided not a shred of detail about those claims.
The claim that science doesn't know what the state of the past was is a mere observation, that can't be refuted.
I may not have a detailed knowledge about radiometric dating, but I have enough of a knowledge about it to know that it works.
That's what you think. Only in the near past would it be valid, only as long as our state existed. (not even that long if collaboration of trees or corals is needed/used.
Only if you believe that people in business are willing to throw billions of dollars at something that is useless.
Never saw a dime spent on a same state past...you? Bizarre.
It takes very little to defeat someone who doesn't bring anything to the table. And I've provided more than that.
Yes you can type stuff. Wow. How about..'I've been to Mars'? That might be a good sig too.
By the way, here are some more questions you won't be able to answer...
Why is it that the radiometrically dated age for the Hawaiian islands matches exactly with the predicted ages for them based on the rate of plate movement and how far the islands are away from the hotspot that created them?
Source? Details? How do you come up with an age exactly? The movement over the hot spot is no issue. Only when and how fast...in other words what state.
Why is radiometric dating consistent with Milankovitch cycles, which depend only on astronomical factors such as precession of the earth's tilt and orbital eccentricity?
I dare you to try to defend that nonsense!! Anytime.
Why is radiometric dating consistent with the
luminescence dating method?
Try to see if you can detect several present state law requirements in the first sentence of your link..
"Luminescence is a phenomenon exhibited by many crystals, such as diamond, quartz, feldspars and calcite. Energy absorbed from ionizing radiation (alpha, beta, gamma, cosmic rays) frees electrons to move through the crystal lattice and some are trapped at imperfections in the lattice. Subsequent heating of the crystal, or stimulation by absorption of light can release some of these trapped electrons..."
Why is radiometric dating consistent with relative dating methods?
Name the method the sample rock is consistent with? We can look at that.
..
And so, summing up, the bible indicates a different state past. Earliest history agrees by and large. The present state laws are required to give any meaning to radiactive decay dating, and we do not know what laws existed. Three rings and coral dating depend on present laws too as does ALL methods so called science has used.
No proof of a same state past exists, rendering the anti bible cliams of so called science null and void.
God was right all along.....
Rejoice oh people of God.
