at least follow the example of #8 Gorzaloon (This tagline intentionally left blank.) if you must
Posted on 11/22/2004 5:54:52 PM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
Falsified, huh?
I suppose they mean "refuted", but who knows?
So Dinosaurs were running around with Humans...
Or are our fossil records also wrong?
So give us an estimate...The earth is what....3000 years old?
I think you should call President Gore immediately about this....He knows what to do. If he is not available...call The Lochness Monster to investigate...
Gentry's polonium halo hypothesis for a young Earth fails all tests. Gentry's entire thesis is built on a compounded set of assumptions. He is unable to demonstrate that concentric haloes in mica are caused uniquely by alpha particles resulting from the decay of polonium isotopes. His samples are not from "primordial" pieces of the Earth's original crust, but from rocks which have been extensively reworked. Finally, his hypothesis cannot accommodate the many alternative lines of evidence that demonstrate a great age for the Earth. Gentry rationalizes any evidence which contradicts his hypothesis by proposing three "singularities" - one time divine interventions - over the past 6000 years. Of course, supernatural events and processes fall outside the realm of scientific investigations to address. As with the idea of variable radioactive decay rates, once Gentry moves beyond the realm of physical laws, his arguments fail to have any scientific usefulness. If divine action is necessary to fit the halo hypothesis into some consistent model of Earth history, why waste all that time trying to argue about the origins of the haloes based on current scientific theory? This is where most Creationist arguments break down when they try to adopt the language and trappings of science. Trying to prove a religious premise is itself an act of faith, not science.
In the end, Gentry's young Earth proposal, based on years of measuring discoloration haloes, is nothing more than a high-tech version of the Creationist "Omphalos" argument. This is the late nineteenth century proposition that while God created the Earth just 6,000 years ago according to the Genesis account, He made everything appear old. Unfortunately, because Gentry has published his original work on haloes in reputable scientific journals, a number of basic geology and mineralogy text books still state that microscopic discoloration haloes in mica are the result of polonium decay.
The information at the link that you provided has ben refuted. please click on the source URL. Scroll down to the section Replies To Objections, and click on REPORTS.
There, in HTML format, is the scientific evidence which refutes Gentry's and others challnenges to a non-creation reason for polonium-halos.
The presence of polonium tracks or haloes means little, as radioactive decay progresses indepenent of the temperature of phase of the rock.
I am not qualified to argue the point, but to say that it's "unambiguous" is incorrect, as Mr. Baillieul argues the opposite view.
The lnik you provided---Baillieul's analysis, did not pass peer-review.
Sorry.
Mr. Baillieul's analysis did not pass peer-review. It fell short of refuting the evidence.
When you don't follow scientific methods of analysis, you can get any conclusion you want.
at least follow the example of #8 Gorzaloon (This tagline intentionally left blank.) if you must
< /me> reaches for the popcorn...
at least follow the example of #8 Gorzaloon (This tagline intentionally left blank.) if you must. two in a row!!! what is this forum coming to?
That argument has also summarily been dealt with and refuted, according to waht I have read.
Wow, I am seeing the same scenario that Earth Science Associates described... "Claims to the contrary on the Internet and elsewhere. But none passed peer-review or been published in the open scientific literature."
Nice of you to try and deflect the discussion elsewhere.
Maybe you should have worked as one of Gore's spin doctors.
The creationists are resurrecting this hoary old canard. You'd think they'd do a bit of research before posting.
I am the only one on here that is excused from this one small requiremnt.
Anyway, who died and made you God?
If no one did, then you must scram.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.