My Pumice Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Then it's not really your place to say others are here for.

We'll just keep it a secret then ... how's that?

 

[AirPo]

We'll just keep it a secret then ... how's that?

Too late.

 

[Loudmouth]

Would God create pumice with Cesium-135?

 

[PsychoSarah]

I know.

You guys aren't here to understand -- you're here to ridicule.

Not true, at least, not in my case. I happen to be trying to learn social skills by tolerating people with vastly different views than my own as well as people who aren't necessarily polite to me (politeness not necessarily correlating with views). I also want to learn a bit about how people interpret their religion, and hopefully find religion myself (though I wouldn't bet on that happening). If I wanted to troll, I'd pick a site with less restrictive rules.

 

[Lost Angel]

Can God create pumice ex nihilo tomorrow without deception?

Gods can do anything humans imagine. Nothing more and nothing less. That includes deceptive acts.

 

[Split Rock]

Right.

The alternative is to sit and listen to how God is so "deceptive," isn't it?

Rather than challenge these "educated" boys with challenges that [should] show that even creating an apple, raisin bread, or pumice would confuse them -- and pray they see the error of their hasty assessment of God -- I should just consider all this a silly game; shouldn't I?

(It ain't gonna happen.)

It isn't our assessment of God that is in question, its our assessment of "Embedded-Age" creationism.

 

[Dizredux]

It isn't our assessment of God that is in question, its our assessment of "Embedded-Age" creationism.

As far as I can see YECers really have only two ways of handling the overwhelming amount of evidence for old universe/old earth.

They can choose to reject any evidence that disagrees. This the direction that AIG and the ICR has taken or they can use some form of The Omphalos hypothesis, that the universe/earth was really made in the last 6000 or so years old but God made his creation look like it was many millions of years old. You can see this in several variations here on the forum.

I really do not see any other line of argument they can use.

Dizredux

 

[AV1611VET]

Gods can do anything humans imagine.

Then people shouldn't be accusing God of deception, should they?

 

[AV1611VET]

It isn't our assessment of God that is in question, its our assessment of "Embedded-Age" creationism.

Uh-huh.

 

[Queller]

Yes. God cannot deceive.

That's an odd claim in light of 1 Kings 22:23

 

[EternalDragon]

Would God create the pumice so that the K/Ar, U/Pb, and Rb/Sr ratios all produced the same radiometric date?

God created extra loaves of bread and fish for people to eat, fully cooked and fully risen. Ready to eat. So yes, anything God created would be exactly as it should be. With nothing missing that should be there.

 

[AV1611VET]

God created extra loaves of bread and fish for people to eat, fully cooked and fully risen. Ready to eat. So yes, anything God created would be exactly as it should be. With nothing missing that should be there.

Adam Clarke's notes on Genesis 2:5 ...

It appears that God created every thing, not only perfect as it respects its nature, but also in a state of maturity, so that every vegetable production appeared at once in full growth; and this was necessary that man, when he came into being, might find every thing ready for his use.

 

[Queller]

Wrong translation.

Jeremiah 20:7

O Lord, You induced me, and I was persuaded;
You are stronger than I, and have prevailed.
I am in derision daily;
Everyone mocks me.

Which version of the Bible are you using and why is that one the correct translation?

 

[lasthero]

God created extra loaves of bread and fish for people to eat, fully cooked and fully risen. Ready to eat. So yes, anything God created would be exactly as it should be. With nothing missing that should be there.

Why should pumice have the exact amount of these radiometric isotopes? Why should they date to billions of years? I get why the loaves would be ready to eat. But that doesn't explain why pumice not only have old age, but the age we would predict to them to have if they'd been made by completely different means.

What if the pumice dated to be as old as it actually is? What would that actually change? How would that adversely effect anything?

 

[Queller]

Those readings rely on beginning assumptions. So it's man's assumptions of how old everything is.

This is simply not true. The age of the earth is NOT an assumption. It is a conclusion reached by examining multiple lines of evidence. It is also a conclusion first reached by believers in a Young Earth/Global Flood who set out to find evidence of a global flood and did not find it. They didn't conclude this from finding radioisotopes either.

If I could create something by speaking and created a 1969 Mustang, you would conclude it was made by Ford. On the assembly line in 1969. So I tell you "No, I just created it today".

Then you tell me, "All tests and appearances show it was created by Ford in 1969. It even has the assembly line tag on it".

How am I being deceptive if I explained the creation to you and made the car exactly as it should appear?

You've made it appear as if it was something created 45 years ago but are claiming it was created today. That is deceptive.

This of course is a philosophical question and can't be proven either way, by either of us. Aside from the fact that I have something supposedly written by God that explains my position.

How is whether something is deceptive or not a philosophical question? Something is either deceptive or it is not.

 

[EternalDragon]

Why should pumice have the exact amount of these radiometric isotopes? Why should they date to billions of years? I get why the loaves would be ready to eat. But that doesn't explain why pumice not only have old age, but the age we would predict to them to have if they'd been made by completely different means.

What if the pumice dated to be as old as it actually is? What would that actually change? How would that adversely effect anything?

The billion year date is an assumption. It is not a fact. Just as if you had met Adam and Eve who had language and intelligence at the start, you would not think that they were one day old infants. When in fact they were one day old.

I usually don't wonder how uranium with it's radioactive properties could adversely effect anything.

Uranium miners have a higher incidence of cancer. An excess risk of lung cancer among Navajo uranium miners, for example, has been documented and linked to their occupation.[40] The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, a 1990 law in the USA, required $100,000 in "compassion payments" to uranium miners diagnosed with cancer or other respiratory ailments.

Uranium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[lasthero]

Also, the Ford analogy fails because, again, the world has history in it, too.

This isn't like making a 1969 Ford out of nothing - this is like making a 1969 Ford, complete with dents, scratches, rust and all the things you would expect on a car that's existed for forty years. Why would you make a car out of nothing with dents and scratches from collisions and damage it never actually took, unless you were trying to convince someone that it was older than it actually was?

 

[Loudmouth]

God created extra loaves of bread and fish for people to eat, fully cooked and fully risen. Ready to eat. So yes, anything God created would be exactly as it should be. With nothing missing that should be there.

Why should the uranium, lead, potassium, argon, rubidium, and strontium be there at specific ratios? Explain.

 

[Loudmouth]

The billion year date is an assumption.

It is a conclusion drawn from evidence, not an assumption.

You really don't understand what the word "assumption" means, do you?

. Just as if you had met Adam and Eve who had language and intelligence at the start, you would not think that they were one day old infants. When in fact they were one day old.

Would God give Adam scars from an accident he never suffered? Would God give Eve stretch marks from a pregnancy she never had?

 

[lasthero]

The billion year date is an assumption.

No, it's not. No one ever assumed the world was billions of years old. It's a conclusion.

Just as if you had met Adam and Eve who had language and intelligence at the start, you would not think that they were one day old infants.

Uranium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, thank you, I understand how radioactivity works. Billions of years ago, the radioactivity wouldn't be a problem for life on this planet.

And that still doesn't explain why meteors floating out in the middle of nowhere also show this old age.

There would be ways I could tell that they were just made. They wouldn't have scars, for one thing - if you live to be that old, you are going to get a few scars. They wouldn't have fingerprints or a navel, either. Those would be rather big clues.