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.
Yes, whatever was there in a particular rock, in this case we said the rock contained some argon.
Why would there be no potassium-40? How about it was all there? (save some shorter half life stuff)
No. Forget that entirely! That was not something that applied in the (in my example of creation day one) four hours from when it came to exist and then went through some changes and forming etc. Why would there not also have been potassium-40 in the end result on day 1 or 2? Just because after it came to exist, it slipped into a relationship and situation where there was now radioactivity etc. That says nothing of those first hours when it came to exist on earth at all.
No. On day one how much decaying if any would you claim had went on in four hours?? However the stuff in the newly created rock was after it was all created and already here does not matter.
How would we know what reasons there were for materials (that now must exist a certain way in this world) to have been here on day 1? Are you saying that the creation of God could never have included potassium-40? Why not? Just because in the world after creation certain rules went into being? I cannot limit what God may have used or what materials may have resulted from Him creating and forming things. Whatever He did, the final results were rocks that included certain materials, some of which are not doing certain things like decaying etc.
I referenced the potassium-argon decay method for dating "basalt". For example the eruption path of the Yellowstone Hotspot that you laughed at.
It gets me to realize that what we see is what we got! Regardless of what processes go on today. You cannot trace back how a rock that was here at creation got here by natural means such as decay.
What it gets us is a deceitful God. Which just doesn't work for me and makes the whole embedded age line as crazy thinking.
Basalt that was a result of creation and maybe the forming later would not be subject to how basalt forms today! In creation who knows what heat was involved and what cooling in the moment of creation or hours or day after when God put finishing touches on things? Basalt need not have came to exist as some 'eruption'!!
Not crazy if there really is a God and there really was a creation. It would only blow the minds of those who believed the deception that natural processes really created all things.
Do you think God limited how He created the universe to how unbelievers in the end of time interpret material in rocks wrong!? Do you think He said 'Gee, I better create things so they end up looking just like so called science expects by using false and unbelieving assumptions'?
If you want to know how long ago that "creation" was, then you might.
Yes because we are not talking about measuring creation. We are talking about measuring the age of the rock. When did it form? That is the question.
Radioactive decay doesn't measure how the rock got there. It measures the time since formation.
We can't do that, now, can we?
Nope. Again -- radioactive dating doesn't tell you how a rock came to exist. It tells you how old it is.
The Columbia River Basalt's very clearly came from fissures in the ground called "dikes". I've seen them. Both the eruption path of the Yellowstone Hotspot as clearly seen in any map of Idaho and the Columbia River Basalt flows would have happened long after any supposed Biblical Creation or Flood event or there would be piles of sediment covering it all. That's not happening. Regardless of the denial, the isotope age is accurate.
For this Lover of God...there really is God and there really IS Creation. Just not at all in the way your going with it.
No, because there is no possibility of using radioactive dating or any scientific method on a newly created rock.
No you are talking about dismissing creation and God and Scripture and supplanting them with some little natural process did it all theory and so called dating method. None of the isotopes in a created rock would be there due to decay. Therefore trying to use decay to tell us where the rock came from or when is impossible
No it measures stuff existing in the rock that is in this natural world and involved in some processes. You assume that there was no creation so that all the stuff in the rock and what it is now doing would tell us how long ago it started to exist.
No. Not if that rock and all that it contains was created.
So tell us, when God separated the water from the land on the planet could that have involved some fissures? Also if it was not an eruption but just molten rock moving or some such then would there not also be a path? Now you are claiming that the event was long after creation. Fine. Firstly, prove it. Then we can go from there.
No, I'm not going to forget that radioactive potassium-40 decays into argon-40. It's something that potassium-40 does. If we find a pinecone under a pine tree with no other pine trees in miles, we're going to assume that the pinecone fell from that particular pine tree. Sure, both could have been created out of thin air by God days ago, but we know that pinecones fall from pine trees. If we find argon-40 mixed in with potassium-40 and know that argon-40 comes from potassium-40, then unless indicated otherwise it's safe to assume that the argon-40 got there by decay of potassium-40.
