A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby marcsurtees » Sat Jul 28, 2012 5:48 pm

Peter Henderson wrote:The bible gives no indication of the passage of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, sao why should any Christian be called a compromiser because they accept "millions of years" ?

Could it be because, "The bible gives no indication of the passage of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2"!
Marc
_______________________________________________________
"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing
— they believe in anything." (commonly attributed to) G.K. Chesterton
marcsurtees
 
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby Peter Henderson » Sat Jul 28, 2012 7:02 pm

marcsurtees wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:The bible gives no indication of the passage of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, sao why should any Christian be called a compromiser because they accept "millions of years" ?

Could it be because, "The bible gives no indication of the passage of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2"!


So it could just as well be millions of years Marc. The passage of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genisis 1:2 is unceretain, according to the plain reading of scripture.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4350
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:40 am

Worth a read: http://thenaturalhistorian.com/2012/07/ ... omment-462 (I've submitted a brief comment underneath!)
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:57 am

http://questioninganswersingenesis.blogspot.co.uk/
"We might also point out that since the half-life of 87Rb is ~48 billion years, the most important element here is time. Without a lot of time, there is no known mechanism by which to form minerals with such drastically different 87Sr/86Sr ratios. Some YEC's will try to redirect your attention to things like 'accelerated nuclear decay', but the explanation is 1) ad hoc, made up only to rationalize why the data contradict their hypothesis; 2) physically absurd, since a 1-million-fold increase in decay rates would produce enough heat to melt the Earth; and 3) completely arbitrary and even contrary to orthodox notions of divine providence, in which God does not produce random miracles just to make it appear geochemically that mountain ranges and volcanic islands formed through a more elegant and ancient process".

I emailed the blogger as follows:


You may wish to see this discussion thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3049
Marc Surtees is a 'recoloniser' YEC.

Should you have any suggested corrections to my recent comments aimed
at Marc, below (comments made within a post at 3.28 am BST on 25 July)
they would be welcome! Though I hope I was already on the right lines
about very long half lives.
"He suggested that most radiometric dating methods are bound to give
dates of millions/billions of years because the half-lives are very
lengthy. But haven't some of the methods been used successfully to date
igneous rocks known to be only hundreds or thousands of years' old?
Does anybody know? Also, given the number of atoms found in some
samples thus meaning that a tiny proportion should have decayed on
average, I'm not convinced that a very long half-life would preclude
the possibility of successful dating ie decay since closure temperature
could be detected even if less than one half-life had really elapsed
and the sample was really millions/billions of years' old? Can anyone
else confirm whether this is the case (I don't think Dawkins addressed
this in 'The Greatest Show on Earth' chapter 4; he did mention that
there are some very very short half-lives - which of course are pretty
useless in dating radiometrically something millions of years' old)?
Dawkins did also mention the point, which Sarfati tried to dismiss in
his 'refutation', that "Isotopes whose half-life is less than a tenth
or so of the age of the Earth are, for practical purposes, extinct and
don't exist except under special circumstances"."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Classic misdirection by Dr Don Batten

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Aug 04, 2012 1:55 am

http://creation.com/biblical-earth-age-objection
(My email is below.)


"you will find that we are not troglodytes and not illogical or
unscientific..."
TOSH

"This is correct if Charles Darwin invented the idea of biological
evolution, but it was thought of a long time before Darwin."
Excuse me? Dr Laurence NEVER mentioned Charles Darwin.
FAIL
NO 'ifs' - Dr Laurence WAS correct and you are trying to MISREPRESENT
what he clearly wrote. WHY? Do you think he is stupid? I bet you wish
he was.

"The idea of the earth being old was not derived from data, but was a
preconceived notion of opponents of the Bible like gentleman farmer
James Hutton and lawyer Charles Lyell. Prior to their manipulation of
data to fit their preconceived notions and its widespread acceptance,
people from many nations believed the written historical records that
put the earth's history at less than 10,000 years."
LIES

"As something that replaces and therefore opposes faith in Jesus
Christ as Creator, Saviour and coming King, Christians should be
opposing evolution, not accommodating it (2 Corinthians 10:5)." Even if
it is likely to be TRUE?

"I think I have given you enough to get you started. I hope you will
make the effort, as I have to help you get going." I look forward to
learning whether or not Dr Laurence moves anywhere.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Aug 05, 2012 7:14 pm

This story was covered on tonight's Channel 4 News (repeated an hour later on Channel 13) but doesn't seem to have made it onto the website yet: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/aug/0 ... don-graves

An example of radiocarbon dating being tied to a historical geological event - around a century before the Black Death but these particular people appear to have died of starvation rather than disease.

On the Channel 4 News programme it was suggested that the volcano responsible may have been one in Indonesia beginning with the letter 'R'.

One assumes that the Mars Science Laboratory - assuming a successful landing - will not be attempting any radiometric dating, and that for the time being the possibility of radiocarbon dating of anything organic has been ruled right out.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Aug 05, 2012 7:44 pm

PS Mount Rinjani.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Aug 07, 2012 6:51 pm

I plan to take a closer look at this later tonight: http://questioninganswersingenesis.blogspot.co.uk/
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby Paul Braterman » Tue Aug 07, 2012 7:06 pm

FWIW, we have radiometric (40Ar/39Ar refinement of 40Ar/40K) dating of the AD 79 eruption of Vesuvius at AD 73 +/- 10

I invite anyone who imagines that Hutton was imposing prejudices on the data, to visit Siccar Point. A Noah's Flood deposit it is not.
Paul Braterman
Paul Braterman
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:03 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Aug 07, 2012 7:58 pm

In fact Jonathan Baker's article about Snelling makes Paul's point about the AD 79 eruption.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby Moon Fire » Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:58 am

Paul Braterman wrote:FWIW, we have radiometric (40Ar/39Ar refinement of 40Ar/40K) dating of the AD 79 eruption of Vesuvius at AD 73 +/- 10

I invite anyone who imagines that Hutton was imposing prejudices on the data, to visit Siccar Point. A Noah's Flood deposit it is not.


Geologist?
Moon Fire
 
Posts: 366
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 12:50 pm

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Aug 12, 2012 1:26 am

Latest Tas Walker garbage:
http://creation.com/human-fossils-ancient-co2-levels
"For periods older than that the timescale is incorrect because they are ignoring the effects of the global Flood and the post-Flood Ice Age immediately after. So the period which they quote as from 3,500 years to 100,000 years would likely in real time be from 3,500 years to around 4,000 years—a period of some 500 years or less. The variations they quote likely represent variations in local short-term storm events and similar. Or they could even be an artefact from assembling a liner sequence of tree rings from logs that were actually contemporaneous."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:30 pm

a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby Peter Henderson » Fri Aug 17, 2012 11:15 pm

I invite anyone who imagines that Hutton was imposing prejudices on the data, to visit Siccar Point. A Noah's Flood deposit it is not.


Therre's always Mt St. Helens Paul !
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4350
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:08 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:I added a comment here:
http://eyeonicr.wordpress.com/2012/08/1 ... #more-4325



If Paul and Mark read the email where the full version of my comment was visible, I have acknowledged my minor error (under Eye's blog). The penultimate link which I cited in my post DID refer to manganese54 - as well as chlorine36.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

PreviousNext

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests