Young Earth Creationist dynamics.

[Zaius137]

SkyWriting...

Or day eight, I don't care. WOULD your pet measuring system give us the number ZERO?
Because that is what your articles are saying. On day 7 everything would measure ZERO AGE.

A zero age is not a rational expectation for a result. Let me ask you where in the Bible can element ratios be deduced from? Actually I have searched the articles I cited and can not find that particular passage where it says “everything would measure ZERO AGE”. Obviously some thing is bothering you about the postulations of these scientists… can you articulate further?

Science

can only deal with reproducible events so that we can double-check the work of the original researcher. If God is the original Creator or instigator of some event, it's not a reproducible event so is not in the realm of science.

Taking your point one step further you are implying nothing is reproducible that God has miraculously created. But there are many things we can hold in our hands and explain by his natural laws. We only call science a study of God’s creation. Look at Adam in the garden; he was given the job of naming the animals (start of biological science). You are letting the materialists grok one the very things God has given us… the pleasure of documenting, understanding and exploring his brilliant creation.

 

[SkyWriting]

SkyWriting...

A zero age is not a rational expectation for a result. Let me ask you where in the Bible can element ratios be deduced from? Actually I have searched the articles I cited and can not find that particular passage where it says “everything would measure ZERO AGE”. Obviously some thing is bothering you about the postulations of these scientists… can you articulate further?

You bet:

Great. Now lets use your link "which strongly uphold the 6,000-year timescale of Scripture."to articulate my question:
Now, The article is telling me that the data is confirming that what they are testing was cooling or formed 6000 ya.
I have a handful of that "Stuff" we read about in the scriptures. I grabbed a hold of this "stuff" on day 7. Some of this stuff looks like green plants, some like soil (decaying organic matter), there are some bugs in it, some bug eggs, and some "rock".

The article you linked to says this stuff (fresh from 6 thousand years ago) is from the time they consider to be 6000 years ago, or Creation week.
You examine it with your Creationist, Child of God, follower of Jesus glasses on.
Tell me. (Without or without knowledge of seeing it created in the last 7 days)
Tell me, based on the descriptions you read in the scriptures, what age is the stuff I am giving you to examine?

You don't like that question? OK

Given:

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

HOW OLD IS THE STUFF in this description? Zero or 7 days or what? You have a tree with fruit in it.
How old is the tree?

 

[Zaius137]

You bet:

Great. Now lets use your link "which strongly uphold the 6,000-year timescale of Scripture."to articulate my question:
Now, The article is telling me that the data is confirming that what they are testing was cooling or formed 6000 ya.
I have a handful of that "Stuff" we read about in the scriptures. I grabbed a hold of this "stuff" on day 7. Some of this stuff looks like green plants, some like soil (decaying organic matter), there are some bugs in it, some bug eggs, and some "rock".

The article you linked to says this stuff (fresh from 6 thousand years ago) is from the time they consider to be 6000 years ago, or Creation week.
You examine it with your Creationist, Child of God, follower of Jesus glasses on.
Tell me. (Without or without knowledge of seeing it created in the last 7 days)
Tell me, based on the descriptions you read in the scriptures, what age is the stuff I am giving you to examine?

You don't like that question? OK

Given:

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

HOW OLD IS THE STUFF in this description? Zero or 7 days or what? You have a tree with fruit in it.
How old is the tree?

I believe in the strict interpretation of the 6 days of creation. When you say age measured what does that really mean? Do you know the parent daughter isotope ratios so you can demonstrate a materialistic date? Did the isotopes measured undergo rapid radio active decay? You seem to want to refer to uniformitarian principals that hold no water scientifically.

When Adam was created was he a thirty year old man? You are trying to answer a similar question that can not be answered.

 

[Zaius137]

We have already been over this many times Zaius, it is not an assumption, it is measured. Additionally, decay rates are measured in numerous different isotopes occurring in supernovae millions of light years distant. Those measured decay rates are the same as observed 100 years ago, 50 years ago, 10 years ago and today. They are the same, read for yourself. http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9912131

One issue I have wanted to take up is isotope decay rates by super nova remnants.

Please show me where in this article a single radioactive decay rate can be confirmed?

You seem to keep implying that radio active decay rates are confirmed in super Nova remnants. You cited this article… http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9912131.pdf

Principally there are two speculations at the core of this so called evidence…

“These gamma-ray lines may be subdivided into 2 categories that are defined by the channel that led to the nuclear excitation: (a) radioactive decay into an excited state of the daughter isotope, or (b) nuclear interactions and reactions.”

Point (a) alone could radically change the decay rates of some parent daughters and little is know about either of these dynamics in the physics.
“The production of these isotopes in supernova explosions has been indirectly inferred from lightcurve characteristics, reflecting the respective decay times.”

It seems that super novas are a very difficult source for confirming radioactive decay rates.

“44Ti is believed to be exclusively produced by supernova events, and its production can be inferred from the solar abundance of the decay product 44Ca.”

The problem here is how much Ca was produced in the nucleosynthesis of elements. You see daughters of radioactive decay will be produced alongside the parent element.

“Ionisation would prevent 44Ti decaying by orbital electron capture and hence falsify the relation between observed gamma-ray line flux and present 44Ti mass, relaxing the constraint on the amount of 56Ni produced during the explosion [24]. An asymmetric explosion could increase 44Ti over 56Ni production in the high entropy alpha-rich freezeout along the polar directions [25]”

High heat, complete ionization and now possibly neutrinos or another particle affect radioactive decay rates. All of these factors exist in great abundance in a super nova.

“Considerable uncertainties that are involved in the modelling of nucleosynthesis processes, mainly due to the poorly known physics of stellar convection, do not allow for a theoretical determination of the dominant galactic 26Al sources.”

I think this next statement puts a fine point on the speculative nature of this type of investigation…



“New gamma-ray lines have been discovered, such as the 1.157 MeV line from 44Ti or several decay lines from 56Co and 57Co. Gamma-ray lines probe aspects of nucleosynthesis, stellar evolution, and supernova physics that are difficult to access by other means. Additionally, they provide tracers of galactic activity and improve our understanding of the interstellar recycling processes.”



Some problems here are:

A current understanding of stellar evolution can not be supported by the physics or observations.

The interstellar recycling dogma is so far outside current understanding as to be a complete fictional story.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Explanation of accelerated decay for YEC dynamics.

The rapid decay happened in two processes. The first accelerated decay happened during creation week and the second during the flood. Basically the evidence provided by the RATE team happened with the following notes......................

The earth cannot be billions of years old.

How old do you reckon, both the world and universe, are biblically and scientifically?

Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon

Hebrew Lexicon :: H8398 (NKJV)
Strong's Number H8398 matches the Hebrew תֵּבֵל(tebel ),
which occurs 36 times in 36 verses in the Hebrew concordance

Jer 51:15
He has made the earth/land by His power;
He has established the world by His wisdom,
And stretched out the heaven by His understanding.

Greek Lexicon :: G2889 (NKJV)
Strong's Number G2889 matches the Greek κόσμος (kosmos), which occurs 187 times in 152 verses in the Greek concordance.
[Used 3 times in Revelation]

Reve 11:15
And the seventh Messenger trumpets and became great voices in the heaven saying "has become! the kingdom/*s of the world of the Lord of us and of the Christ of Him
and He shall be reigning into the Ages of the Ages".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRjrtjvfN9A


.

.