Radioactive dating

[Black Dog]

Well, that could be debated but let's face it, we have history from many parts of the world, so there is no question nature was the same in the world generally.

You think the laws of nature changed, so how do you know that the laws of nature didn't change for that split second that Jesus needed to be mundanely resurrected, no miracle required? It could happen so that just Jesus was resurrected, and no one else even noticed the changes in the natural laws they were so short. If that event had happened a little earlier or later, then someone else would have been resurrected and declared the Son of God.

 

[dad]

I specifically mentioned ratios. Why would you have a direct relationship between the U/Pb and K/Ar ratios in the same stratum?

Relationship? Howso? Imaginary years based on interpreting ratios in a same state past way.

Why would we consistently get the the same K/Ar ratio for a given U/Pb ratio in a same state past? Why would the relationship between those ratios also match up with the same state decay rates?

Matching in imaginary time doesn't count.

 

[Loudmouth]

Relationship? Howso? Imaginary years based on interpreting ratios in a same state past way.

Please point to the "imaginary years" on this graph.

 

[dad]

Please point to the "imaginary years" on this graph.

Ok, so where are the years on it? That might make it easier to point to them. If perchance you want to talk just about ratios with no times associated to them, we can do that. Just be clear.

It also stands to reason that the rapidly changing processes, such as those with isotopes, in that different past nature, would result in a pattern! Just like we see! So in a given layer, we would expect all elements to have been affected, not just the one. Therefore we expect to see agreement in the ratio pattern of more parent than daughter material. This you seem to prove.

God's amazing creation and different future and past are incredible!

 

[Loudmouth]

Ok, so where are the years on it?

There aren't any. Just ratios.

Those are the predicted ratios that you should find if the ratios of isotopes were created in a same state past.

It also stands to reason that the rapidly changing processes, such as those with isotopes, in that different past nature, would result in a pattern! Just like we see!

Where is your evidence? Sorry, but bare assertions don't mean squat.

Why would a layer that has a Pb/U ratio of 0.5 consistently have an Ar/K ratio of 0.22? Why just those two numbers? Why would we see only those ratios together in a different state past? Why wouldn't a different state past produce a 0.5 ratio for both?

So in a given layer, we would expect all elements to have been affected, not just the one. Therefore we expect to see agreement in the ratio pattern of more parent than daughter material. This you seem to prove.

In a same state past, we would also expect to see rocks with more parent isotope than daughter isotope. That is exactly what we see. You have just disproved a different state past again.

 

[dad]

There aren't any. Just ratios.

Those are the predicted ratios that you should find if the ratios of isotopes were created in a same state past.

Thanks for admitting that, so you have ABSOLUTELY nothing then! In other words the ratios which represent whatever process was at work in the created world in the former state, show a pattern of change in a predictable way! That works for me more than or as much as for your fantasy state past!

Where is your evidence? Sorry, but bare assertions don't mean squat.

Pot... meet kettle. You need evidence for a same state past if THAT is what you claim is responsible for the ratios! As for me accepting God's record of the actual past, you cannot ask for other evidences than HE gave, and science is out of the loop. Since we know you are allergic to anything having to do with God (no?) you are in a position of having cut yourself off from evidence.

Why would a layer that has a Pb/U ratio of 0.5 consistently have an Ar/K ratio of 0.22? Why just those two numbers? Why would we see only those ratios together in a different state past? Why wouldn't a different state past produce a 0.5 ratio for both?

That boils down to 'why would there be ratios of isotopes that resulted from whatever processes had to exist in the nature of the day'!? Whatever processes exited in that former state were acting on the isotopes or material etc. The only issue was what state existed, so we know what forces and laws were acting!? The clear answer is you do not know.

A different state past would also leave ratios in a pattern as we see.

 

[Loudmouth]

Thanks for admitting that, so you have ABSOLUTELY nothing then! In other words the ratios which represent whatever process was at work in the created world in the former state, show a pattern of change in a predictable way! That works for me more than or as much as for your fantasy state past!

If they were created in a different state then they would not fall on that line. Only rocks created in a same state past would fall on that line.

Pot... meet kettle. You need evidence for a same state past if THAT is what you claim is responsible for the ratios!

That's like saying that I need to prove that the suspect left DNA at a crime scene before I can use a DNA test. The ratios themselves demonstrate that they were created by a same state past.

As for me accepting God's record of the actual past, you cannot ask for other evidences than HE gave, and science is out of the loop.

