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

Skip to comments.

MEASURABLE 14C IN FOSSILIZED ORGANIC MATERIALS: CONFIRMING THE YOUNG EARTH CREATION-FLOOD MODEL
http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf ^

Posted on 08/11/2003 8:57:56 AM PDT by fishtank

PDF file.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: carbon14; creation; creationism; creationvevolution; evolution; radioisotopes; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 961-962 next last
To: Terriergal
The only problem comes when they actually examine the doctrine of sin and find that death came before sin in evolution, therefore what need is there of salvation, if death (both physical and spiritual) is not a result of sin?

Agree....

It'll really get ya wondering which is right, and then...............

521 posted on 08/13/2003 10:01:23 AM PDT by Elsie (Don't believe every prophecy you hear: especially *** ones........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 504 | View Replies]

To: SengirV
are you going to read what I wrote or insist I was talking about species and not subspecies?
522 posted on 08/13/2003 10:03:03 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
...merely factual or logical criticism and rebuttal shall never be considered "obscene or belittling."

It appears that the 'agreement' is about as good as the ones the US Gov't made with the Indians!

523 posted on 08/13/2003 10:03:04 AM PDT by Elsie (Don't believe every prophecy you hear: especially *** ones........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 506 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
More and more I'm noticing that the 'agreement' will be subject to just as much 'interpretation' as the rules of the forum already are. Only with less definitive retribution for violating them, and more cooks to stir the pot.
524 posted on 08/13/2003 10:04:23 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; Havoc
Thus, a "willing" should never be more harsh with another poster than he would want to be treated himself were the situation reversed.

OK, I take back the 'blowhard'; although I'd rather be called a blowhard than a liberal.

525 posted on 08/13/2003 10:04:51 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 514 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
you have no idea what obstructions may be out there to slow the travel of the light emerging

If something is slowing the speed of light, then the universe is older than we had calculated, not younger.

526 posted on 08/13/2003 10:05:07 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 512 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
However, people who are not signed on to the agreement are subject to the abuse button ...

Uh...

So are the signers...........

527 posted on 08/13/2003 10:05:29 AM PDT by Elsie (Don't believe every prophecy you hear: especially *** ones........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
It'll really get ya wondering which is right, and then...............

You get to the precipice between despair and hope. No one likes to be there. Hope requires that you turn your back on all you know, on your self-sufficiency, on your high image of yourself. That or despair. Who in their natural mind wants to make that choice? Therefore people instinctively avoid going there.

528 posted on 08/13/2003 10:06:17 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 521 | View Replies]

To: Terriergal
I wonder how big they were when first hatched? And how fast they grew? Hm....

I can see it now, Noah sneaking from nesting site to nesting site stealing eggs/young of T-Rex, Allosaurus, Albertosaurus, Velociraptor, etc.. That would be more of a story than sitting in a boat for 40 days.

529 posted on 08/13/2003 10:06:25 AM PDT by SengirV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 488 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
Then while you're telling us all about the extinction of the trilobytes later, I'll sit and chuckle about the coelacanth.

The coelocanths of today are not the same species as the fossil coelocanths that had been thought extinct. They are not even the same genus. Their existence is thus powerful evidence for evolution.

530 posted on 08/13/2003 10:07:09 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 510 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; Havoc
Thus, a "willing" should never be more harsh with another poster than he would want to be treated himself were the situation reversed.

OK, I take back the 'blowhard'; although I'd rather be called a blowhard than a liberal.

531 posted on 08/13/2003 10:07:15 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 514 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
I think I did read that it said those who agree would not hastily hit the abuse button on each other - they would let the *other* side of the argument reprimand their own, or something.
532 posted on 08/13/2003 10:07:27 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 527 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
I'd rather be called a blowhard than a liberal.

You got a great point there! ;-)

533 posted on 08/13/2003 10:08:11 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 531 | View Replies]

To: SengirV
I can see it now, Noah sneaking from nesting site to nesting site stealing eggs/young of T-Rex, Allosaurus, Albertosaurus, Velociraptor, etc.. That would be more of a story than sitting in a boat for 40 days.

Remember how the story says the animals came to him? (no you probably never read it...) If they did that I can't see how much more miraculous it would be to take eggs from a dinosaur nest.

534 posted on 08/13/2003 10:09:24 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies]

To: SengirV
It's also quite possible that many species had been extinct by that time.
535 posted on 08/13/2003 10:11:21 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies]

To: Terriergal
For Young Earth Creationists, the real miracle was required when the animals disembarked in what is now modern Turkey, and the poor duck-billed platypus and Koala had to make it across deserts, ocean straits, and jungles to Australia, in time to be discovered by modern humans - to say nothing of the flightless parrots and kiwis who had to get a further 1000 miles across the Tasman Sea to New Zealand.
536 posted on 08/13/2003 10:17:23 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 534 | View Replies]

To: SengirV
We cannot, therefore, turn down Theology, simply because it does not avoid being poetical. All world views yield poetry to those who believe them by the mere fact of being believed. And nearly all have certain poetical merits whether you believe them or not. This is what we should expect. Man is a poetical animal and touches nothing which he does not adorn.

There are, however, two other lines of thought which might lead us to call Theology a mere poetry, and these I must now consider. In the first place, it certainly contains elements similar to those which we find in many early, and even savage, religions. And those elements in the early religions may now seem to us to be poetical. The question here is rather complicated. We now regard the death and return of Balder[referred to earlier on the page linked to below] as a poetical idea, a myth. We are invited to infer thence that the death and resurrection of Christ is a poetical idea, a myth. But we are not really starting with the datum "Both are poetical" and thence arguing "Therefore both are false". Part of the poetical aroma which hangs about Balder is, I believe, due to the fact that we have already come to disbelieve in him. So that disbelief not poetical experience, is the real starting point of the argument. -- CS Lewis (A somewhat theistic evolutionist)

537 posted on 08/13/2003 10:19:36 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 535 | View Replies]

To: Terriergal
Thank you for your post!

Actually, it is not as fluid as it might first appear. The Language Restraint clause is part of the Guidelines to achieving the first Principle - which is basically a do unto others as you would have then do unto you statement.

To a Fundamentalist Christian like myself, the Principle is like the Great Commandment (Matthew 22:37-40) and the Guidelines are like the Ten Commandments and other parts of the Law and the Prophets.

Thus, the first and most important thing for a complying poster is to make sure whatever he is saying or doing does not go beyond what he would find acceptable in the reverse situation. The second step is to make sure he is not going beyond what is acceptable to all of the willing, i.e. the Guidelines such as Language Restraint.

Again, using the Fundamentalist Christian parallel, the first question is whether what I am about to say or do is out of love of God or my neighbor, and the second question is whether it is acceptable under all the rest of the Law and the Prophets.


538 posted on 08/13/2003 10:19:47 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: SengirV
From the same page:

After that it is hardly worth noticing minor difficulties. Yet these are many and serious. The Bergsonian critique of orthodox Darwinism is not easy to answer. More disquieting still is Professor D. M. S. Watson's defence. "Evolution itself," he wrote, "is accepted by zoologists not because it has been observed to occur or... can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible." Has it come to that? Does the whole vast structure of modern naturalism depend not on positive evidence but simply on an a priori metaphysical prejudice. Was it devised not to get in facts but to keep out God? -- CS Lewis

539 posted on 08/13/2003 10:21:45 AM PDT by Terriergal ("multipass!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 537 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Thank you so very much for recanting the subject word! Indeed, I would not want to be called a liberal either.
540 posted on 08/13/2003 10:22:48 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 531 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 961-962 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