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.
That is a shortcut for the laws of physics aw we know them. Remember how Newton's Law of Gravity broke down when it came to the precession of Mercury's orbit? Sometimes it is just easier to say "the laws of physics break down". That does not mean that the singularity did not exist, physicists have massive evidence for that occurring, they just can't predict what would happen in a singularity.Stephen Hawking
The Beginning of Time
“The beginning of real time, would have been a singularity, at which the laws of physics would have broken down.”
http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html
Regarding the paper you linked using flat unconformaties as support for a young earth, yes, because the reasoning put forth on where the eroded sediment is now and using his own average rates of erosion without accounting for the type or variation of either over long periods of time is not scholarly. He didn't even correlate his rates to durations of specific ages of flat gaps described. Why does he not present that paper to the scientific community. If he can show he is right he would become the most famous and respected geologist of all time. I have no reason to doubt his intentions are honest, but scientific research does not begin with an end point (the earth is young) and fills in the gaps that seem to support that end point, ignoring everything that doesn't support it. Scientific research begins with an hypothesis and tests that hypothesis, and then progresses to where the hypothesis leads them, which may be completely different from their expectations. I am currently experiencing that myself with a paleoclimate research project I have been engaged in for about a year now. My original ideas have expanded considerably.Thank you. I am impressed. Do you believe that your training and experience far surpasses that of Dr. Ariel Roth?
The oldest human artifacts we know of are cave paintings, that date back about 37,000 years, possibly to 40,000.
No. I meant that the dates obtained from bones must be compared with the dates obtained from the examination of human artifacts.Bones can't tell you it was a human?
My question is: How can I rely on studies yielding older dates?
No. I meant that the dates obtained from bones must be compared with the dates obtained from the examination of human artifacts.
The evidence remains, but the interpretation of said evidence does not.
The various dating techniques available to archaeologists
“Today's archaeologist has a wide variety of natural, electro-magnetic, chemical, and radio-metric dating methodologies available to her that can be used to accurately date objects that are just a few hundred years old as well as objects that are a few million years old with high accuracy in the right circumstances. Furthermore, when you consider that many archaeological sites will contain numerous types of artifacts that permit the use of multiple dating methodologies, a modern archaeologist can often employ cross-dating methodologies which can allow for extremely accurate dating as far back as 10,000 years in some regions. … “ [emphases supplied]”
http://www.sourcinginnovation.com/archaeology/Arch08.htm
My question is: How can I rely on studies yielding older dates?
We do not share a common ancestor with apes. What we share with apes is a common designer.
Your post presupposes that the form in which we find the thing is the same form in which it was designed.A common designer would not copy a broken vitamin c gene into both species, with the same break, even. Only common ancestry explains that. A common designer would not insert identical junk DNA in the form of retroviral inserts in the same places in both species. Only common ancestry explains that.
Your post presupposes that the form in which we find the thing is the same form in which it was designed.
That's like someone going to a junk yard, finding a Porsche and saying, "This couldn't have been designed. What designer would create a car with the front smashed in?"
If this were true, you would have provided a link to a study demonstrating same.We can tell the break in the vitamin c gene is the same break as the break in the other primates because breaks, unlike designs, are inherently random, and the break is the same in the various primate species.
Your post presupposes that the form in which we find the thing is the same form in which it was designed.
That's like someone going to a junk yard, finding a Porsche and saying, "This couldn't have been designed. What designer would create a car with the front smashed in?"
If this were true, you would have provided a link to a study demonstrating same.
The GLO gene of anthropoid primates has lost seven of the twelve exons found in functional vertebrateGLO genes, whereas the guinea pig has lost its first and fifth exon as well as part of its sixth exon (references [29,30], Fig. 44). Using comparison between functional and non-functional sequences, the inactivation dates have been calculated to be about 61 MYA in anthropoid primates and 14 MYA in guinea pigs [28]. Given current knowledge of vertebrate species divergence times, these estimates are consistent with those obtained based on the phylogenetic distribution of functional and non-functional GLO genes [29-34].
Your post presupposes that the form in which we find the thing is the same form in which it was designed.
That's like someone going to a junk yard, finding a Porsche and saying, "This couldn't have been designed. What designer would create a car with the front smashed in?"
The various dating techniques available to archaeologists
“Today's archaeologist has a wide variety of natural, electro-magnetic, chemical, and radio-metric dating methodologies available to her that can be used to accurately date objects that are just a few hundred years old as well as objects that are a few million years old with high accuracy in the right circumstances. Furthermore, when you consider that many archaeological sites will contain numerous types of artifacts that permit the use of multiple dating methodologies, a modern archaeologist can often employ cross-dating methodologies which can allow for extremely accurate dating as far back as 10,000 years in some regions. … “ [emphases supplied]”
http://www.sourcinginnovation.com/archaeology/Arch08.htm
My question is: How can I rely on studies yielding older dates?
I know nothing of the sort. One study does not convince me of anything.There. Now that I've posted a link, you know it is true. But this information is widely known.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?