If you are going to ignore evidence, then don't ask for it and don't claim it doesn't exist.

 

[dad]

If they were created in a different state then they would not fall on that line. Only rocks created in a same state past would fall on that line.

Not sure where the error in your thinking lies. However, for lurkers, I will say that rocks that existed in the former state did not go poof and vanish when nature changed! Therefore the ratios were likely here in that former state. Simple. Yes they would reflect the same pattern in various 'ages'. However, we should remember that any given layer in the geologic column might represent mere centuries. Maybe less for some. For example IF the KT layer did represent the flood years (?) that layer would represent probably less than several years!
The known pattern in the former nature, based on other realities of life recorded then, was that processes that now take a lot of time took little time back then! So IN the former nature a rock or formation that formed in say, a century, would have in it different ratios in different depths of that layer. The fast changing ratios then, could have 'locked' into place in short order. There is NO reason to interpret ratio patterns to mean great time at all. The only reason is belief in the unsound, unproven, ungodly same state past!

Now don't pretend I ignore evidence such as the ratios. Starting to get it yet?

 

[Loudmouth]

Not sure where the error in your thinking lies. However, for lurkers, I will say that rocks that existed in the former state did not go poof and vanish when nature changed! Therefore the ratios were likely here in that former state.

Why would they have those specific ratios in the former state? Why would a zircon have a Pb/U ratio of 0.5 and a tektite in the same layer have an Ar/K ratio of 0.22 in the same geologic layer? Why those ratios and only those ratios? Why couldn't both the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios be 0.5 in a different state past?

Yes they would reflect the same pattern in various 'ages'.

Why? Also, why would they change to these ratios?

The known pattern in the former nature, based on other realities of life recorded then, was that processes that now take a lot of time took little time back then!

Why would they have those specific ratios in the former state? Why would a zircon have a Pb/U ratio of 0.5 and a tektite in the same layer have an Ar/K ratio of 0.22 in the same geologic layer? Why those ratios and only those ratios? Why couldn't both the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios be 0.5 in a different state past?

Now don't pretend I ignore evidence such as the ratios. Starting to get it yet?

You never explained why the different state past would produce those specific ratios.

 

[dad]

Why would they have those specific ratios in the former state?

Hey, don't try to make it sound like because you don't know, the universe must operate on your particular little baseless belief set. The ratios had whatever meaning they used to have when nature was different. Patterns do not help you, and your ignorance of what went on or why is not helpful either.

Why would a zircon have a Pb/U ratio of 0.5 and a tektite in the same layer have an Ar/K ratio of 0.22 in the same geologic layer? Why those ratios and only those ratios? Why couldn't both the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios be 0.5 in a different state past?

Both materials represent an age where ratios existed and did so in a pattern. If we zoom in on a certain period, naturally we would see a pattern in ratios! The issue is not that a pattern or ratios existed, but what that meant at that time. You whole trip is to try to make it mean what it would mean now in this state. Once we know your game...you can never win!

Why? Also, why would they change to these ratios?

The stuff laid down and that went through whatever process existed that affected isotopes at the time would be affected by the nature of the day. The continual fast change would leave, presumably, isotopes from the past that all had been affected for a time. So, say, if Noah lived through, for example, the Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous, and part of the Tertiary, the rocks under his feet would have seen many layers of different isotopes in patterns according to the time they were laid down! In his case, he lived in both states! He would know. You, who only ever have seen this state would not.

That is why specific ratios probably exist in layers.

 

[Loudmouth]

Hey, don't try to make it sound like because you don't know, the universe must operate on your particular little baseless belief set. The ratios had whatever meaning they used to have when nature was different. Patterns do not help you, and your ignorance of what went on or why is not helpful either.

If you can't explain these ratios with a different state past, then a different state past is out.

We can explain these ratios with a same state past. That means it is evidence for a same state past.

Both materials represent an age where ratios existed and did so in a pattern. If we zoom in on a certain period, naturally we would see a pattern in ratios!

WHY WOULD WE SEE THAT EXACT PATTERN? WHY NOT ANY OTHER PATTERN?

Pb/U and Ar/K both being at a ratio of 0.5 is a pattern, but it would not fall on the line in that graph. Why do we only see the pattern that a same state past would produce out of the trillions of other possible patterns?

The stuff laid down and that went through whatever process existed that affected isotopes at the time would be affected by the nature of the day. The continual fast change would leave, presumably, isotopes from the past that all had been affected for a time. So, say, if Noah lived through, for example, the Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous, and part of the Tertiary, the rocks under his feet would have seen many layers of different isotopes in patterns according to the time they were laid down! In his case, he lived in both states! He would know. You, who only ever have seen this state would not.

