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.
I have indeed noticed this.
And they also refuse to learn anything about it... preferring to make up convoluted fantasy stories about it.
Why would the incorrect assumptions of one technique be wrong by just the right amount to match up with the results given by a different method with completely different incorrect assumptions?
Why would there be no aliens if there was no evolution? Are you suggesting that God would be incapable of life on another planet?
ar to often a radioactive date is rejected by geologist, etc because the date does not fit with there expectations.
There is also the problem of samples of different rocks from the same location give very different dates.
You are skrptical of Christianity, may I suggest you be as skeptical of the claims for evolution and of radio active dating methods.
No I am saying that we have no knowledge of God creating life in other solar systems, we have not discovered any solar systems capable of sustaining life.
The knowledge we do have indicates that plant and animal life exists for the benefit of mankind, so with out man other life forms are unneccessary.
This would be a fine argument if the allegedly erroneous results given occurred at the same rate (or more often) than the results the scientists claim are correct. But they do not. And when erroneous result occur, the reason for this can usually be discovered (the sample was contaminated, or some factor was not taken into account).
And different rocks giving different ages is not a problem, since there is no rule of nature that says that rocks of differing ages can not be found together. Indeed, it would be a common occurrence. If a cliff collapses, the youngest rocks at the top would mingle with the older rocks below as they tumbled down the cliff into a big jumbled pile of debris.
I'm sorry, but what knowledge do we have that confirms this? What benefit does humanity get from the tube worms that live clustered around volcanic vents at the bottom of the deep ocean?
I'm talking about the different crystals that can be found in a metemorpic rock, that were formed at the same time, yey have vastly different ages.
Or where a larva flow has been seen to occur and when cooled has been sampled. The rock formed a matter of a year or so ago, yet has a vastly greater age according to radio active dating.
Would you care to provide a scientific source to support this claim?
we have not discovered any solar systems capable of sustaining life.
A person can't be honest, godly, and a good Christian, and a scientist at the same time?This leads straight into whether yec sites like DI or AIG are honest, godly and good Christians. And whether scientists actually are fakes, dishonest, anti god.
Being a scientist grants a license to just question anything.Being a yec grants a license to just say things.
Well there's no questions once a belief is distinguished by science .. there's just no utility value beyond that point.Being a scientist grants a license to just question anything.
I'm talking about the different crystals that can be found in a metemorpic rock, that were formed at the same time, yey have vastly different ages.
Or where a larva flow has been seen to occur and when cooled has been sampled. The rock formed a matter of a year or so ago, yet has a vastly greater age according to radio active dating.
We have discovered dozens of exoplanets that are in the 'Goldilocks zone' that could support life.
Would you care to provide a scientific source to support this claim?
That depends, are you broad minded enough to accept the results of a qualified practising scientist who is also a Christian?
Radioactive ‘dating’ failure - creation.com
and
Radioactive dating in conflict! - creation.com
They are articles together with the results from recognised scientic labs of radioactive dating on varrious samples.
None are from Mt st helens.
Creation.com is not a scientific source, which is what I SPECIFICALLY asked for. Even if they are quoting results from labs, they could be cherry-picking what they present, or they could simply not understand and be presenting a flawed interpretation of the actual science.
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?