100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Let's Try This Again | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
The OP is not accurate to the scientific evidence of man before 4000 years ago anyway. wiki answers has this: From the lay studies I have conducted (readings), the earliest sign of civilization were found in the excavating of the village at Konya in Turkey. With an estimated population of 5-8000, scientific dating points to 7500-9000 BC. Interesting also, is the discovery only 100 miles north of Konya (12 miles into the Black Sea) near Sinope (also in Turkey). An underwater small village was discovered in 1999. It is dated 7500-8500 BC (both of these before the great flood). I persoanlly have faith in extensive findings such as these that are literal establishings and reference points in history. When dealing with isolated "findings" such as "Lucy" bones, the argument gets weaker and weaker til disintigration. The missing link is the same as it always has been....a "tweener" that has never been discovered. Heres another one: Science News Share Blog Cite Print Email BookmarkNew Evidence Puts Man In North America 50,000 Years Ago ScienceDaily (Nov. 18, 2004) — Radiocarbon tests of carbonized plant remains where artifacts were unearthed last May along the Savannah River in Allendale County by University of South Carolina archaeologist Dr. Albert Goodyear indicate that the sediments containing these artifacts are at least 50,000 years old, meaning that humans inhabited North American long before the last ice age. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- See also: Fossils & Ruins Fossils Ancient Civilizations Lost Treasures Early Climate Cultures Origin of Life Reference The evolution of human intelligence Stone Age Homo antecessor Excavation The findings are significant because they suggest that humans inhabited North America well before the last ice age more than 20,000 years ago, a potentially explosive revelation in American archaeology. Goodyear, who has garnered international attention for his discoveries of tools that pre-date what is believed to be humans' arrival in North America, announced the test results, which were done by the University of California at Irvine Laboratory, Wednesday (Nov .17). "The dates could actually be older," Goodyear says. "Fifty-thousand should be a minimum age since there may be little detectable activity left." The dawn of modern homo sapiens occurred in Africa between 60,000 and 80,000 years ago. Evidence of modern man's migration out of the African continent has been documented in Australia and Central Asia at 50,000 years and in Europe at 40,000 years. The fact that humans could have been in North America at or near the same time is expected to spark debate among archaeologists worldwide, raising new questions on the origin and migration of the human species. "Topper is the oldest radiocarbon dated site in North America," Goodyear says. "However, other early sites in Brazil and Chile, as well as a site in Oklahoma also suggest that humans were in the Western Hemisphere as early as 30,000 years ago to perhaps 60,000." In 1998, Goodyear, nationally known for his research on the ice age PaleoIndian cultures dug below the 13,000-year Clovis level at the Topper site and found unusual stone tools up to a meter deeper. The Topper excavation site is on the bank of the Savannah River on property owned by Clariant Corp., a chemical corporation headquartered near Basel, Switzerland. He recovered numerous stone tool artifacts in soils that were later dated by an outside team of geologists to be 16,000 years old. For five years, Goodyear continued to add artifacts and evidence that a pre-Clovis people existed, slowly eroding the long-held theory by archaeologists that man arrived in North America around 13,000 years ago. Last May, Goodyear dug even deeper to see whether man's existence extended further back in time. Using a backhoe and hand excavations, Goodyear's team dug through the Pleistocene terrace soil, some 4 meters below the ground surface. Goodyear found a number of artifacts similar to the pre-Clovis forms he has excavated in recent years. Then on the last day of the last week of digging, Goodyear's team uncovered a black stain in the soil where artifacts lay, providing him the charcoal needed for radiocarbon dating. Dr. Tom Stafford of Stafford Laboratories in Boulder, Colo., came to Topper and collected charcoal samples for dating. "Three radiocarbon dates were obtained from deep in the terrace at Topper with two dates of 50,300 and 51,700 on burnt plant remains. One modern date related to an intrusion," Stafford says. "The two 50,000 dates indicate that they are at least 50,300 years. The absolute age is not known." The revelation of an even older date for Topper is expected to heighten speculation about when man got to the Western Hemisphere and add to the debate over other pre-Clovis sites in the Eastern United States such as Meadowcroft Rockshelter, Pa., and Cactus Hill, Va. In October 2005, archaeologists will meet in Columbia for a conference on Clovis and the study of earliest Americans. The conference will include a day trip to Topper, which is sure to dominate discussions and presentations at the international gathering. USC's Topper: A Timeline May, 1998 — Dr. Al Goodyear and his team dig up to a meter below the Clovis level and encounter unusual stone tools up to two meters below surface. May 1999 — Team of outside geologists led by Mike Waters, a researcher at Texas A&M, visit Topper site and propose a thorough geological study of locality. May 2000 — Geology study done by consultants; ice age soil confirmed for pre-Clovis artifacts. May 2001 — Geologists revisit Topper and obtain ancient plant remains deep down in the Pleistocene terrace. OSL (optically stimulated luminescence) dates on soils above ice age strata show pre-Clovis is at least older than 14,000. May 2002 — Geologists find new profile showing ancient soil lying between Clovis and pre-Clovis, confirming the age of ice age soils between 16,000 - 20,000 years. May 2003 — Archaeologists continue to excavate pre-Clovis artifacts above the terrace, as well as new, significant Clovis finds. May 2004 — Using backhoe and hand excavations, Goodyear and his team dig deeper, down into the Pleistocene terrace, some 4 meters below the ground surface. Artifacts, similar to pre-Clovis forms excavated in previous years, recovered deep in the terrace. A black stain in the soil provides charcoal for radio carbon dating. November 2004 — Radiocarbon dating report indicates that artifacts excavated from Pleistocene terrace in May were recovered from soil that dates some 50,000 years. The dates imply an even earlier arrival for humans in this hemisphere than previously believed, well before the last ice age. DR. ALBERT C. GOODYEAR III University of South Carolina archaeologist Albert C. Goodyear joined the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology in1974 and has been associated with the Research Division since 1976. He is also the founder and director of the Allendale PaleoIndian Expedition, a program that involves members of the public in helping to excavate PaleoAmerican sites in the central Savannah River Valley of South Carolina. Goodyear earned his bachelor's degree in anthropology from the University of South Florida (1968), his master's degree in anthropology from the University of Arkansas and his doctorate in anthropology from Arizona State University (1976). He is a member of the Society for American Archaeology, the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, the Archaeological Society of South Carolina, and the Florida Anthropological Society. He has served twice as president of the Archaeological Society of South Carolina and is on the editorial board of The Florida Anthropologist and the North American Archaeologist. Goodyear developed his interest in archaeology in the 1960s as a member of the F1orida Anthropological Society and through avocational experiences along Florida's central Gulf Coast. He wrote and published articles about sites and artifacts from that region for The Florida Anthropologist in the late 1960s. His master's thesis on the Brand site, a late PaleoIndian Dalton site in northeast Arkansas, was published in 1974 by the Arkansas Archeological Survey. At Arizona State University, he did field research on Desert Hohokam mountain hunting and gathering sites in the Lower Sonoran desert of Southern Arizona. Goodyear, whose primary research interest has been America's earliest human inhabitants, has focused on the period of the Pleistocene-Holocene transition dating between 12,000 and 9,000 years ago. He has taken a geoarchaeological approach to the search for deeply buried early sites by teaming up with colleagues in geology and soil science. For the past 15 years he has studied early prehistoric sites in Allendale County, S.C., in the central Savannah River Valley. These are stone tool manufacturing sites related to the abundant chert resources that were quarried in this locality. This work has been supported by the National Park Service, the National Geographic Society, the University of South Carolina, the Archaeological Research Trust (SCIAA), the Allendale Research Fund, the Elizabeth Stringfellow Endowment Fund, Sandoz Chemical Corp. and Clariant Corp., the present owner of the site. Goodyear is the author of over 100 articles, reports and books and regularly presents public lectures and professional papers on his PaleoIndian discoveries in South Carolina. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adapted from materials provided by University Of South Carolina. Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats: APA MLA University Of South Carolina (2004, November 18). New Evidence Puts Man In North America DEBBIE SAYS: Konya (Ottoman Turkish: قونیه; also Koniah, Konieh, Konia, and Qunia; historically also known as Iconium (Latin), Greek: Ἰκόνιον Ikónion) is a city in Turkey, on the central plateau of Anatolia. It has a population of 1,412,343 Excavations have shown that the region was inhabited during the Late Copper Age, around 3000 BC. The city came under the influence of the Hittites around 1500 BC. These were overtaken by the Indo-European Sea Peoples around 1200 BC. The Phrygians established their kingdom in central Anatolia in the 8th century BC. Xenophon describes Iconium, as the city was called, as the last city of Phrygia. The region was overwhelmed by Cimmerian invaders c. 690 BC. It was later part of the Persian Empire, until Darius III was defeated by Alexander the Great in 333 BC. Alexander's empire broke up shortly after his death and the town came under the rule of Seleucus I Nicator. During the Hellenistic period the town was ruled by the kings of Pergamon. When Attalus III, the last king of Pergamon, died childless, he bequeathed his empire to Rome. Under the rule of emperor Claudius, the city's name was changed to Claudioconium, and during the rule of emperor Hadrianus to Colonia Aelia Hadriana. 3,000 years no need to go further. Not 7,500 to 9,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would justify my arguements on evolution but it would be a waste of time. In a million years I hope there is still human life on this planet. If there is, i hope they have better to do than talk about us. In reference to the bible, the most important passage is Mark 4 24-25. The Golden Rule. U might want to read it. Please show me....... Mark 4: 24-25 24"Consider carefully what you hear," he continued. "With the measure you use, it will be measured to you—and even more. 25Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him." But you left out the best one....what a shame 21He said to them, "Do you bring in a lamp to put it under a bowl or a bed? Instead, don't you put it on its stand? 22For whatever is hidden is meant to be disclosed, and whatever is concealed is meant to be brought out into the open. 23If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear." Please show me....... Mark 4: 24-25 24"Consider carefully what you hear," he continued. "With the measure you use, it will be measured to you—and even more. 25Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him." But you left out the best one....what a shame 21He said to them, "Do you bring in a lamp to put it under a bowl or a bed? Instead, don't you put it on its stand? 22For whatever is hidden is meant to be disclosed, and whatever is concealed is meant to be brought out into the open. 23If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear." Literal Christians, gotta love the niavity. I read this section and the first thing I thought was "Are you literally giving the evolutionist a foot to stand on?" Most people think that Christ was speaking only of the church in this text. I believe he was speaking to man in broader terms. He was warning us to listen to the knowledge of our forefathers. That the collection of wisdom of the ages is important to learn and understand. I'm quite certain that, assuming he is God as people claim, Jesus had full knowledge of the scientific evidience that man would find in the future (this is what being omnipitant means). So if he is telling us not to hide knowledge, why is it so hard for Christians to accept that all knowledge comes from God? What is so hard to understand that God only opens the eyes of the scientist so that he understands what God already knows? Do you think we could have this knowledge without him? Evolution does not fly in the face of Christianity. It is God's way of saying "yeah, that's how I did it." Wouldee WTF is the deal with a birds wing? Sure they have hollow bones so they can fly. So did the pterydactyls, and they were reptiles. By the way, other than the bones being hollow, a birds wing and a bats wing both have the same bone construction as the human arm above the wrist. Same could be said of whale, seal and dolphin fins, all of which are mammals and are the evolutionary connection to the sea. We weren't fish, we were dolphins. It took a lot of reading to get this far, thanks for getting me through the last two hours of the work day!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can also see where trilobites may enter the picture as something you might be referring to - out side of that I'm not sure? enlighten me majik man? Will the real Tribologist please stand up. 
Actually Tribology is the study of Lubrication, Friction and Wear. Particularly with respect to metals, but can be applied to all materials. I worked for the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA). I worked on designing lubricants for their roller mills so they could make beer cans from thinner sheet metal.