That is why specific ratios probably exist in layers.

So why would that produce those exact ratios?

 

[dad]

If you can't explain these ratios with a different state past, then a different state past is out.

I did. Creation and the former state.

We can explain these ratios with a same state past.

That is all you do! You never tried anything else, and you have no knowledge of anything at all outside the fishbowl of this present nature.

WHY WOULD WE SEE THAT EXACT PATTERN? WHY NOT ANY OTHER PATTERN?

WHY WOULD WE NOT SEE THAT EXACT PATTERN? WHY ANY OTHER PATTERN?

Pb/U and Ar/K both being at a ratio of 0.5 is a pattern, but it would not fall on the line in that graph. Why do we only see the pattern that a same state past would produce out of the trillions of other possible patterns?

That was explained.

"
Both materials represent an age where ratios existed and did so in a pattern. If we zoom in on a certain period, naturally we would see a pattern in ratios! The issue is not that a pattern or ratios existed, but what that meant at that time. You whole trip is to try to make it mean what it would mean now in this state. Once we know your game...you can never win!
The stuff laid down and that went through whatever process existed that affected isotopes at the time would be affected by the nature of the day. The continual fast change would leave, presumably, isotopes from the past that all had been affected for a time. So, say, if Noah lived through, for example, the Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous, and part of the Tertiary, the rocks under his feet would have seen many layers of different isotopes in patterns according to the time they were laid down! In his case, he lived in both states! He would know. You, who only ever have seen this state would not."


Rather than ask the same questions, respond to the answers. Better to talk less and say more.

 

[Loudmouth]

I did. Creation and the former state.

How does that lead to the conclusion that we would see those ratios and only those ratios?

That is all you do! You never tried anything else, and you have no knowledge of anything at all outside the fishbowl of this present nature.

You haven't been able to explain these ratios with a different state past. All you can seem to muster is that a different state past will produce patterns. That doesn't explain why we see those ratios and only those ratios.

"
Both materials represent an age where ratios existed and did so in a pattern. If we zoom in on a certain period, naturally we would see a pattern in ratios! The issue is not that a pattern or ratios existed, but what that meant at that time. You whole trip is to try to make it mean what it would mean now in this state. Once we know your game...you can never win!
The stuff laid down and that went through whatever process existed that affected isotopes at the time would be affected by the nature of the day. The continual fast change would leave, presumably, isotopes from the past that all had been affected for a time. So, say, if Noah lived through, for example, the Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous, and part of the Tertiary, the rocks under his feet would have seen many layers of different isotopes in patterns according to the time they were laid down! In his case, he lived in both states! He would know. You, who only ever have seen this state would not."

I already refuted this argument.

"Pb/U and Ar/K both being at a ratio of 0.5 is a pattern, but it would not fall on the line in that graph. Why do we only see the pattern that a same state past would produce out of the trillions of other possible patterns?"

 

[dad]

How does that lead to the conclusion that we would see those ratios and only those ratios?

That does not LEAD to a conclusion. Why let a belief lead to a science conclusion as you do?? Stop letting your same state past belief lead you around, and then try to call it science. Cease and desist.

I already refuted this argument.

Actually look again, you never even addressed it.

"Both materials represent an age where ratios existed and did so in a pattern. If we zoom in on a certain period, naturally we would see a pattern in ratios! The issue is not that a pattern or ratios existed, but what that meant at that time. You whole trip is to try to make it mean what it would mean now in this state. Once we know your game...you can never win!
The stuff laid down and that went through whatever process existed that affected isotopes at the time would be affected by the nature of the day. The continual fast change would leave, presumably, isotopes from the past that all had been affected for a time. So, say, if Noah lived through, for example, the Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous, and part of the Tertiary, the rocks under his feet would have seen many layers of different isotopes in patterns according to the time they were laid down! In his case, he lived in both states! He would know. You, who only ever have seen this state would not."

 

[Loudmouth]

That does not LEAD to a conclusion. Why let a belief lead to a science conclusion as you do??

I am following the EVIDENCE. The evidence is the ratio of isotopes in rocks. If they match the ratios that a same state would produce, then they are evidence of a same state past. That's how evidence works.

Stop letting your same state past belief lead you around, and then try to call it science. Cease and desist.

It isn't a belief. It is an evidenced conclusion. I have the evidence. You don't.

