Posted on 08/13/2003 9:02:05 PM PDT by nwrep
No they are not, but you're welcome to present your argument as to why you think they are.
You are further invited to explain why:
1. Independent (repeat, independent) dating methods which rely on no common assumption give the same date results for the same samples.
2. Dating methods give correct dates for items of known age.
Any bets on whether He Who Must Not Be Addressed would run to the moderators again because I was "engaging him in my discussion" by daring to refute his words, thus abusing his right to be unaffected by my existence?
Because that's what multiple independent tests and lines of evidence indicate.
I already asked for a ruling from the moderators in my prior post on this matter. This so infuriated He Who Must Not Be Addressed that he escalated the matter to Jim Robinson before waiting for a response from the moderators. Go figure. If JR fails to respond in a timely fashion, perhaps He Who Etc. will appeal to the Pope next.
Really? Holy crow! That was about '84 or '85, wasn't it?
This is on the level of telling Christians that "all they REALLY know is that they have found some words in a book".
There is, to put it mildly, much more evidence regarding fossils than simply, "oh look, a bone".
My reaction as well. Seeing the concerns that an AiG article might somehow be discounted for coming from a creationist site, I was about to say something along the lines of "Given the arguments presented in ... [several AnswersInGenesis-based posts, including but not limited to 1375] ... how many times do we have to catch someone presenting risible arguments before we're allowed to discount them as bad thinkers, maybe even dishonest?"
(AiG, as they themselves like to note, aren't as bad as most other creationist sites as they have publicly discarded a few bad arguments. Still, we've seen a flood of AiG material on this thread and almost none of it has stood up to scrutiny.)
RadioAstronomer (who has been doing double duty at work, and will be for some time) says hi, and asks in hurt tones why we haven't been pinging him, and whether it's his breath? Or that insufferable propeller beanie? Anyway, Rades, this ping's for you!
I don't know about you all, but it's nice to get back to refuting the familiar old creationist canards, after the long spell of cheap, imported rancor. It's rather like rooting through an old box of Wacky Packages.
"Hey, I remember this one!"
"I remember laughing really hard at this one as a kid."
"You know, this one didn't make sense to me when I was 10, and it still doesn't."
"What the hell makes these things stick, anyway?"
Problem is, the first MRI paper was published by Lauterbur in 1973.
Image formation by induced local interactions. Examples employing nuclear magnetic resonance. Lauterbur, P. C.. Dep. Chem., State Univ. New York, Stony Brook, NY, USA. Nature (London, United Kingdom) (1973), 242(5394), 190-1.
Abstract: A new imaging technique called zeugmatog. is disclosed which takes advantage of induced local interactions to overcome the wavelength-dependence limitation of normal imaging systems. In the presence of a 2nd field that restricts the interaction of the object with the 1st field to a limited region, the resoln. becomes independent of wavelength, and is instead a function of the ratio of the normal width of the interaction to the shift produced by a gradient in the 2nd field. As an example, NMR zeugmatog. was performed with 60 MHz (5 m) radiation and a static magnetic field gradient corresponding, for proton resonance, to 700 Hz/cm. The test object consisted of two 1-mm inside diam. thin-walled glass capillaries of H2O attached to the inside wall of a 4.2-mm inside diam. glass tube of D2O.
End quote
By 1977, Mansfield and Ernst had also independently published imaging methods; Ernst's is the one mostly used today.
You're kidding, right?
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.