It's true! I'm the one you can blame for those really flimsy bear cans. After that I work on developing Smart Bombs for a whole different company and keep the beer a top secret. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The OP is not accurate to the scientific evidence of man before 4000 years ago anyway. wiki answers has this: From the lay studies I have conducted (readings), the earliest sign of civilization were found in the excavating of the village at Konya in Turkey. With an estimated population of 5-8000, scientific dating points to 7500-9000 BC. Interesting also, is the discovery only 100 miles north of Konya (12 miles into the Black Sea) near Sinope (also in Turkey). An underwater small village was discovered in 1999. It is dated 7500-8500 BC (both of these before the great flood). I persoanlly have faith in extensive findings such as these that are literal establishings and reference points in history. When dealing with isolated "findings" such as "Lucy" bones, the argument gets weaker and weaker til disintigration. The missing link is the same as it always has been....a "tweener" that has never been discovered. Heres another one: Science News Share Blog Cite Print Email BookmarkNew Evidence Puts Man In North America 50,000 Years Ago ScienceDaily (Nov. 18, 2004) — Radiocarbon tests of carbonized plant remains where artifacts were unearthed last May along the Savannah River in Allendale County by University of South Carolina archaeologist Dr. Albert Goodyear indicate that the sediments containing these artifacts are at least 50,000 years old, meaning that humans inhabited North American long before the last ice age. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- See also: Fossils & Ruins Fossils Ancient Civilizations Lost Treasures Early Climate Cultures Origin of Life Reference The evolution of human intelligence Stone Age Homo antecessor Excavation The findings are significant because they suggest that humans inhabited North America well before the last ice age more than 20,000 years ago, a potentially explosive revelation in American archaeology. Goodyear, who has garnered international attention for his discoveries of tools that pre-date what is believed to be humans' arrival in North America, announced the test results, which were done by the University of California at Irvine Laboratory, Wednesday (Nov .17). "The dates could actually be older," Goodyear says. "Fifty-thousand should be a minimum age since there may be little detectable activity left." The dawn of modern homo sapiens occurred in Africa between 60,000 and 80,000 years ago. Evidence of modern man's migration out of the African continent has been documented in Australia and Central Asia at 50,000 years and in Europe at 40,000 years. The fact that humans could have been in North America at or near the same time is expected to spark debate among archaeologists worldwide, raising new questions on the origin and migration of the human species. "Topper is the oldest radiocarbon dated site in North America," Goodyear says. "However, other early sites in Brazil and Chile, as well as a site in Oklahoma also suggest that humans were in the Western Hemisphere as early as 30,000 years ago to perhaps 60,000." In 1998, Goodyear, nationally known for his research on the ice age PaleoIndian cultures dug below the 13,000-year Clovis level at the Topper site and found unusual stone tools up to a meter deeper. The Topper excavation site is on the bank of the Savannah River on property owned by Clariant Corp., a chemical corporation headquartered near Basel, Switzerland. He recovered numerous stone tool artifacts in soils that were later dated by an outside team of geologists to be 16,000 years old. For five years, Goodyear continued to add artifacts and evidence that a pre-Clovis people existed, slowly eroding the long-held theory by archaeologists that man arrived in North America around 13,000 years ago. Last May, Goodyear dug even deeper to see whether man's existence extended further back in time. Using a backhoe and hand excavations, Goodyear's team dug through the Pleistocene terrace soil, some 4 meters below the ground surface. Goodyear found a number of artifacts similar to the pre-Clovis forms he has excavated in recent years. Then on the last day of the last week of digging, Goodyear's team uncovered a black stain in the soil where artifacts lay, providing him the charcoal needed for radiocarbon dating. Dr. Tom Stafford of Stafford Laboratories in Boulder, Colo., came to Topper and collected charcoal samples for dating. "Three radiocarbon dates were obtained from deep in the terrace at Topper with two dates of 50,300 and 51,700 on burnt plant remains. One modern date related to an intrusion," Stafford says. "The two 50,000 dates indicate that they are at least 50,300 years. The absolute age is not known." The revelation of an even older date for Topper is expected to heighten speculation about when man got to the Western Hemisphere and add to the debate over other pre-Clovis sites in the Eastern United States such as Meadowcroft Rockshelter, Pa., and Cactus Hill, Va. In October 2005, archaeologists will meet in Columbia for a conference on Clovis and the study of earliest Americans. The conference will include a day trip to Topper, which is sure to dominate discussions and presentations at the international gathering. USC's Topper: A Timeline May, 1998 — Dr. Al Goodyear and his team dig up to a meter below the Clovis level and encounter unusual stone tools up to two meters below surface. May 1999 — Team of outside geologists led by Mike Waters, a researcher at Texas A&M, visit Topper site and propose a thorough geological study of locality. May 2000 — Geology study done by consultants; ice age soil confirmed for pre-Clovis artifacts. May 2001 — Geologists revisit Topper and obtain ancient plant remains deep down in the Pleistocene terrace. OSL (optically stimulated luminescence) dates on soils above ice age strata show pre-Clovis is at least older than 14,000. May 2002 — Geologists find new profile showing ancient soil lying between Clovis and pre-Clovis, confirming the age of ice age soils between 16,000 - 20,000 years. May 2003 — Archaeologists continue to excavate pre-Clovis artifacts above the terrace, as well as new, significant Clovis finds. May 2004 — Using backhoe and hand excavations, Goodyear and his team dig deeper, down into the Pleistocene terrace, some 4 meters below the ground surface. Artifacts, similar to pre-Clovis forms excavated in previous years, recovered deep in the terrace. A black stain in the soil provides charcoal for radio carbon dating. November 2004 — Radiocarbon dating report indicates that artifacts excavated from Pleistocene terrace in May were recovered from soil that dates some 50,000 years. The dates imply an even earlier arrival for humans in this hemisphere than previously believed, well before the last ice age. DR. ALBERT C. GOODYEAR III University of South Carolina archaeologist Albert C. Goodyear joined the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology in1974 and has been associated with the Research Division since 1976. He is also the founder and director of the Allendale PaleoIndian Expedition, a program that involves members of the public in helping to excavate PaleoAmerican sites in the central Savannah River Valley of South Carolina. Goodyear earned his bachelor's degree in anthropology from the University of South Florida (1968), his master's degree in anthropology from the University of Arkansas and his doctorate in anthropology from Arizona State University (1976). He is a member of the Society for American Archaeology, the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, the Archaeological Society of South Carolina, and the Florida Anthropological Society. He has served twice as president of the Archaeological Society of South Carolina and is on the editorial board of The Florida Anthropologist and the North American Archaeologist. Goodyear developed his interest in archaeology in the 1960s as a member of the F1orida Anthropological Society and through avocational experiences along Florida's central Gulf Coast. He wrote and published articles about sites and artifacts from that region for The Florida Anthropologist in the late 1960s. His master's thesis on the Brand site, a late PaleoIndian Dalton site in northeast Arkansas, was published in 1974 by the Arkansas Archeological Survey. At Arizona State University, he did field research on Desert Hohokam mountain hunting and gathering sites in the Lower Sonoran desert of Southern Arizona. Goodyear, whose primary research interest has been America's earliest human inhabitants, has focused on the period of the Pleistocene-Holocene transition dating between 12,000 and 9,000 years ago. He has taken a geoarchaeological approach to the search for deeply buried early sites by teaming up with colleagues in geology and soil science. For the past 15 years he has studied early prehistoric sites in Allendale County, S.C., in the central Savannah River Valley. These are stone tool manufacturing sites related to the abundant chert resources that were quarried in this locality. This work has been supported by the National Park Service, the National Geographic Society, the University of South Carolina, the Archaeological Research Trust (SCIAA), the Allendale Research Fund, the Elizabeth Stringfellow Endowment Fund, Sandoz Chemical Corp. and Clariant Corp., the present owner of the site. Goodyear is the author of over 100 articles, reports and books and regularly presents public lectures and professional papers on his PaleoIndian discoveries in South Carolina. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adapted from materials provided by University Of South Carolina. Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats: APA MLA University Of South Carolina (2004, November 18). New Evidence Puts Man In North America DEBBIE SAYS: Konya (Ottoman Turkish: قونیه; also Koniah, Konieh, Konia, and Qunia; historically also known as Iconium (Latin), Greek: Ἰκόνιον Ikónion) is a city in Turkey, on the central plateau of Anatolia. It has a population of 1,412,343 Excavations have shown that the region was inhabited during the Late Copper Age, around 3000 BC. The city came under the influence of the Hittites around 1500 BC. These were overtaken by the Indo-European Sea Peoples around 1200 BC. The Phrygians established their kingdom in central Anatolia in the 8th century BC. Xenophon describes Iconium, as the city was called, as the last city of Phrygia. The region was overwhelmed by Cimmerian invaders c. 690 BC. It was later part of the Persian Empire, until Darius III was defeated by Alexander the Great in 333 BC. Alexander's empire broke up shortly after his death and the town came under the rule of Seleucus I Nicator. During the Hellenistic period the town was ruled by the kings of Pergamon. When Attalus III, the last king of Pergamon, died childless, he bequeathed his empire to Rome. Under the rule of emperor Claudius, the city's name was changed to Claudioconium, and during the rule of emperor Hadrianus to Colonia Aelia Hadriana. 3,000 years no need to go further. Not 7,500 to 9,000 Using your same source wikipedia: Jericho (Arabic أريحا (help·info), ʼArīḥā; Hebrew יְרִיחוֹ (help·info), Standard Yəriḥo Tiberian Yərîḫô / Yərîḥô; Greek Ἱεριχώ) is a town in the West Bank of the Palestinian territories, located within the Jericho Governorate, near the Jordan River. Its name may be derived from the word meaning "moon" in Hebrew and Canaanite, as the city was an early center of worship for lunar deities.[2] Despite the city's long history, Jericho was first mentioned in the Book of Numbers. Jericho is believed to be the oldest continuously-inhabited city of the world,[3] and archaeologists have unearthed the remains of over 20 successive settlements there, dating back to 11,000 years ago (9000 BCE).[4] Jericho has a population of approximately 25,000 Palestinians.[5] The current mayor is Hassan Saleh, a former lawyer. Three separate settlements have existed at or near the current location for more than 11,000 years. The position is on an east-west route north of the Dead Sea. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
OpenWounds
on
Tue 08/12/08 03:13 PM
|
|
I was being satcastic with the 'little naive' thing, just to make sure im not being misunderstood
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
your the youngster not me- suck it up MM, your still able to do it - i have faith in you hahaha OMG! You are an old fart! I was thinking that you were in your 30's judging by your photos on your profile. By the way, I think you ought to put up that picture of you in the pointed hat and long pointed beard. I need to get a new avatar myself. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nope, won't fly, RO.
oops, that wasn't supposed to be funny, but oh, well. the feather, RO, the feather. That is where the leap falls down.
oops, funny, huh? the feather cannot be excused away. sorry, no transition. it cannot be done, batman. just a clue....a wing and a feather not a leap make but flight from one gap to another. oops, another funny.
study it. study the learned conclusions about that transition. It is an impossibility. want another one? get a larvae to a butterfly in the transition of the larvae. it won't occur in the butterfly. it musty occur in the larvae. science cannot produce any evidence of a transition of such a leap. there are more. stop the naivete and believing eveerything you hear because it is convenient. dig, man, dig. oops, another funny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can also see where trilobites may enter the picture as something you might be referring to - out side of that I'm not sure? enlighten me majik man? Will the real Tribologist please stand up.
Actually Tribology is the study of Lubrication, Friction and Wear. Particularly with respect to metals, but can be applied to all materials. I worked for the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA). I worked on designing lubricants for their roller mills so they could make beer cans from thinner sheet metal.
It's true! I'm the one you can blame for those really flimsy bear cans. After that I work on developing Smart Bombs for a whole different company and keep the beer a top secret.
hmmm? i looked it up in the dictionary and it says: tribology One entry found. tribology Main Entry: tri·bol·o·gy Pronunciation: \trī-ˈbä-lə-jē, tri-\ Function: noun Date: 1966 : a study that deals with the "designer fashions", "friction of bodies", wearing goddesses out, and >>>>lubrication of interacting surfaces in relative motion<<<<<<< - ???? (as in earings or tears) — tri·bo·log·i·cal \ˌtrī-bə-ˈlä-ji-kəl, ˌtri-\ adjective — tri·bol·o·gist \trī-ˈbä-lə-jist, tri-\ noun are you sure this isn't another reference to G-??? NOT!!!!!!!!! - 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.
My nose is a Dr. Pepper fountain! While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.
OMG! My sides are hurting! Someone please help me up off the floor.
You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
Here's the Christian "intellectual answer" to your statement Big Jim: Christian: "Well, if we'd quit questioning God we wouldn't even know those kind of statistics!" That's the kind of "logic" they use Big Jim.
Just look the other way! BLIND FAITH BABY! All the way to heaven!   
That's just it! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
your the youngster not me- suck it up MM, your still able to do it - i have faith in you hahaha OMG! You are an old fart! I was thinking that you were in your 30's judging by your photos on your profile. By the way, I think you ought to put up that picture of you in the pointed hat and long pointed beard. I need to get a new avatar myself. make it a majik man abra |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OW: Isn't in a little naive to take everything you read at a literal value? Tribo: no it's >>>alot nieve!!<<< not even the bible can be taken literally, nor can any other info that does not have physical proof. MO Then why do people continually do this? I can understand wanting to believe in something because it brings you comfort or whatever the situation might be but to take all of these stories literally from the bible, it doesn’t seem necessary. Or to attempt to shove it down the throats of others. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you don't get it, do you, Krimsa? You really are missing the point. I apologize. Let me make it simple. If evolution is true, then jesus blood is not significant. Since the blood is the extant of the metaphort of the life and the life in Christ is God himself, and since this whole infantile establishment of sacrificing anything and the shedding of blood has anything to do with explaining the inexplicable on a level incomprehensible at its finest, then the blood is pertinent to the premise of evolution's efficacy. Meaning, if Jesus is just evolved from goo then he is meat with a brain and an idea and played his idea out on the unsuspecting in his community. it's that simple. evolution is an exercise in woerking backwards from that premise. It's that simple. There is no other motive logical enough to impart the outcome of the pursuit from the outset. Deconstructing God, is the hope and aspiration of the proponents of evolution. study every 'if' in every document of that hypothetical charade, as I have and do, and you will find that there are escape clauses in every deduction made and in ever conclusion reached and in every consensus assumed, as long as the 'ifs' are given merit, then the whole charade is applauded as possible. It is not about the dna, at all. who cares? that is another foolish distraction meaning nothing. evolution conjecture is flawed, faulty, incomplete, hypothetical only, and assumptions given to it. It is not fact, truth, or complete. It is a dead end. Darwin died, evolution died, and God is alive. Seek him. 
period. 
How can I seek something that can't be seen? Something that not even the most devout christian can not even prove its existance beyond a shadow of a doubt? As Abra said: Blind Faith all the way!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
beachbum,
not you too? let's look at your post of copy and paste evidence for loopholes shall we?
Using your same source wikipedia: Jericho (Arabic أريحا (help·info), ʼArīḥā; Hebrew יְרִיחוֹ (help·info), Standard Yəriḥo Tiberian Yərîḫô / Yərîḥô; Greek Ἱεριχώ) is a town in the West Bank of the Palestinian territories, located within the Jericho Governorate, near the Jordan River. Its name may be derived from the word meaning "moon" in Hebrew and Canaanite, as the city was an early center of worship for lunar deities.[2] Despite the city's long history, Jericho was first mentioned in the Book of Numbers. Jericho is believed to be the oldest continuously-inhabited city of the world,[3] and archaeologists have unearthed the remains of over 20 successive settlements there, dating back to 11,000 years ago (9000 BCE).[4] Jericho has a population of approximately 25,000 Palestinians.[5] The current mayor is Hassan Saleh, a former lawyer. Three separate settlements have existed at or near the current location for more than 11,000 years. The position is on an east-west route north of the Dead Sea. believed to be? a caveat? a guess? conjecture? of course. and radio carbon dating is completely inept as a means of dating anything credibly. That is widely known and imperically sound as the blinds have proved.
wiki pedia indeed.  a charitable web site doing its best to copy and paste anything and everything and confirming noting as fact or truth.
sloppy. lazy. keep dancing...
join the crowd.....
dance kiddies, dance.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jenniebean brings forth what she believes is evidence as evolution but i disagree, if the animal had brought forth a goat or a monkey or some other animal rather than one which still quite closely resembles its ancestry, then that would be a proof beyond a doubt. But a horse and a mule bringing forth a kind that much resembles its parents not.
I don't care what the jump is - only that it can be shown now at present time to be such. That i have not been able to deduce from any such as i have read or seen on so far. Do you have proof of such? A clear line of man evolving from apes that had evolved from lemurs or dogs or cats or fish or less than this? just asking.? I brought forth the story of the Mule who gave birth because Feralcat said that all she wanted one ONE NEW ANIMAL. Now the mule itself is not a new animal as it has been produced for years by crossing a horse with a donkey which cannot reproduce. Hence a mule is not a species of its own right. BUT a mule who gives birth to a foal is a different story. It is still a mule, and the foal may still be a mule, but it proves that SOMETHING different evolved to allow that mule to now procreate its own kind within its own kind. I had heard for years that there was no way a mule could give birth. Unless this is some kind of hoax, that has been proven wrong or else some kind of evolution is taking place. JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Big_Jim
on
Tue 08/12/08 03:35 PM
|
|
Let's get a new spin on things, shall we? A little bit of mix and match... Maybe everyone will be happy.....?
Christians say that god created man in its image right? Ok then. Science states that man evolved from, well, monkeys. Does that mean waaaay back god looked like a monkey?? I find that idea very plausable. Everyone satisfied now? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
feralcatlady
on
Tue 08/12/08 03:38 PM
|
|
clearly you can go to any museum and see bones.....but the carbon dating is not accurate.....again refer to samples that were dead for 50 years that they claimed much older.....and even the seal that had just died......so please.......it is real simple that the cardon14 dating is not proof positive.....there are just to many holes in that theory....sorry.... But that's already been refuted Feral. That's not how the science is done. The dating isn't performed on the bones themselves, the dating is accomplished by dating the sediment in which the bones were fossilized. You just don't understand the technology of the process that is used to determine these things. Besides the carbon dating is only one of a myriad of scientific observations that has led to these conclusions. It doesn't all rest on carbon dating. That's an erroneous assumption to begin with. There are many other reasons. For example, scientist have even been able to determine what dinosaurs had eaten by examining the remains of fossilized stool, etc. No one has ever found human bones in fossilized dinosaur stool. Yet if dinosaurs lived side-by-side with humans you can rest assured that humans would have been on the dinosaur's menu. At least on the menus of the ones that were omnivores. There would also be no way to explain why dinosaurs disappeared and man did not. Anything that would have destroyed all the dinosaurs most certainly would have destroyed man too. You not just talking about carbon dating here. You're talking about a complete whole new theory. You'd need to explain all this stuff in a whole new theory if you want to reject science. Just claiming that carbon dating might not be dependable isn't enough to blow away the whole collective picture. These arguments were made decades ago, and the scientific community has long since shown that they are non-credible arguments. In fact, if you want to speak about dinosaurs, the very argument that carbon dating isn't trustworthy enough to be considered 'proof' of the age of things, is itself a 'dinosaur argument' figuratively speaking. Finally, if what you'd like to believe were actually true in ancient biblical times, then dinosaurs would have been mentioned in the bible in a major way. Not merely in an obscure passage in Job that also refers to a fire-breathing beast. The mention of a fire-breathing best is more in line with mythology than with dinosaurs. RADIOMETRIC DATING AND THE FANTASY WORLD OF EVOLUTIONISTS. HOW EVOLUTIONISTS TAKE US BACK MILLIONS OF YEARS INTO THEIR FANTASY WORLD WHAT IS THE TRUE AGE OF THE EARTH? RADIOMETRIC DATING AND THE AGE OF THE EARTH. ALL IS NOT WHAT IT SEEMS! How many times do you hear on television or read in the newspapers that dinosaurs died out 60 million years ago? That this particular rock is 20 millions years old? You can be forgiven for believing them because they sound so convincing. They talk as if it was a proven fact - but it isn't! Quite the reverse. We'll talk about dinosaurs later but for now let's look at methods of dating. WE CAN CALCULATE THE EARTH'S AGE BY THE URANIUM-THORIUM-LEAD METHOD. The radio isotopes of uranium and thorium, found in some of the earth's rocks decay and they emit alpha particles, that are helium-4 nuclei. As these slow down they pick up electrons to form helium-4 atoms that find their way into the earth's atmosphere. This rate of helium-4 released into the atmosphere has been calculated by Henry Faul in his book; "Nuclear Geology". He says it has taken just over 11,000 years for this amount of helium-4 to be produced from the decay of the uranium and thorium that is in the earth's crust. If the earth was created with some helium-4 already present (a reasonable assumption!) then the age of the earth will be much less - agreed? WHAT THE INBALANCE OF RADIO CARBON TELLS US ABOUT THE AGE OF THE EARTH. "Pre-history and Earth Models", shows there is an inbalance of radio carbon showing the earth cannot be more than 10,500 years old. In the upper atmosphere, tells us, nitrogen is continually being bombarded by neutrons formed by cosmic radiation. The energy transmuted by these high energy nuclear reactions into carbon-14, a radioactive form of carbon also called radiocarbon. Newly formed, this combines with oxygen in the air to form carbon dioxide which diffuses through the atmosphere and is assimilated by plants during photosynthesis[16]. Animals take up this radiocarbon through the food chain. When a plant of animal dies it is unable to take up further radiocarbon and the amount that is present diminishes due to radioactive decay. If the earth was older than 100,000 years the rate of reproduction of radiocarbon in the upper atmosphere would be equal to it's rate of disappearance from the biosphere[17] due to radioactive decay. These rates are not equal. There is an inbalance between the rate of formulation of the radiocarbon and it's rate of disappearance from the biosphere. This means the earth cannot be that old. Evolutionists fantasy world: Numerous geochronometers (clocks) have been used to measure the age of the earth but there are at least two requirements for any clock. First, we must assume the clock has been running at the same rate throughout history. Remember we talked about the theory of uniformitarianism, that the rate things have happened have been constant from the beginning. Secondly, how tightly was the clock wound in the first place. Was there any cosmic dust present before the clock was wound up? A creationists would dispute both these assumptions. Evolutionists are assuming uniformitarianism applies - they're assuming no cosmic dust was present at the start. These are two very big assumptions and we creationists could end our argument here because their assumptions have no basis in fact - but we won't, we'll expose a bit more. "ASS/U/ME". "You see,"the word tells you the result of doing so - it makes an ASS of U and ME!" This is just what is happening to these evolutionists! Radiometric dating gives vastly different values. They vary by millions upon millions of years but they don't publish these figures in case evolution is seen for what it is - fantasy. I list one or two examples here:- Sea salt - 50 to 90 million years. Helium gas in the atmosphere - 26 million years. Meteorites from their helium content - 60 million years but using the Potassium-Argon method - a staggering 4,600 million years! "1470 Man" - 220 million years and 2,600,000 years. "Nut Cracker Man" - 1,750,000 years but the but material from the same stratum only 1,000 years! Moon rock dated 5.4 billion years (more than the estimated age of the moon) and 28.1 billion years (half as old again as their greatest estimated age of the universe!) Recently erupted rocks dated 22 million years. Hair on a mammoth 26,000 years yet the peat in which it was preserved only 5,600 years. Living snails dated 27,000 years old using carbon 14. Let's go back to school Atoms of elements each consist of a nucleus containing protons (positively charged) and neutron (no charge) surrounded by electrons (negatively charged). The number of protons equals the number of electrons and the whole is rather like a miniature solar system. The number of electrons governs the reactivity of the element. Elements can exist in the form of isotopes, characterised by the same number of protons and electrons as the parent element but having a different number of neutrons, thus the mass number varies. The parent and isotope have similar chemical properties. Many isotopes decay. Actually they are converted to other elements and in so doing they radiate alpha-particles, beta-rays, or gamma-rays, which can be measured. A decay curve can be drawn for any isotope showing that after it's "half life", 50% of the isotope has been lost and after a further equal time, half of the remainder and so on. The "half-lives" of some of these isotopes used for radiometric dating are: Tritium 12.3 years, 14 Carbon 5,730 years, 40 Potassium 1,300 million years, 238Uranium 4,510 million years. 