Actually look again, you never even addressed it.

"Both materials represent an age where ratios existed and did so in a pattern. If we zoom in on a certain period, naturally we would see a pattern in ratios! The issue is not that a pattern or ratios existed, but what that meant at that time. You whole trip is to try to make it mean what it would mean now in this state. Once we know your game...you can never win!
The stuff laid down and that went through whatever process existed that affected isotopes at the time would be affected by the nature of the day. The continual fast change would leave, presumably, isotopes from the past that all had been affected for a time. So, say, if Noah lived through, for example, the Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous, and part of the Tertiary, the rocks under his feet would have seen many layers of different isotopes in patterns according to the time they were laid down! In his case, he lived in both states! He would know. You, who only ever have seen this state would not."

Actually, I did.

If the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios were both 0.5 in the same geologic stratum, would that be a pattern? Yes or no?

What if the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios fell on this line? Would that be a pattern? Yes or no?

 

[dad]

I am following the EVIDENCE.

NO! You are following a same state past belief and trying to use the evidence accordingly.

The evidence is the ratio of isotopes in rocks.

That is evidence for we know not what. You have no exclusive on that.

If they match the ratios that a same state would produce, then they are evidence of a same state past.

Circular. A same state is first assumed in all decay and all dating! The you try to make it agree as best you can, even when you need to smash millions of imaginary years around where needed! That is after you so called 'collaborate' the dating with other wholly same state past based beliefs foisted on other things like tree rings.

If the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios were both 0.5 in the same geologic stratum, would that be a pattern? Yes or no?

The pattern we actually see is what matters. That pattern is one where a larger ratio of parent material to daughter material tends to exist. You chose to interpret this solely on same state past belief so that decay existed, and produced all the daughter. That is religion. One can also assume that whatever process existed in the former nature used the materials in the ratios another way. Same ratios.

 

[Loudmouth]

NO! You are following a same state past belief and trying to use the evidence accordingly.

Those ratios aren't beliefs. They are very real observations.

That is evidence for we know not what. You have no exclusive on that.

I do know. I have shown how the facts align with a same state past. You have been incapable of explain why a different state past would produce those ratios and only those ratios.

A same state is first assumed in all decay and all dating!

Where are the dates in this graph?

The pattern we actually see is what matters. That pattern is one where a larger ratio of parent material to daughter material tends to exist. You chose to interpret this solely on same state past belief so that decay existed, and produced all the daughter. That is religion. One can also assume that whatever process existed in the former nature used the materials in the ratios another way. Same ratios.

If the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios were both 0.5 in the same geologic stratum, would that be a pattern? Yes or no?

What if the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios fell on this line? Would that be a pattern? Yes or no?

 

[dad]

Those ratios aren't beliefs. They are very real observations.

Great and they don't help your fantasy past.

I do know. I have shown how the facts align with a same state past.

No more than with Mother Goose. You sought to claim credit for your unproven same state past for the created materials that exist. The ratios are in a pattern, but that has nothing to do with your fantasy.

You have been incapable of explain why a different state past would produce those ratios and only those ratios.

It didn't. The former nature merely started working after creation. Now use a specific example rather than made up generalities and religious graphs! That way I may be able to deduce what time in actual history and in what state it was.

Where are the dates in this graph?

If there are none, great. Now the question arises, what is the point?

If the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios were both ------- in the same geologic stratum, would that be a pattern? Yes or no?

There is a pattern. You were told this. Various ratios were left behind as time progressed.

What if the Pb/U and Ar/K ratios fell on this line? Would that be a pattern? Yes or no?

Point? What about the created material being in the former state and leaving a pattern are you not getting here?[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[Loudmouth]

Great and they don't help your fantasy past.

Why not?

Please show how those ratios are not consistent with a same state past.

No more than with Mother Goose. You sought to claim credit for your unproven same state past for the created materials that exist. The ratios are in a pattern, but that has nothing to do with your fantasy.

Is this a pattern? Yes or no?

It didn't. The former nature merely started working after creation. Now use a specific example rather than made up generalities and religious graphs! That way I may be able to deduce what time in actual history and in what state it was.

What is religious about this graph? Why do you have to run away from it every time?

If there are none, great. Now the question arises, what is the point?

There is a pattern. You were told this.

Is this a pattern? Yes or no?

 

[Loudmouth]

dad,

Here are three different patterns of ratios. Which of these patterns would a different state produce (if any), and why?