Irreducible complexity

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Radiometric dating is based on assumptions.

False. Its based on very precise measurements. Haha, you are regurgitating long debunked YEC canards. This garbage doesnt play in the real world, sorry.

 

[Wuwei]

Your ignorance is appaling. Allow me to educate you. This confirms what I said.
Assumptions of Radiometric Dating

There are a number of radiometric dating methods that are all quite different. You would have to find fault with all of them. Here are three that involve the weak nuclear force:

Electron capture or positron decay of potassium-40 to argon-40. Potassium-40 has a half-life of 1.3 billion years

Beta decay of rubidium-87 to strontium-87, with a half-life of 50 billion years

Decay of uranium-234 into thorium-230, which has a half-life of about 80,000 years.

The decay rates of those isotopes involve the weak nuclear force and the "fine structure constant", alpha. The constant was measured by examining the spectral lines of distant stars and found to be no different than it is today. So the half life is stable.

The other objections from your reference are related to a closed system.

If you are trying to argue that countless thousands of radiometric dating are wrong due to contamination to the extent that no dating is over 10,000 years old (or whatever creationists believe) then you have to understand that you are being outlandish to put it mildly.

.

 

[alang1216]

Quite untrue, evolution can easily be falsified. The theory predicts that we'll find fossils in a particular sequence. If a fossil is ever found that contradicts the theory, the theory must be false. We've found trillions of fossils and every single one supports the ToE.

If someone found a proven falsifier, say a horse with a dinosaur, that person would be an instantly famous celebrity.

Guess what? They have already discovered fossils that are out of sequence. Thousands of them. So much for that theory. Lol!

Link?

Rock layers may be flipped but that does not mean they are out of sequence. Fossils may burrow into older sediments and get buried there but that does not mean they are out of sequence. Both cases are easily recognized by scientists.

The whole idea of a geologic column is simply ridiculous. Here. Educate yourself. Your ignorance offends me.
Geological Column and Inherent Problems - Creation Studies Institute

You read the website of an anti-science group and you think you know more than trained scientists? That offends me.

You site is replete with errors and straw men. Here's just one example:

The Geological Column concept also relies on the presupposition that long periods of time elapsed between each stratum.
​

That is absurd. Certainly some formations take a long time (e.g., chalk cliffs of Dover are the remains of diatoms that settled to the sea floor over an enormous time period) but some are almost instantaneous (e.g., flood deposits and volcanic eruptions). Both these cases are well documented by science.

It is education and knowledge, not ignorance, that offends you.

CSI has many scientists on staff. So how can you say they are anti science? Evolution is not science. Its a philosophy.

How many peer-reviewed articles have they ever published?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Guess what? They have already discovered fossils that are out of sequence. Thousands of them. So much for that theory. Lol!

Link?

Rock layers may be flipped but that does not mean they are out of sequence. Fossils may burrow into older sediments and get buried there but that does not mean they are out of sequence. Both cases are easily recognized by scientists.

The whole idea of a geologic column is simply ridiculous. Here. Educate yourself. Your ignorance offends me.
Geological Column and Inherent Problems - Creation Studies Institute

You read the website of an anti-science group and you think you know more than trained scientists? That offends me.

You site is replete with errors and straw men. Here's just one example:

The Geological Column concept also relies on the presupposition that long periods of time elapsed between each stratum.
​

That is absurd. Certainly some formations take a long time (e.g., chalk cliffs of Dover are the remains of diatoms that settled to the sea floor over an enormous time period) but some are almost instantaneous (e.g., flood deposits and volcanic eruptions). Both these cases are well documented by science.

It is education and knowledge, not ignorance, that offends you.

CSI has many scientists on staff. So how can you say they are anti science? Evolution is not science. Its a philosophy.

How many peer-reviewed articles have they ever published?

Exactly zero. And he is a liar, anyway...they have no scientists on staff, nor anyone performing science. Which are the same thing.

 

[alang1216]

It is not absurd. Why else do evolutionists use the fossils to date the layer they are found in?

If a geologist already knows the age range of a fossil and he finds that fossil in a rock layer, it is likely that that rock layer was formed within the age range of the fossil. Likewise, if you know the age of a rock layer, it is likely that the fossils in it are of that same age.

I guess you didn't know that you cant date sedimentary rock layers. that's why they use fossils to date them.

What you mean is that they can't be dated radiometrically. There are many other methods.

 

[james bond]

Other than God did it in seven days, do you have a better idea than evolution?

Well, you lost your moving the minimalist car argument, so you may as well lose your evolution ideas. The chicken came before the egg.

 

[james bond]

If a fossil is ever found that contradicts the theory, the theory must be false.

Haha. it's false then. You were right that it can be falsified tho. There was a horse dragon or horse dinosaur found, so they just added him to the sequence of whatever lol. You also have living fossils to explain or all the other fossils whose age do not fall in the ranges you determine..

 

[james bond]

The geological column works. But the Earth is not stagnant. The crust shifts, mountains rise, and the columns get moved. But not out of sequence.

Post a link showing that fossils are found out of sequence. Your own ignorance is showing here.

Creation scientists think it's evolutionist dogma about the fossil record. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for ID. IOW, it's "faith-based" science. What we find is that the fossil records shows catastrophes which you admitted. However, these catastrophes cause the layers to occur in rapid fashion. Not eons of long-time as you believe.

 

[Magnificat]

The geological column works. But the Earth is not stagnant. The crust shifts, mountains rise, and the columns get moved. But not out of sequence.

Post a link showing that fossils are found out of sequence. Your own ignorance is showing here.

Creation scientists think it's evolutionist dogma about the fossil record. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for ID. IOW, it's "faith-based" science. What we find is that the fossil records shows catastrophes which you admitted. However, these catastrophes cause the layers to occur in rapid fashion. Not eons of long-time as you believe.

Have you ever been to the Grand Canyon? There are several areas where several sedimentary layers are bent? I saw one that was bent 90 degrees! Those layers, which scientists claim took millions of years to form are bent. Rock does not bend. That means ALL of those layers were deposited at the same time. There can be no other explanation. That means that all the fossil bearing layers of the Grand Canyon cannot be millions of years old, and were deposited in a single catastrophic event.

 

[james bond]

I do not consider myself a "leftie". But I do consider people who lie to further their agenda to be nonproductive.

You seem like a balanced person. All I can say is from studying evolution and creation science that only one can be right. I'm NOT arguing ID like Magnificat. Irreducible complexity has been falsified. I can't convince you that the fossil record is a trick based on your "faith-based" beliefs in evolution. It may be due to this is what you were taught. In my case, I'm older so I had to learn it myself and believed in it until I started questioning it around 2007 - 2011 time frame. A lot came out to challenge evolution then. For example, evos think the fossil record shows plants and animals lived together at the same time. This isn't necessarily true if catastrophism prevailed. Then plants and animals were buried in layers in fast time and it just shows they were buried together. So, the debate continues. I don't think we'll be able to reach an agreement on what happened based on fossil layers since we can't agree on the age of the Earth and universe. What I can show is how these layers happened rapidly like with Mt. St. Helens. You'll see the same sedimentary layers.

 

[Magnificat]

I do not consider myself a "leftie". But I do consider people who lie to further their agenda to be nonproductive.

You seem like a balanced person. All I can say is from studying evolution and creation science that only one can be right. I'm NOT arguing ID like Magnificat. Irreducible complexity has been falsified. I can't convince you that the fossil record is a trick based on your "faith-based" beliefs in evolution. It may be due to this is what you were taught. In my case, I'm older so I had to learn it myself and believed in it until I started questioning it around 2007 - 2011 time frame. A lot came out to challenge evolution then. For example, evos think the fossil record shows plants and animals lived together at the same time. This isn't necessarily true if catastrophism prevailed. Then plants and animals were buried in layers in fast time and it just shows they were buried together. So, the debate continues. I don't think we'll be able to reach an agreement on what happened based on fossil layers since we can't agree on the age of the Earth and universe. What I can show is how these layers happened rapidly like with Mt. St. Helens. You'll see the same sedimentary layers.

