Why do YECs believe the universe is only about 6000 years old?

[Homie]

"since you can't carbon date dinosaur bone fossils."
- Why?

 

[lithium.]

"since you can't carbon date dinosaur bone fossils."

Why do people bring this up? I mean dang there is now many new dating technologies they don't just use one.

Sorry for the spelling errors I think I fixed them now. LOL

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by Homie
"since you can't carbon date dinosaur bone fossils."
- Why?

Two reasons:

a) Carbon dating only works if the object is less than 50k years old or so.

b) Dinosaur bones no longer contain any of the original carbon. The original bone tissue has been replaced by minerals. Thus, there is no carbon to date.

 

[Homie]

All the people that critized the videos posted by Smell Shoe before they watched them should really take the time to watch them. You say the source Kent Hovind (never heard of him) is not reliable, and therefore won't watch it. Well, look at it this way:
Either you learn something from the videos, all the better
Or you find flaws in the videos which you can use as arguments in discussions like these, it is a win-win situation

 

[Homie]

Couldn't find a single chart/poster of an animal's evolution. If anyone can find it, please post.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

To say the Hovind is "not reliable" is a polite understatement if ever I saw one. At the risk of seeming closed-minded, Homie, the reason I won't waste my time watching his videos is because his fans (there seem to be a disturbing number of them) can be counted on to faithfully parrot his "arguments". It's impossible to engage in online evolution/creation debates for any appreciable length of time and not get a snootful of Hovind's stuff by way of his misled minions. Hovind's work has been examined ad nauseam and repeatedly found wanting.

But like the whack-a-mole game, no sooner do you dispose of one Hovind follower, another pops up to take his place. It stopped being interesting a long time ago. Now, it's just depressing and a sad indictment of our national level of scientific literacy.

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by Homie
Couldn't find a single chart/poster of an animal's evolution. If anyone can find it, please post.

Horses?

http://chem.tufts.edu/science/evolution/HorseEvolution.htm

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by sandyb
Where can this cycle be observed? Please give us some examples.

In reference to the question about dinosaurs, there are animals in the Bible such as the behemoth which have all the characteristics of dinosaurs. In addition to that, carbon dating of dinosaur bones has on several occasions found them to be only thousands of years old, not millions at the guesswork in looking at their position in the geological column would have us believe.

Reference for the carbon dating you're referring to?

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by LiveFreeOrDie
Two reasons:

a) Carbon dating only works if the object is less than 50k years old or so.

b) Dinosaur bones no longer contain any of the original carbon. The original bone tissue has been replaced by minerals. Thus, there is no carbon to date.

but there are elements to measure radioactive decay which can date the fossils.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by Sinai
Uh, folks.....

Although I am enjoying this discussion, I would still like to find out why young earth creationists believe the universe is only about 6000 years old......

My theory is...their pastor, preacher, teacher, etc...told them so, and that to believe anything else goes against God.  They believed it..and refuse to consider or study the sciences that show differently....

Just my theory for today.

 

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by sandyb
The elephants story is interesting, though I don't regard variations within a species as 'evolution'. They are still elephants genetically. Even if I were to accept that, this is simplification of an animal, not an advancement but a recession. How can more complex things develop through things getting simpler?

I do not appear to be able to post links yet as I am too new a user, but there were unfossilized bones found in Alaska in 1961 (jnl. of paleantology, vol 61 no.6, 1886-7, pgs 198-200)

Microevolution is the scientific study of evolution occurring within species sandy.  One prime example of such:  Drug resistant strains of bacteria...(termed super-bugs).

 

[ifriit]

Smilin: but there are elements to measure radioactive decay which can date the fossils.

Of course. However, sandyb specified that dinosaur bone fossils had been carbon dated. I was simply pointing out that this either (a) wasn't the case or (b) that carbon dating would not have given any sort of information about the age of the original animal.

 

[Homie]

by Smilin

My theory is...their pastor, preacher, teacher, etc...told them so, and that to believe anything else goes against God. They believed it..and refuse to consider or study the sciences that show differently....

That's funny because my theory about evolutionists is quite similar:

My theory is...their teacher, the anchorman, the journalist, etc...told them so, and that to believe anything else is stupid. They believed it..and refuse to think for themselves, listen to any other theories, watch some videos by a scientist that does not follow the main stream (kent hovind, hint hint) or be open for the possibilty that another theory just might be true.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by Homie
by Smilin

That's funny because my theory about evolutionists is quite similar:

My theory is...their teacher, the anchorman, the journalist, etc...told them so, and that to believe anything else is stupid. They believed it..and refuse to think for themselves, listen to any other theories, watch some videos by a scientist that does not follow the main stream (kent hovind, hint hint) or be open for the possibilty that another theory just might be true.

funnier still is the ridiculous labels tossed around in here...

'creationists' or 'evolutionists'....some of us don't fit neatly into your categories.  Some of us are informed enough to accept the age of the earth, accept the wonders of how plants/animals evolve, and believe in a creator.

Now..what does that label me?????

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by ifriit
Of course. However, sandyb specified that dinosaur bone fossils had been carbon dated. I was simply pointing out that this either (a) wasn't the case or (b) that carbon dating would not have given any sort of information about the age of the original animal.

My question would be:  Have any fossils been found that COULD be carbon dated?  All the ones we've uncovered in this region of the country have been totally mineralized.

 

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Homie, Hovind is not in any way, shape or form a scientist. However, don't take my word for it. Run a check and see how many peer-reviewed scientific works he has published. (Hint, hint...the answer is zero.)

 

[ifriit]

Homie: They believed it..and refuse to think for themselves, listen to any other theories, watch some videos by a scientist that does not follow the main stream (kent hovind, hint hint)...

This implies that Kent Hovind is a scientist. Considering that Hovind has performed no research, published no studies, nor presented any alternate theories, I must confess confusion as to how he could be one.

Homie: ... or be open for the possibilty that another theory just might be true.

Here's where you're absolutely flat-out wrong: I believe evolutionary theory to be valid, but it's always possible that it is not. The problem is not that there are theories that we are ignoring, but that there are no scientific theories being put forth by creationists. Not one. Sure, another theory could be superior--do you have one?

 

[Smilin]

HEYYYY...SOME of us BELIEVE in a creator..AND accept Evolution as a science....

/me starts to sharpen his fangs

 

[lithium.]

I have a theory, but I don't have evidence for it (and it's a crackpot theory but you can't prove it's wrong).

My theory is that aliens put all life on earth, they wanted dinosaurs to rule the earth but that dang asteroid killed them so they started with us but only because they were bored only someone bored would create a species that is only around 6 foot tall. And one day the aliens will come back and take only the fat people to there planet I think to eat them. There is no other reason why we are alive.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by seesaw
I have a theory, but I don't have evidence for it (and it's a crackpot theory but you can't prove it's wrong.

My theory is that aliens put all life on earth, they wanted dinosaurs to rule the earth but that dang asteroid killed them so they started with us but only because they were bored only someone bored would create a species that is only around 6 foot tall. And one day the aliens will come back and take only the fat people to there planet I think to eat them. There is no other reason why we are alive.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA....Can i post a poll on which member everyone predicts to be the first taken?  (or would that be considered a personal attack)