40Potassium and 238Uranium are found in rocks. We are now getting to the point. Means of dating if: 1. The half life is known and has been constant throughout time. 2. The amount of radioactivity in the sample is measured. 3. The amount of the product present is known. 4. The initial amount of the radioactive substance is determined (i.e., the amount present immediately after crystallisation of the material.) item 4 is impossible to arrive at because we cannot go back in time to analyze the material concerned. This renders the whole dating process unreliable. There is a great deal of evidence to show that the half lives of isotopes have not been constant in the past. "Most people think that the amount of cosmic radiation has been constant for thousands of years but this is not true." There is no guarantee that the half life will remain constant in a rock that is open to the elements. He also expresses doubt in his writings that the initial amount of radioactive material and the amount of decay product are as assumed. Doubt about the reliability of the Uranium-Thorium-Lead method. Earlier we discussed this view, this method has been used since 1907 but now is being superseded by the Potassium-Argon method. "It depends on the decay of the 238 Uranium isotope to give eventually lead and helium. It is not known if part of the product leads were produced by some other method, apart from radioactive decay and...that some of the lead isotopes may have been present initially - no one knows." He also goes on to explain that helium, being a light gas, can escape readily from the rocks into the atmosphere and that 238Uranium can be leached out of rocks, even granite. He says that 10,000 to 50,000 tons of uranium are washed into the sea annually. If a mineral was found to contain a certain amount of the initial isotope 238Uranium which had in fact been depleted by weathering AND decay, the mineral would appear older by an enormous and indeterminate amount. The same applies if the product helium were being measured. CAN YOU SEE HOW UNRELIABLE THE WHOLE BUSINESS IS? POTASSIUM-ARGON METHOD. This is the method seen to be more reliable and used more recently. The isotope 40Potassium changes into 40Argon(11%) and 40Calcium(89%). As you can see two products have been formed, a minor and a major, the so called "branching ratio". This has not been measured with any certainty and the value used can alter the age value of the mineral concerned by a large amount. The isotope of calcium is not useful to measure, as calcium is so common in rocks. 40Argon is always used for age determination. Here there are many problems: 1. The amount of 40Argon in the earth's atmosphere is 100 times too high for it to have been produced by radioactive decay of 40Potassium even if 4,500 million years are invoked! Therefore, much of this must have been there initially which is what Creationists say. I heard on BBC television some time ago, an evolutionist scientist saying as there is too much 40Argon in the atmosphere. He said the general feeling is that the universe must be older than they thought. It must be "10 billion years old or even 15 billion". This is an amazing statement and the gullible public just accept it. It's "think of a number time". Why not 20 or 30 billion years if that fits the evolutionist's fantasies? They've made up their minds that evolution is a fact so they don't have to believe in God and they will say anything to convince people. WHEN I WENT TO SCHOOL THE WORD "SCIENCE" MEANT "KNOWLEDGE" NOT "FANTASY". 2. 40Argon defuses easily from rocks, depending on the porosity of the surface and prevailing pressure. Rocks deeper in the earth's crust where pressure is higher, will lose 40Argon to rocks nearer the surface where pressure is lower. It will also be lost to different degrees from different types of minerals. It does not take a scientists to understand that the rocks at the surface will have a higher 40Argon content than those below - agreed? Guess which rocks are used to determine the age of the earth? - That's right, you're ahead of me! The rocks nearer the surface will suggest a greater age than is accurate. 3. Volcanic rocks have inherited 40Argon from the earth's magma (molten core) in formation. This would suggest a vast age for those that have erupted into the sea. Rocks at the ocean bed near Hawaii were dated 22 million years by the Potassium-Argon method but the lava flow is known to have occurred less than 200 years ago! 4. Potassium is easily washed out of minerals. An iron meteorite lost 80% of it's potassium by running distilled water over it for 4.5 hours. Rocks subject to weathering conditions lose potassium thus indicating that the 40Potassium has had vast ages in which to decay to these very small values. Similar criticisms have been levelled at the Rubidium-Strontium method by many writers but space does not permit a detailed discussion here. The point has already been well made. "ZINANTHROPUS BOSEII" (Nutcracker Man to you and I.) Mentioned earlier he was dated by the Potassium-Argon method but not by dating the bones themselves as is generally believed, but by dating the rock stratum in which the remains were found. It gives 1.75 million years for the stratum above, 1.5 million years for the stratum below and for the layer of basalt below that as 1 million years or less. If the evolutionists are right, as they claim, the ages are the wrong way around as the lower stratum should be the older. However, what an enormous variation in ages by the same method. Creationists would dispute ages anything like this, of course but to be 750,000 years out by there own standards shows how unreliable the system is. WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED SO FAR: According to the laws of science, evolution cannot possibly have taken place. Evolution is mathematical nonsense. Evolution is only a belief peddled as science when it is only atheistic propaganda. The Bible said the earth is a ball hanging in space when others said it was flat. The earth's magnetic field proves it is only thousands of years old. Theories on how the moon came into being cannot possibly have happened. The moon is only a few thousand years old - proved by lunar dust. Comets prove the universe is only a few thousand years old. Globular clusters prove the universe to be young. Spiral galaxies prove the earth to be young. Galaxy clusters prove the earth to be young. The earth's rotation proves the earth is only a few thousand years old. Sediment in the oceans prove the earth to be only a few thousand years old. Radiometric dating is grossly inaccurate. Various dating methods are shown to be wildly inaccurate. Will answer the rest of this one after I eat.....giggle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's present opinion as fact! Yay!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jenniebean brings forth what she believes is evidence as evolution but i disagree, if the animal had brought forth a goat or a monkey or some other animal rather than one which still quite closely resembles its ancestry, then that would be a proof beyond a doubt. But a horse and a mule bringing forth a kind that much resembles its parents not.