Its also interesting to note that the geologic column is a single, unbroken expanse of sedimentary rock that spans a large portion of the globe. It actually covers several continents. It is obvious that this layer was deposited during a single catastrophic event. What could have caused it?

 

[WinterBorn]

The geological column works. But the Earth is not stagnant. The crust shifts, mountains rise, and the columns get moved. But not out of sequence.

Post a link showing that fossils are found out of sequence. Your own ignorance is showing here.

Creation scientists think it's evolutionist dogma about the fossil record. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for ID. IOW, it's "faith-based" science. What we find is that the fossil records shows catastrophes which you admitted. However, these catastrophes cause the layers to occur in rapid fashion. Not eons of long-time as you believe.

Have you ever been to the Grand Canyon? There are several areas where several sedimentary layers are bent? I saw one that was bent 90 degrees! Those layers, which scientists claim took millions of years to form are bent. Rock does not bend. That means ALL of those layers were deposited at the same time. There can be no other explanation. That means that all the fossil bearing layers of the Grand Canyon cannot be millions of years old, and were deposited in a single catastrophic event.

Rock does not bend? Who told you that? Layers of rock, subjected to enormous pressures, can certainly bend. And no, it was not deposited in a single catastrophic event. That would not make all those layers.

 

[Hollie]

The geological column works. But the Earth is not stagnant. The crust shifts, mountains rise, and the columns get moved. But not out of sequence.

Post a link showing that fossils are found out of sequence. Your own ignorance is showing here.

Creation scientists think it's evolutionist dogma about the fossil record. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for ID. IOW, it's "faith-based" science. What we find is that the fossil records shows catastrophes which you admitted. However, these catastrophes cause the layers to occur in rapid fashion. Not eons of long-time as you believe.

The ID’iot creation ministries could submit their youtube videos to any of the peer reviewed science journals for critique. But of course they won’t.

There’s a reason why the ID’iot creation ministries do no research and publish in no peer reviewed journals.

 

[Wuwei]

Other than God did it in seven days, do you have a better idea than evolution?

Well, you lost your moving the minimalist car argument, so you may as well lose your evolution ideas. The chicken came before the egg.

Moving this thread to the hobby forum was a joke. You took my sarcasm seriously?

If you want to say the earth is 6,000 years old you will have to dump over 100 years of modern physics including quantum mechanics and refute countless experimental observations with accuracies of 1 part per billion.

.

 

[Hollie]

I do not consider myself a "leftie". But I do consider people who lie to further their agenda to be nonproductive.

You seem like a balanced person. All I can say is from studying evolution and creation science that only one can be right. I'm NOT arguing ID like Magnificat. Irreducible complexity has been falsified. I can't convince you that the fossil record is a trick based on your "faith-based" beliefs in evolution. It may be due to this is what you were taught. In my case, I'm older so I had to learn it myself and believed in it until I started questioning it around 2007 - 2011 time frame. A lot came out to challenge evolution then. For example, evos think the fossil record shows plants and animals lived together at the same time. This isn't necessarily true if catastrophism prevailed. Then plants and animals were buried in layers in fast time and it just shows they were buried together. So, the debate continues. I don't think we'll be able to reach an agreement on what happened based on fossil layers since we can't agree on the age of the Earth and universe. What I can show is how these layers happened rapidly like with Mt. St. Helens. You'll see the same sedimentary layers.

What debate is there? Religo’s don’t debate anything.

Why not show us your “Theory of Supernatural Design” and provide others with the data that ID’iot creationists have to support the theory of supernaturalism?

 

[Hollie]

I do not consider myself a "leftie". But I do consider people who lie to further their agenda to be nonproductive.

You seem like a balanced person. All I can say is from studying evolution and creation science that only one can be right. I'm NOT arguing ID like Magnificat. Irreducible complexity has been falsified. I can't convince you that the fossil record is a trick based on your "faith-based" beliefs in evolution. It may be due to this is what you were taught. In my case, I'm older so I had to learn it myself and believed in it until I started questioning it around 2007 - 2011 time frame. A lot came out to challenge evolution then. For example, evos think the fossil record shows plants and animals lived together at the same time. This isn't necessarily true if catastrophism prevailed. Then plants and animals were buried in layers in fast time and it just shows they were buried together. So, the debate continues. I don't think we'll be able to reach an agreement on what happened based on fossil layers since we can't agree on the age of the Earth and universe. What I can show is how these layers happened rapidly like with Mt. St. Helens. You'll see the same sedimentary layers.

Its also interesting to note that the geologic column is a single, unbroken expanse of sedimentary rock that spans a large portion of the globe. It actually covers several continents. It is obvious that this layer was deposited during a single catastrophic event. What could have caused it?

What could have caused it?

 

[WinterBorn]

I do not consider myself a "leftie". But I do consider people who lie to further their agenda to be nonproductive.

You seem like a balanced person. All I can say is from studying evolution and creation science that only one can be right. I'm NOT arguing ID like Magnificat. Irreducible complexity has been falsified. I can't convince you that the fossil record is a trick based on your "faith-based" beliefs in evolution. It may be due to this is what you were taught. In my case, I'm older so I had to learn it myself and believed in it until I started questioning it around 2007 - 2011 time frame. A lot came out to challenge evolution then. For example, evos think the fossil record shows plants and animals lived together at the same time. This isn't necessarily true if catastrophism prevailed. Then plants and animals were buried in layers in fast time and it just shows they were buried together. So, the debate continues. I don't think we'll be able to reach an agreement on what happened based on fossil layers since we can't agree on the age of the Earth and universe. What I can show is how these layers happened rapidly like with Mt. St. Helens. You'll see the same sedimentary layers.

Its also interesting to note that the geologic column is a single, unbroken expanse of sedimentary rock that spans a large portion of the globe. It actually covers several continents. It is obvious that this layer was deposited during a single catastrophic event. What could have caused it?

What could have caused it?

I'd rather see how he thinks this single layer of sedimentary rock covers a large portion of the globe.

 

[james bond]

Moving this thread to the hobby forum was a joke. You took my sarcasm seriously?

If you want to say the earth is 6,000 years old you will have to dump over 100 years of modern physics including quantum mechanics and refute countless experimental observations with accuracies of 1 part per billion.

Haha. Don't backtrack now. You did not use green font for sarcasm nor understand what the minimalist car represented -- destruction of evolution by the IDers. That said, it's not creation science, Christianity, nor my argument. I was just trying to clarify.

Yes, you and I have our differences between fast time and catastrophism and long time and uniformitarianism, but who knows what happens in hundreds of millions or billions of years? I have a good idea, but you won't believe our Earth and universe won't be around anymore. That said, why don't you explain how I will "have to dump over 100 years of modern physics including quantum mechanics and refute countless experimental observations with accuracies of 1 part per billion." WTF are you talking about lol?

 

[james bond]

I'd rather see how he thinks this single layer of sedimentary rock covers a large portion of the globe.

The simple answer is Noah's Flood.

The Bible theory Scripture specifies that the time elapsed for all of creation and earth history has not been very long. Our geology confirms it.

And no green font.

 

[WinterBorn]

I'd rather see how he thinks this single layer of sedimentary rock covers a large portion of the globe.

The simple answer is Noah's Flood.

The Bible theory Scripture specifies that the time elapsed for all of creation and earth history has not been very long. Our geology confirms it.

And no green font.

Noah's Flood?

First of all, that a sedimentary layer is covering most of the globe (oceans included) has not been shown.

Second of all, if it exists and depending on where the layer is in the strata, it would offer as much proof of a long wet period in geological time.