Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

More Fluctuations Found in Isotopic Clocks
Institute for Creation Research ^ | 8-17-2012 | Brian Thomas

Posted on 08/17/2012 11:21:22 AM PDT by fishtank

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-205 next last
To: Forrestfire
So does that mean Mick Jagger is even older than we thought?

Has anyone dated Mick recently?

5.56mm

61 posted on 08/17/2012 7:28:59 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

Freedom of Religion is more about freedom than Religion.

The practical effect was to establish a Country that was not “told” by their Gov’t what religion they must practice.

That is it.

Individuals are to be free to practice whatever religion they wish.

It made no statement about which region is correct, and yes, some folks will and do have “incorrect” religions.

I’m willing in a free society to explore, as I have, the merits associated with those positions.

It doesn’t in anyway mean that they are correct, just because they exist.

We are back to relativism.


62 posted on 08/17/2012 7:32:00 PM PDT by Zeneta (Why are so many people searching for something that has already found us ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Zeneta
Some religious beliefs are completely illogical, and many others have no historical foundation.

Agreed. But I think religious beliefs that are logical leads people to make logical agruments in support of them. This article is a litany of logical fallacies, and gives me no reason to have faith in the theology behind it.

63 posted on 08/17/2012 7:59:31 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

You may be correct about logical fallacies contained in the referenced article.

But that, in and of itself, doesn’t logically mean that the conclusions are incorrect.

In addition, try to set aside the “faith” behind any argument and simple consider the evidence as a skeptical scientist. Ask a lot of questions, and question ever assumption.

When I say set aside faith, I mean the faith in Darwinism as well.

There are so many problems that it has become unworkable.

Best of luck to you.


64 posted on 08/17/2012 8:29:36 PM PDT by Zeneta (Why are so many people searching for something that has already found us ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
You appear to be starting from a premise that it is impossible for God to have created life with the ability to evolve. This leads to the conclusion that if evolution happened, then there is no God.

I do not accept that premise because I do not assume restrictions on the power of God. Because I do not start from that premise, I arrive at different conclusions.

Just so you know.

I did not grow up with a Biblical or Cristian belief. I was left to my own to decide. I spent the better part of the past 25 years searching.

Ironically, it was Joseph Campbell's work on mythology that started me on this path. It has been a rough and rocky road, however the burning questions about the core of belief kept me going. It was never about what I wanted or needed to feel better. It has been, and is, what foundations a certain system are based on.

And as I said before, if you are sincere, then keep asking questions. DO NOT accept anything on authority alone.

65 posted on 08/17/2012 8:52:41 PM PDT by Zeneta (Why are so many people searching for something that has already found us ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS

Thanks for the ping!


66 posted on 08/17/2012 9:03:30 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
Science fiction must be logical and entertaining else whats the point.. Reality however need not be logical at all.... And I don’t see how time must be linear.

LOLOL! Thank you for sharing your views, dear hosepipe!
67 posted on 08/17/2012 9:05:13 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

More gibberish from the science haters.

What was really reported was that the ratio of U238 to U235 differed by half a percentage point more than was commonly believed.

That means instead of a rock formation being a billion years old, it’s 995 million years old.


68 posted on 08/17/2012 9:19:06 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zeneta
You may be correct about logical fallacies contained in the referenced article.

But that, in and of itself, doesn’t logically mean that the conclusions are incorrect.

No, it does not. I have no problem with the proposition that the conclusions may be true. I do have a problem with the proposition that it must be true, and this proves it. It's implied that the decay rate of Uranium can be accelereated to 4 million times normal by heating it to magma temperatures. If that works you should be able to make an atom bomb with a chunk of Uranium and a blast furnace.

69 posted on 08/17/2012 10:09:19 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Zeneta; Alamo-Girl; betty boop; YHAOS; Whosoever

[ dividing infinity (eternity) by anything gets a little silly. ]

Why?.. its done all the time! (wry smile)..
Eternity is composed of many moments..
which are like strings... in the Quantum moment..

