Why does life require specific ratios of isotopes in rocks in order to survive? If there were no rocks with a K/Ar ratio consistent with 1 billion years, would life stop? If so, why?
Upvote
0
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.
The earth has to be old. A young earth wouldn't support life, a
young sun or a young universe wouldn't support life. A young Adam
and Eve would not survive without parents. Young animals would not
survive and a young eco system would not support that newly created
life.
Everything had to be "very good" to support life.
The earth has to be old. A young earth wouldn't support life, a
young sun or a young universe wouldn't support life. A young Adam
and Eve would not survive without parents. Young animals would not
survive and a young eco system would not support that newly created
life.
Everything had to be "very good" to support life.
The same type of erosion features were formed
in mud (not rock)
just as Creationist groups claim:
"These deposits include fine pumice ash laminae and beds from one millimeter thick to greater than one meter thick, each representing just a few seconds to several minutes of accumulation. A deposit accumulated in less than one day, on June 12, 1980, is 25 feet thick and contains many thin laminae and beds. "
Having been to both, the erosion features look the same in mud, as the rock formations in the grand canyon.
Some geologists have proposed that the grand Canyon was cut in weeks due the draining of an inland sea.
The earth has to be old. A young earth wouldn't support life, a
young sun or a young universe wouldn't support life. A young Adam
and Eve would not survive without parents. Young animals would not
survive and a young eco system would not support that newly created
life.
Everything had to be "very good" to support life.
The same type of erosion features were formed
in mud (not rock)
just as Creationist groups claim:
"These deposits include fine pumice ash laminae and beds from one millimeter thick to greater than one meter thick, each representing just a few seconds to several minutes of accumulation. A deposit accumulated in less than one day, on June 12, 1980, is 25 feet thick and contains many thin laminae and beds. "
Having been to both, the erosion features look the same in mud, as the rock formations in the grand canyon.
Some geologists have proposed that the grand Canyon was cut in weeks due the draining of an inland sea.
What ecosystem existed in the Garden of Eden? There was no rain, water cycle, decay, predation, death, disease, or anything else requiring a cyclic system.
Why are things that aren't from Earth old, too?
Exodus 20:11
the seventh day
Cue the temptation scene and sin which happened almost right after
creation in 5....4....3.....2....
Edit: Let me clarify for you only. If God created a heat producing sun, a cooled and solid
earth, a middle aged man and woman, with built in language and intelligence, plants fully
grown, animals in adulthood and planets fully formed, in six days, why would he then create
the heavens and the stars (rest of the universe) as young? Follow the logical conclusio
[serious];66877773 said:Does it ever say how old adam was when they got the boot?
Edit: Let me clarify for you only. If God created a heat producing sun, a cooled and solid
earth, a middle aged man and woman, with built in language and intelligence, plants fully
grown, animals in adulthood and planets fully formed, in six days, why would he then create
the heavens and the stars (rest of the universe) as young? Follow the logical conclusion here.
Which of those requires zircons to have a uranium to lead ratio consistent with billions of years of decay history?
Obviously the question about gaps in the fossil record, always comes up, especially with regard to human evolution.
My response has always been, "Gaps between what?".
The problem with the creationist "fossil gap" argument is that every new transitional fossil creates two new gaps. If we had 1,000 transitional fossils between humans and our common ancestor with chimps, this would create 999 gaps. Given so many gaps, creationists would argue that each and every new transitional fossil makes evolution less and less evidenced. Crazy, isn't it?
I think you might not know this, but you are posting on the wrong thread.
This thread is dealing specifically with LINES OF EVIDENCE for EVOLUTION!
You need to go to : DATING METHODS and present your argument, there.
Thanks
I've never heard that argument before, but then I don't talk to many Creationists. The only arguments I'd listened to, were those presented by (Dr) Kent Hovind and Jack Chick. (and to be honest, I can't remember that for sure) -- they basically said that there were no transitional forms, and that the bones were all fabrications. Have you ever read Hovind?
In all fairness, since the lines evidences for evolution are interconnected, many YECs think that if they can punch a hole in one -- in this case, the dating methods -- the whole thing would unravel.
They fail -- predictably and yet spectacularly -- but the strategy has some merit to it.
go get that boring lecture at one of their priests of babel AKA the higher education of lowered learning.. do it already .I'm a recovering KJO-YEC
I got very poor marks for Grade 12 Biology (in 1982), but am very keen to learn all I can about these lines of evidence for E V O L U T I O N
Please choose "one" and help me understand it?
I known I could search out the answer, but then this wouldn't be a discussion - it'd be a boring old lecture.
So, let's chat.
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?