I don't care what the jump is - only that it can be shown now at present time to be such. That i have not been able to deduce from any such as i have read or seen on so far. Do you have proof of such? A clear line of man evolving from apes that had evolved from lemurs or dogs or cats or fish or less than this? just asking.? I brought forth the story of the Mule who gave birth because Feralcat said that all she wanted one ONE NEW ANIMAL. Now the mule itself is not a new animal as it has been produced for years by crossing a horse with a donkey which cannot reproduce. Hence a mule is not a species of its own right. BUT a mule who gives birth to a foal is a different story. It is still a mule, and the foal may still be a mule, but it proves that SOMETHING different evolved to allow that mule to now procreate its own kind within its own kind. I had heard for years that there was no way a mule could give birth. Unless this is some kind of hoax, that has been proven wrong or else some kind of evolution is taking place. JB sorry goddess, wasn't trying to make light of your proof, but what i meant is i want to see clear unadultrated evidence of a bird turning into a monkey or something that is along those lines. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's present opinion as fact! Yay!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
clearly you can go to any museum and see bones.....but the carbon dating is not accurate.....again refer to samples that were dead for 50 years that they claimed much older.....and even the seal that had just died......so please.......it is real simple that the cardon14 dating is not proof positive.....there are just to many holes in that theory....sorry.... But that's already been refuted Feral. That's not how the science is done. The dating isn't performed on the bones themselves, the dating is accomplished by dating the sediment in which the bones were fossilized. You just don't understand the technology of the process that is used to determine these things. Besides the carbon dating is only one of a myriad of scientific observations that has led to these conclusions. It doesn't all rest on carbon dating. That's an erroneous assumption to begin with. There are many other reasons. For example, scientist have even been able to determine what dinosaurs had eaten by examining the remains of fossilized stool, etc. No one has ever found human bones in fossilized dinosaur stool. Yet if dinosaurs lived side-by-side with humans you can rest assured that humans would have been on the dinosaur's menu. At least on the menus of the ones that were omnivores. There would also be no way to explain why dinosaurs disappeared and man did not. Anything that would have destroyed all the dinosaurs most certainly would have destroyed man too. You not just talking about carbon dating here. You're talking about a complete whole new theory. You'd need to explain all this stuff in a whole new theory if you want to reject science. Just claiming that carbon dating might not be dependable isn't enough to blow away the whole collective picture. These arguments were made decades ago, and the scientific community has long since shown that they are non-credible arguments. In fact, if you want to speak about dinosaurs, the very argument that carbon dating isn't trustworthy enough to be considered 'proof' of the age of things, is itself a 'dinosaur argument' figuratively speaking. Finally, if what you'd like to believe were actually true in ancient biblical times, then dinosaurs would have been mentioned in the bible in a major way. Not merely in an obscure passage in Job that also refers to a fire-breathing beast. The mention of a fire-breathing best is more in line with mythology than with dinosaurs. RADIOMETRIC DATING AND THE FANTASY WORLD OF EVOLUTIONISTS. HOW EVOLUTIONISTS TAKE US BACK MILLIONS OF YEARS INTO THEIR FANTASY WORLD WHAT IS THE TRUE AGE OF THE EARTH? RADIOMETRIC DATING AND THE AGE OF THE EARTH. ALL IS NOT WHAT IT SEEMS! How many times do you hear on television or read in the newspapers that dinosaurs died out 60 million years ago? That this particular rock is 20 millions years old? You can be forgiven for believing them because they sound so convincing. They talk as if it was a proven fact - but it isn't! Quite the reverse. We'll talk about dinosaurs later but for now let's look at methods of dating. WE CAN CALCULATE THE EARTH'S AGE BY THE URANIUM-THORIUM-LEAD METHOD. The radio isotopes of uranium and thorium, found in some of the earth's rocks decay and they emit alpha particles, that are helium-4 nuclei. As these slow down they pick up electrons to form helium-4 atoms that find their way into the earth's atmosphere. This rate of helium-4 released into the atmosphere has been calculated by Henry Faul in his book; "Nuclear Geology". He says it has taken just over 11,000 years for this amount of helium-4 to be produced from the decay of the uranium and thorium that is in the earth's crust. If the earth was created with some helium-4 already present (a reasonable assumption!) then the age of the earth will be much less - agreed? WHAT THE INBALANCE OF RADIO CARBON TELLS US ABOUT THE AGE OF THE EARTH. "Pre-history and Earth Models", shows there is an inbalance of radio carbon showing the earth cannot be more than 10,500 years old. In the upper atmosphere, tells us, nitrogen is continually being bombarded by neutrons formed by cosmic radiation. The energy transmuted by these high energy nuclear reactions into carbon-14, a radioactive form of carbon also called radiocarbon. Newly formed, this combines with oxygen in the air to form carbon dioxide which diffuses through the atmosphere and is assimilated by plants during photosynthesis[16]. Animals take up this radiocarbon through the food chain. When a plant of animal dies it is unable to take up further radiocarbon and the amount that is present diminishes due to radioactive decay. If the earth was older than 100,000 years the rate of reproduction of radiocarbon in the upper atmosphere would be equal to it's rate of disappearance from the biosphere[17] due to radioactive decay. These rates are not equal. There is an inbalance between the rate of formulation of the radiocarbon and it's rate of disappearance from the biosphere. This means the earth cannot be that old. Evolutionists fantasy world: Numerous geochronometers (clocks) have been used to measure the age of the earth but there are at least two requirements for any clock. First, we must assume the clock has been running at the same rate throughout history. Remember we talked about the theory of uniformitarianism, that the rate things have happened have been constant from the beginning. Secondly, how tightly was the clock wound in the first place. Was there any cosmic dust present before the clock was wound up? A creationists would dispute both these assumptions. Evolutionists are assuming uniformitarianism applies - they're assuming no cosmic dust was present at the start. These are two very big assumptions and we creationists could end our argument here because their assumptions have no basis in fact - but we won't, we'll expose a bit more. "ASS/U/ME". "You see,"the word tells you the result of doing so - it makes an ASS of U and ME!" This is just what is happening to these evolutionists! Radiometric dating gives vastly different values. They vary by millions upon millions of years but they don't publish these figures in case evolution is seen for what it is - fantasy. I list one or two examples here:- Sea salt - 50 to 90 million years. Helium gas in the atmosphere - 26 million years. Meteorites from their helium content - 60 million years but using the Potassium-Argon method - a staggering 4,600 million years! "1470 Man" - 220 million years and 2,600,000 years. "Nut Cracker Man" - 1,750,000 years but the but material from the same stratum only 1,000 years! Moon rock dated 5.4 billion years (more than the estimated age of the moon) and 28.1 billion years (half as old again as their greatest estimated age of the universe!) Recently erupted rocks dated 22 million years. Hair on a mammoth 26,000 years yet the peat in which it was preserved only 5,600 years. Living snails dated 27,000 years old using carbon 14. Let's go back to school Atoms of elements each consist of a nucleus containing protons (positively charged) and neutron (no charge) surrounded by electrons (negatively charged). The number of protons equals the number of electrons and the whole is rather like a miniature solar system. The number of electrons governs the reactivity of the element. Elements can exist in the form of isotopes, characterised by the same number of protons and electrons as the parent element but having a different number of neutrons, thus the mass number varies. The parent and isotope have similar chemical properties. Many isotopes decay. Actually they are converted to other elements and in so doing they radiate alpha-particles, beta-rays, or gamma-rays, which can be measured. A decay curve can be drawn for any isotope showing that after it's "half life", 50% of the isotope has been lost and after a further equal time, half of the remainder and so on. The "half-lives" of some of these isotopes used for radiometric dating are: Tritium 12.3 years, 14 Carbon 5,730 years, 40 Potassium 1,300 million years, 238Uranium 4,510 million years. 40Potassium and 238Uranium are found in rocks. We are now getting to the point. Means of dating if: 1. The half life is known and has been constant throughout time. 2. The amount of radioactivity in the sample is measured. 3. The amount of the product present is known. 4. The initial amount of the radioactive substance is determined (i.e., the amount present immediately after crystallisation of the material.) item 4 is impossible to arrive at because we cannot go back in time to analyze the material concerned. This renders the whole dating process unreliable. There is a great deal of evidence to show that the half lives of isotopes have not been constant in the past. "Most people think that the amount of cosmic radiation has been constant for thousands of years but this is not true." There is no guarantee that the half life will remain constant in a rock that is open to the elements. He also expresses doubt in his writings that the initial amount of radioactive material and the amount of decay product are as assumed. Doubt about the reliability of the Uranium-Thorium-Lead method. Earlier we discussed this view, this method has been used since 1907 but now is being superseded by the Potassium-Argon method. "It depends on the decay of the 238 Uranium isotope to give eventually lead and helium. It is not known if part of the product leads were produced by some other method, apart from radioactive decay and...that some of the lead isotopes may have been present initially - no one knows." He also goes on to explain that helium, being a light gas, can escape readily from the rocks into the atmosphere and that 238Uranium can be leached out of rocks, even granite. He says that 10,000 to 50,000 tons of uranium are washed into the sea annually. If a mineral was found to contain a certain amount of the initial isotope 238Uranium which had in fact been depleted by weathering AND decay, the mineral would appear older by an enormous and indeterminate amount. The same applies if the product helium were being measured. CAN YOU SEE HOW UNRELIABLE THE WHOLE BUSINESS IS? POTASSIUM-ARGON METHOD. This is the method seen to be more reliable and used more recently. The isotope 40Potassium changes into 40Argon(11%) and 40Calcium(89%). As you can see two products have been formed, a minor and a major, the so called "branching ratio". This has not been measured with any certainty and the value used can alter the age value of the mineral concerned by a large amount. The isotope of calcium is not useful to measure, as calcium is so common in rocks. 40Argon is always used for age determination. Here there are many problems: 1. The amount of 40Argon in the earth's atmosphere is 100 times too high for it to have been produced by radioactive decay of 40Potassium even if 4,500 million years are invoked! Therefore, much of this must have been there initially which is what Creationists say. I heard on BBC television some time ago, an evolutionist scientist saying as there is too much 40Argon in the atmosphere. He said the general feeling is that the universe must be older than they thought. It must be "10 billion years old or even 15 billion". This is an amazing statement and the gullible public just accept it. It's "think of a number time". Why not 20 or 30 billion years if that fits the evolutionist's fantasies? They've made up their minds that evolution is a fact so they don't have to believe in God and they will say anything to convince people. WHEN I WENT TO SCHOOL THE WORD "SCIENCE" MEANT "KNOWLEDGE" NOT "FANTASY". 2. 40Argon defuses easily from rocks, depending on the porosity of the surface and prevailing pressure. Rocks deeper in the earth's crust where pressure is higher, will lose 40Argon to rocks nearer the surface where pressure is lower. It will also be lost to different degrees from different types of minerals. It does not take a scientists to understand that the rocks at the surface will have a higher 40Argon content than those below - agreed? Guess which rocks are used to determine the age of the earth? - That's right, you're ahead of me! The rocks nearer the surface will suggest a greater age than is accurate. 3. Volcanic rocks have inherited 40Argon from the earth's magma (molten core) in formation. This would suggest a vast age for those that have erupted into the sea. Rocks at the ocean bed near Hawaii were dated 22 million years by the Potassium-Argon method but the lava flow is known to have occurred less than 200 years ago! 4. Potassium is easily washed out of minerals. An iron meteorite lost 80% of it's potassium by running distilled water over it for 4.5 hours. Rocks subject to weathering conditions lose potassium thus indicating that the 40Potassium has had vast ages in which to decay to these very small values. Similar criticisms have been levelled at the Rubidium-Strontium method by many writers but space does not permit a detailed discussion here. The point has already been well made. "ZINANTHROPUS BOSEII" (Nutcracker Man to you and I.) Mentioned earlier he was dated by the Potassium-Argon method but not by dating the bones themselves as is generally believed, but by dating the rock stratum in which the remains were found. It gives 1.75 million years for the stratum above, 1.5 million years for the stratum below and for the layer of basalt below that as 1 million years or less. If the evolutionists are right, as they claim, the ages are the wrong way around as the lower stratum should be the older. However, what an enormous variation in ages by the same method. Creationists would dispute ages anything like this, of course but to be 750,000 years out by there own standards shows how unreliable the system is. WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED SO FAR: According to the laws of science, evolution cannot possibly have taken place. Evolution is mathematical nonsense. Evolution is only a belief peddled as science when it is only atheistic propaganda. The Bible said the earth is a ball hanging in space when others said it was flat. The earth's magnetic field proves it is only thousands of years old. Theories on how the moon came into being cannot possibly have happened. The moon is only a few thousand years old - proved by lunar dust. Comets prove the universe is only a few thousand years old. Globular clusters prove the universe to be young. Spiral galaxies prove the earth to be young. Galaxy clusters prove the earth to be young. The earth's rotation proves the earth is only a few thousand years old. Sediment in the oceans prove the earth to be only a few thousand years old. Radiometric dating is grossly inaccurate. Various dating methods are shown to be wildly inaccurate. Will answer the rest of this one after I eat.....giggle. DEB - are you then under the belief that dinosaurs are only at the most let's say, 10 to 12,000 yrs. old? just curious? |
|
|
|
|