“Quantum Moment Theory”, <<-I may have just coined a phrase.. LoL


70 posted on 08/18/2012 10:28:29 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe; Zeneta
"dividing infinity (eternity)"

What?
Infinity relates to distance.
eternity relates to time.
(doesn't it? )

71 posted on 08/18/2012 10:38:09 AM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
“Quantum Moment Theory”,

I thought I had a "Quantum Moment" the other day, but when I looked, it was different.

72 posted on 08/18/2012 10:48:34 AM PDT by Zeneta (Why are so many people searching for something that has already found us ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS

[ Infinity relates to distance. eternity relates to time.? ]

Good question.. seems to be a speed question..
How far can you go in a specified Quantum Moment..
Humans may never know the answer to this question..


73 posted on 08/18/2012 10:54:21 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Zeneta

LoL...


74 posted on 08/18/2012 10:55:23 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Forrestfire

Ping for later. Thanks.


75 posted on 08/18/2012 11:04:07 AM PDT by huskerjim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
"How far can you go in a specified Quantum Moment..
Humans may never know the answer to this question..
"

Indeed.

So . . . Why ask me? ( ^8 }

76 posted on 08/18/2012 11:39:45 AM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

I find it interesting that you keep making sweeping generalized statements. I personally believe that one of the most wonderful gifts from God is the capability and capacity to evolve. This discovery of non-constant decay rates is quite remarkable. It seems analogous to the discovery of a non-static speed of light. You seem to prefer to attack people like me who believe in a Creator. Our ability to understand even 10% of the mysteries of life, love, and science are impeded by your irrational insistence on presuming that I am stupid, and made worse by liberals that think like you in government. Please think about abandoning your position of haughty arrogance and read the entire Bible; every word. If you remain convinced that you cannot both love and respect science and your Creator, then out of respect you might want to reconsider saying Creationism is akin to ignorance.


77 posted on 08/18/2012 11:39:54 AM PDT by gcraig (Freedom is not free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
You say, “The world is not 6,000 or so years old.”

The actual, countable annual layers in ice cores can be counted back to 20,000 years after which the ice has compacted so much it becomes difficult to distinguish them. However the ice cores themselves are steeper still by miles. But just for the sake of proof, you already have 14,000 years of ice that existed before the people who misinterpret the Bible say the universe existed.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3409400161.html

78 posted on 08/18/2012 12:01:43 PM PDT by Sirius Lee (Goode over evil. Voting for mitt or obie is like throwing your country away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic; Alamo-Girl; YHAOS; Zeneta; fishtank; allmendream; MrB; MHGinTN
I'm sure Isaac Newton took quite a risk publicly disagreeing with radiometric dating.

Are you joking tacticalogic?

When did Isaac Newton ever publicly disagree with radiometric dating? Indeed, how could he have done so, since nobody at the time had ever even heard of "radiation?"

It seems to me that, in Newton's time, knowledge of the atom and atomic behavior hadn't advanced all that much beyond the ancient Greek philosopher Democritus of Abdera (ca. 460 – 370 BC).

79 posted on 08/18/2012 12:37:32 PM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MrB; Alamo-Girl; tacticalogic; allmendream; YHAOS; Zeneta; fishtank; hosepipe
Those cultures (Chinese, Muslims) which didn't have this foundational belief gave up on scientific advancements as futile because they had no expectation of consistency or rationality in nature.

Excellent observation, MrB!!! Thank you!

What evolutionists seem not to wish to explain is how a purely "blind, random process" can generate consistency and rationality in nature.

Another way to put the question (as Plato did): If natural phenomena are solely the products of ceaseless change (i.e., "evolution"), then how can anything ever be anything at all?

tacticalogic, allmendream: Care to take a stab at that question?

It seems the fundamental duality of the Universe consists of that which does not change, and that which is capable of changing. Evolution entirely omits the former from its mindscape....

Which is why Darwin's theory appears to be so irrational to me. FWIW.

80 posted on 08/18/2012 12:56:27 PM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-205 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson