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

To: StolarStorm
You base this upon a geological column. You do not base it upon dating methods such as Carbon 14 or Potassium Argon because both do not work. The dates come from some man's theory and I don't care if you find it absurd, there is ample evidence that the earth is young. If you could get passed the geological column, then maybe you could see this.
329 posted on 08/16/2003 11:00:36 AM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies ]


To: DittoJed2
In order for the earth to be 6000 years old, you would have to invalidate whole branches of knowledge. Are you sure you want to call in question areas of science that have produced real, concrete, and directly observable results? I'm not even talking about geology here.
331 posted on 08/16/2003 11:05:07 AM PDT by StolarStorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies ]

To: DittoJed2
there is ample evidence that the earth is young.

Right... Are you seriously claiming that less than 10000 years ago Western Pennsylvania was a swamp full of cycads and giant amphibians and other coal-age thingies?

It's never too late: Glenn Morton's Story

417 posted on 08/16/2003 6:21:04 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies ]

To: DittoJed2
You base this upon a geological column.

Actually, most evidence for an "old Earth" comes from lines of evidence other than the geologic column.

Just out of curiosity, though, exactly where did you "learn" that the geologic column is somehow the only source of such information? Your reply may be instructive.

You do not base it upon dating methods such as Carbon 14

Of course not, because Carbon-14 dating caps out at around 60,000 years. Did you not now that?

or Potassium Argon because both do not work.

*snicker*. You are invited to present your evidence. Make sure that your "proof" does not consist of the obvious fact that K-Ar dating (or any other dating method) will give incorrect results if used on a clearly inappropriate sample.

The dates come from some man's theory

Yeah, nuclear physics, "just some man's theory"...

Perhaps you could also explain why samples dated by multiple independent methods (up to as many as ten, sometimes), all based on "different men's theories", give DATES THAT AGREE WITH EACH OTHER. What an amazing coincidence, eh?

and I don't care if you find it absurd, there is ample evidence that the earth is young.

Such as?

If you could get passed the geological column, then maybe you could see this.

If you could get off the geologic column, you might find a field where you won't keep making incorrect claims.

463 posted on 08/16/2003 10:08:10 PM PDT by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies ]

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