MEASURABLE 14C IN FOSSILIZED ORGANIC MATERIALS: CONFIRMING THE YOUNG EARTH CREATION-FLOOD MODEL

http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf ^

[f.Christian]

I watched a tv special about ayres rock in australia and it was the most convoluted evolution bs I'd ever seen .

My theory -- explantion is ... it's an underground blowup - out --- through a soft spot hole in the earth's crust - plate !

If evolution was true and these were plates turned sideways ... their would be some fossil evidence in them and my theory would make their presence nearly impossible --- they could be drawn in from the surface and resurfaced in the extruding process !

* Here it is * ...


Most of the canyons and gorges (( revealing layers forming below surface cambrian layers )) actually formed by drying - shrinking cracks ... water naturally flowing through them because of their lower elevations - depth !

At some point plates collapsed upon themselves forming rocky mountains and some fragmenting - opening allowing islands and mountains to protrude - rise above and through the plate valley - ocean floor edges !

Heating and cooling would have changed the size of the earth ... probably hot --- very small !

Starting to cool forming a surface crust ... getting larger again --- and then like a cake bubbling rising up sections and with more cooling drying cracks !

Towards the center top middle half of the geologic column life forms appear fully formed ... cambrian explosion --- nothing below !

While the top layers were being formed from flooding and volcanic activity ... most of the column layers were formed from below and at the same time forming most of the above ground ... i.e., buttes - hills - mountains -- surface plate geography we see today --- not enough time for all this evolution nonsense that wouldn't be possible with unlimited time anyway --- pure fantasy- fiction !


Cambrian plates are on mountain tops and rising mountains would raise plate and ocean floors to various elevations !

All this geology and life washing out of a mudball is OBVIOUSLY an evolution hoax -- legend !

[CollegeRepublican]

Okay you convinced me. The devil did it :)

[null and void]

Another 3,000 post thread in the making.

Doing-my-part-bump

[narby]

Every scientist, like every person, and certainly everyone with a political party, cannot help but tweak and prod everything they do along the railroad track of their own existing beliefs. I challenge everyone to invent a New Idea that doesn't build on what they already "know" to be true.

Interesting Challenge. Don't know if I could do it. And if I did, I'm not sure my prejudices would allow me to see clearly if I'd acomplished the task, or not.

[SengirV]

If there really is an all powerful God, what would stop him from being able to create a Universe that to us mortals appears to be 16-20 billion years old?

There is nothing to stop God from doing such. I never claimed there was. It's just that you then have to choose one of the following:

1)You accept the Earth as being 6K years old and reject any and all benefit from science, since God is fooling us by misrepresenting the world/universe around us.

2)We do not know, nor can we begin to fathom God's design of the universe. We have a creation story, a parable like many of Jesus' parables, that fit well into the thinking of men 4 thousand years ago. God gave us a brain to understand the world around us and a natural curiosity to explore. We are doing such and learning much about God's creation. But they are not mutually exclusive, as some here would have you believe.

[Prof Engineer]

ping

[50sDad]

You make the same assumption that a hard-core Evolutonist would, that there are only two camps, Creation and Godless Science. I can imagine the Almighty One working in small steps to manifest His glory. ("OK, Moses, it is like this...imagine a double-helix made of four basic chemical groups...Chemicals? Well, OK, everything is made from them. What? Earth, Air, Fire and Water? No, no, no, where did you get that idea. No, see...oh, forget it!)

[IpaqMan]

I believe the scientists were postulating that local radiation was causing hits on the C12 "making" C14. I do find that a stretch, but the article mentioned some correlation between "problem" coal deposits and significant local radiactivity.

I personally believe that the earth is relatively young, but every young age theory seems to have a "credible" old age explanation. However, I do find that FLOOD related questions seem more credible.

Since the flood did occur (stated our Lord, Mat 24:38,39), we can expect to find evidence pointing to it.

[50sDad]

We are doing such and learning much about God's creation. But they are not mutually exclusive, as some here would have you believe.

Bravo!

[Rebelbase]

Those photons are optical illusions, just like fossils were put here by demons to confuse us.

[Havoc]

Stating the obvious; not peer reviewed, not published, chances are they're seeing contamination by modern 14C.

This is what passes for intelligent and knowledgeable input? It is known widely that deep coal deposits contain large amounts of C14. And it has been known for some time. That isn't the issue. The issue is that no amount of facts can be allowed to get in the way of liberal/atheistic postulations and theorizing. If the theory is blown away by fact, ignore the fact or present a wilder theory that can be sold as fact while the real facts go unpublished. You want to argue that things don't get peer reviewed or published, yet it is minds like yours who stop scientific studies such as this from being peer reviewed and published because the facts are inconvenient. You can't have it both ways; but, we know you want it both ways.

Try an honest and forthright argument sometime.

[narby]

I watched a tv special about ayres rock in australia and it was the most convoluted evolution bs I'd ever seen .

That was one of the most convoluted posts I've ever seen.

What does the geologic history of ayres rock have to do with "the survival of the fitest" evolution theory?

Go read 50sDad's large post above. Really great.

[Con X-Poser]

<< No, I don't intend to waste my time on it. The earth is old -- very old -- and no amount of pseudo-science will change that. >>

I agree, the earth is very old. Several thousand years old, in fact.

[fishtank]

You are ignorant of Dr. Humphrey's material. He never mentions light traveling at various speeds through different media.

It's GRAVTITATIONAL time dilation, not anisotropic-universe time dilation.

[SengirV]

I do not have the answers to these questions. I have some knowledge of Astronomy(I am not an astonomer nor do I have a physics degree) but can not give you formula's and calculations that you would obviously require to be satisfied. Perhaps someone who can backup some present day astonomical assumptions could help you out. Maybe an explanation of one point you raised will help - "The furthest star is 12 billion light years away ... the Doppler effect would have rendered the wavelength of light so low as to be unobservable to the eye." If we can get an explanation of how a redshifted star/quasar/pulsar/galaxy/etc... with a value of 5 can be observered, then that might help US understand a little better.

[narby]

OK, Moses, it is like this...imagine a double-helix made of four basic chemical groups...Chemicals? Well, OK, everything is made from them.

That's another great point I've been trying to make for awhile.

Ok, it's time for God to communicate His Word to us simple humans so we can write it down into the Bible. How does He do that?

So He sits Moses down in front of the TV tuned to the Science Channel, and he shows him everything about how He created the universe. Then He tells Moses, "now write all that down".

Moses isn't really trained in science. And even if he was, the people reading Genesis are not. So Moses writes, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

[fishtank]

humdinger ping

[katana]

LOL! Maybe the tape measure on a hobbit hottie (Rosie the bar maid and future Mrs. Gamgee comes to mind)

[balrog666]

The gods-in-the-noise placemarker.

[Hegemony Cricket]

narby - I agree totally with your reply to this challenge. I had exactly the same reaction, but you put it into words very well. It occurred to me as I re-read the challenge, and your reply, that the challenge itself is somewhat a proof of God's existence. If breaking new ground and creating something new is difficult (not impossible, just difficult) for us as humans, how immense then would be the task of creating this entire universe with all of its variety, complexity and harmony? Chance, you say? Fat Chance!