it is evolution that is not scientific. It is a believe system to explain nature with out God. isotopic dates DO NOT converge on an assumed age of 4.5 billion years for earth. even low-temperature fluid processes can cause open systems in dates. This casts serious doubt on the assumption that isotopic systems could remain closed for millions of years. fission--track (FT) dates, most of which are "too young", unambiguously interpreted in terms of annealing caused by geologic heating events, or are such presumed events invented as an ad hoc basis precisely because the dates are "too young'. Your acclamations are incorrect.
"..So "young earth" has no scientific existance. It exists only in the minds of certain theologians who see it as an essential prop for their religious convictions...."
You make false assumptions with these claims. Science has confirmed the Biblical accounts much better than evolution. You can choose not to accept that, I am sorry, you seem very intelligent.
Global warming is a Hoax (man-made) You may cling to your evolutionary beliefs. And I'll stick with mine.
Since we will get no where, if each deny the other, we will stop. You may if you insist, have the last word.
Thank You for the opportunity to discuss these things.
But I have presented only facts, which you chose to ignore or deny.
kimtom:: "it is evolution that is not scientific.
It is a believe system to explain nature with out God."
Of course -- that is the very definition of the word "science" -- natural explanations for natural processes.
Science by definition, indeed by scientific law does not deal with the Supernatural.
It can't, it's not permitted to assume Divine intervention into any natural occurrence.
So once you go beyond the natural realm, then you are beyond science and into some other branch of philosophy -- be it metaphysics or theology, whatever.
These are not matters of my opinion or yours, but matters of fact and definitions of words.
kimtom:: "isotopic dates DO NOT converge on an assumed age of 4.5 billion years for earth."
Most, isotopes have half-lives too short to measure back 4.5 billion years.
However, according to these sources:
Comparing the mass and luminosity of the Sun to the magnitudes of other stars, it appears that the solar system cannot be much older than those rocks.
Ca-Al-rich inclusions (inclusions rich in calcium and aluminium) – the oldest known solid constituents within meteorites that are formed within the solar system – are 4.567 billion years old,[8][9] giving an age for the solar system and an upper limit for the age of Earth."
kimtom:: "even low-temperature fluid processes can cause open systems in dates.
This casts serious doubt on the assumption that isotopic systems could remain closed for millions of years..."
Sure, doubtless some radio-metric samples were somehow "contaminated" over millions of years, but not all -- and only a few have to give truly accurate results to provide scientific evidence of the earth's overall age.
So the burden of scientific proof is on those who claim a "young earth" hypothesis, and no such "proof" has ever been forthcoming.
kimtom:: "fission--track (FT) dates, most of which are "too young", unambiguously interpreted in terms of annealing caused by geologic heating events..."
"Too young" for what, exactly?
All long-period radio-metric dating begins with the last time of geologic heating and annealing.
That's what sets radio-metric "clocks" to "midnight" and starts the countdown to today.
If, for example, some isotope has a half-life of a million years, and is found to be 3/4 converted, that means the most recent geological heating happened two million years ago.
That's how it works.
kimtom:: "You make false assumptions with these claims.
Science has confirmed the Biblical accounts much better than evolution.
You can choose not to accept that, I am sorry, you seem very intelligent."
I make no "false assumptions", only report to you what real scientists say about real science.
You are free, of course, to accept or reject whatever you wish, but you can't honestly do so in the name of science, because that is not who you speak for.
You speak for your religious convictions, which have nothing to do with real science.
kimtom:: "Global warming is a Hoax (man-made)"
Actually, global warming -- natural warming & cooling -- is a fact, which happens daily, yearly and over thousands of years.
The hoax is political agendas which claim that humans (especially Americans) are somehow now responsible for every storm or drought that happens to inconvenience somebody somewhere in the world.
That is nonsense, and hopefully real scientists will eventually prevail with the real truth of the matter.
But it's got to be hard when governments are paying you to tell them what they want to hear...
kimtom:: "Thank You for the opportunity to discuss these things."
You're welcome, and thank you.