Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MEASURABLE 14C IN FOSSILIZED ORGANIC MATERIALS: CONFIRMING THE YOUNG EARTH CREATION-FLOOD MODEL
http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf ^

Posted on 08/11/2003 8:57:56 AM PDT by fishtank

PDF file.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: carbon14; creation; creationism; creationvevolution; evolution; radioisotopes; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 961-962 next last
To: WestPacSailor
Dead on!

And as has often been said, how did we gage a "day", what with the sun and the moon coming along "days" later?

Let me see, First Day, Big Bang created out of the separation between all the Void (the Heavens) and all Matter (The "earth"), and the "earth" was waste, having no shape, and God said "Let there be Light" and we had Cosmic Ignition. The Sun and the Moon, the matter of our individual system, coelested and formed some time after the Big Ignition, and then life appeared, with Man appearing on the scene made in the (mental, concious, inquisitive, adaptable, creative, inventive) form of God, having the qualities that allowed Man to become what God designed him to be, ruler of all created things? The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil indicating that Man is the only animal life that God gave the gift of rising above to have the ability to choose to do Right or Wrong, and know what it is. The Fall showing that we too often listen to the whisper of a physical devil who plays on our own vanity, and that we are Lost from what God would have us strive for, to be more like Christ in our Love?

121 posted on 08/11/2003 11:55:36 AM PDT by 50sDad ("Can't sleep...clowns will eat me!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Carbon 14 measurements are incorrect unless they support the presuppositions of evos. That's scientific!

It appears the paper is not published or peer reviewed. If it had been, the referees would undoubtedly have told the authors to examine the possibility that 14C might be produced endogenously at low levelswithin the earth by nuclear transmutation reactions, and to estimate the rate of such production. The referees might also have obligated the authors to point out that the levels of 14C are still extremely low, compared with 99% of the material used for radiocarbon dating.

122 posted on 08/11/2003 12:01:36 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
God didn't put fossils in the ground to fool anyone. Events on this planet cause fossils to form naturally

I used that line about God putting fossils in the ground to go hand in hand with God putting light from an object many billions of light years away 6K light years away so that the light is just hitting us now.

I agree, fossils are there through natural causes. Over millions of years(some have been found in the billions) a fossil history has been created. Your very simple flood explanation may work for you in your 6K old earth/universe, but it does not work for me. How does your flood account for the destruction of extinct aquatic life like Plesiosaurs, trilobytes, etc..?

How come Noah didn't take any dinosaurs with him in the ark? He was instructed to take representatives from every animal on earth, even reptiles(Gensis 6:19-20). But he didn't take any dinosuars. So there were not any in the ark. But the bible said he took every animal upon the Earth. In order for your world to not collapse around you, land based dinosaurs would have to be extinct by then. So EVERY kind of dinosaur would have to have lived between Adam&Eve and Noah. Genesis 2:5 tells us that there was no rain nor grass nor plants when God created Adam and Eve. In Genesis 2:19, God created all animals(after he created man). So Genesis Chapter 5 gives us the lifespan of the dinosaurs. I am not going to add it up, but I'll be kind and say a couple hundred years. Kinda wacky, don't you think? The fierce lion is mentioned many times in the bible. Don't you think a reptile the size of a bus with teeth 6 inches long would garner at least one entry? They would, if they didn't die out millions of years before Noah was born.

123 posted on 08/11/2003 12:06:22 PM PDT by SengirV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor; Dataman
It's older, but I found this link to Dr. Baumgardner if you're interested.

John R. Baumgardner, PH.D.

124 posted on 08/11/2003 12:06:56 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
It appears the paper is not published or peer reviewed.

Your logic says that if a paper isn't peer reviewed by those with an evolutionary bias, then the paper can be dismissed. An excellent example of circular reasoning.

Let's try your gymnastics like this: Any element of the evolutionary hypothesis must be reviewed by a committee of French chefs else anyone who eats may dismiss them.

BTW, your comments aren't peer reviewed. Dismissed.

125 posted on 08/11/2003 12:12:34 PM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
No. The lower limit of detection (LLD) for the AMS instrument is 0.002 pmc (percent of the modern ratio of C-14). In Figure 3 in their paper, the mean pmc for 10 samples of coal was pmc = 0.247, which is about two orders of magnitude higher than the pmc.

I'm not talking about what your physical equipment can detect against zero background. I'm talking about what occurs in the environment from contamination, all sources.

I just wrote a document dealing with LLD determination for radioactive dose measurements. (I am the lead researcher on a new instrument.) They are not measuring noise.

So you're a recognized authority.

The tables have turned. The statues are falling. Many scientists are being exposed as being not only fallible but biased, deceiving and dishonest on the question of evolution.

So the recognized authorities are wrong.

126 posted on 08/11/2003 12:12:52 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: IpaqMan; Right Wing Professor
From the link:

Scintillation fluid is made from fossil fuels such as methane or oil (plus some other ingredients), and it sparkles when struck by beta particles or certain other events such as neutrinos.

The solution used is carbon tetrachloride. Makes me wonder if the author actually talked to someone.

127 posted on 08/11/2003 12:15:05 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
I have no idea why you directed that hysterical riposte to me.

You have never once on this forum seen an instance of me complaining about the way I am treated by either other posters or by site Management.

Nor do I play funny little games with other posters.

You live in freakin' Hawaii...go surfing, dude, get a life!

128 posted on 08/11/2003 12:15:20 PM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Also there is no evidence of giraffe necks ever growing ... or precambrian fossils ---

You were corrected on *both* of these points in another thread in the past three days. Selective amnesia?

true science will address all anomolies - assumptions

And honest debaters will address rebuttals which have been made to their posts and not just repost their incorrect claims over and over again as if they've never been challenged.

129 posted on 08/11/2003 12:15:55 PM PDT by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
I'm not talking about quasars and pulsars and such that emit radio waves but stars that emit visible light.

Last time I checked radio waves and light travel at the same speed, so the argument is EXACTLY the same.

BTW, you are not seeing these objects in question. You are seeing them thru the lengthy exposure of a device to a designated area of sky, be it visual or radio or any wavelenth you wish. The human eye can only pick up a couple thousand individual stars in the darkest of nights. Other objects can be detected by the naked eye, but they are made up of either large areas of excited gas(orion nebula) or thousands of stars(open or globular clustars) or millions of stars(galaxies).

130 posted on 08/11/2003 12:19:37 PM PDT by SengirV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: 50sDad
Just FYI, I don't consider or make a young earth (or the KJV) a salvation issue.
131 posted on 08/11/2003 12:20:03 PM PDT by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Your logic says that if a paper isn't peer reviewed by those with an evolutionary bias, then the paper can be dismissed.

My logic said no such thing. I said the paper ignored certain obvious alternative hypotheses, and as such failed ordinary scientific standards for publications. I think a reviewer would probably have told them to discard the lengthy and tedious discussion of young-earth creationism, since YEC has conflicts with virtually every field of science. However, they certainly could have published the data if they'd done what any of us submitting a controversial theory has to do; shown that their theory explains these results and has no other major conflict with scientific laws; and that no other currently accepted theory explains their results (assuming none does). Or they could have, without publishing their own theory, noted that the data conflict with current theories, and stated there's something here that needs to be explained.

Your logic says that if a paper isn't peer reviewed by those with an evolutionary bias, then the paper can be dismissed.

Free Republic is a discussion forum, not a scientific journal. Would you like me to review the differences for you?

132 posted on 08/11/2003 12:22:25 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
If you call mud dwelling sludge animals - remains precambrian fossils do you think that is ok ?

I mean real fossils of higher species than worms and mollusks !
133 posted on 08/11/2003 12:23:45 PM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
One man's truth is another man's hysteria !
134 posted on 08/11/2003 12:28:53 PM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
Where did the C-14 come from if the fossil was formed eons ago, thereby trapping the carbon atoms in a rock-like matrix?

You're supposedly an expert? I don't like my experts to ask questions like, "If we all came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" or "If the earth is round, why doesn't it look round?"

Carbon forms such mobile compounds as carbon dioxide and carbonic acid, just to name two. It doesn't have to stay trapped in buried rock, nor are rocks necessarily impermeable to contamination from atmospheric, groundwater, or subterranean sources.

135 posted on 08/11/2003 12:31:00 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
One man's truth is another man's hysteria !

And, that I agree with you on. Sorta.

136 posted on 08/11/2003 12:34:37 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
"One man's truth is another man's hysteria!"

Finally - the crypto-poster gives us a clue!
137 posted on 08/11/2003 12:34:56 PM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
It is the change and breakdown of our DNA that causes aging and many types of disease.

And yet our lifespan of threescore and ten has remained pretty constant over thousands of years of recorded history.

And humans have only 300 generations in 6000 years, whereas bacteria have undergone upwards of 10 million replications. Bacteria have a genome almost as complex as ours. Why hasn't it deteriorated?

138 posted on 08/11/2003 12:37:03 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Now you see why I didn't sign onto the good behavior agreement...
139 posted on 08/11/2003 12:37:45 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace
"A straightforward conclusion that can be drawn from these observations is that all but the very youngest Phanerozoic organic material was buried contemporaneously much less than 250,000 years ago.

This is consistent with the Biblical account of a global Flood that destroyed most of the air-breathing life on the planet in a single brief cataclysm only a few thousand years ago."

Maybe, but it wouldn't have to be from the time of the Flood.

The Bible also alludes to man existing prior to Adam. He was annhilated catastrophically and left no living progeny, but before we can know any more about him, the curtain closes.

Some recent DNA analyses of ancient remains showing no relationship to modern man seem to support the Biblical assertion.

140 posted on 08/11/2003 12:40:38 PM PDT by nightdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 961-962 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson