Magus55

Kinda like macroevolution, the Earth being billions of years old, and the Big Bang. Oh thats right, you base all your evidence on assumptions and presuppostions. Of course the earth is billions of years old, because radiometric dating HAS to be correct.

missus_gumby

Magus, that is so disingenuous. Why? Because you didn't address the second, informative part of Mageth's post! And of course you introduced non-related material to deliberately confuse the issue.

Martin

lpetrich

Magus55, what "assumptions and presuppositions" do you think that we are guilty of believing in? And which ones do you yourself believe in?

And, Magus55, I suggest that you give us at least one reason why radioisotope dating is to be considered unreliable. You don't have to come up with 10 or 20 reasons. One would be enough.

Also, the Bible tells us that Joshua told the Sun to stop moving, and not the Earth.

Back to the main subject, the Earth's sedimentary rocks have numerous layers of igneous rock in them, layers which formed from lava flows, volcanic-ash falls, and the like. These can be dated by radiometric-dating techniques, and the dates come out to be in the order expected.

Now if the Earth's sedimentary rocks had been laid down by Noah's Flood, how did those igneous rocks get in between the Flood's laid-down sediments, and how did those igneous rocks come to have the "right" ages?

And why are fossils so neatly zoned? Most fossil species inhabit only very small subsets of the geological column -- even though they may not differ much from many other species.

And why did none of the trilobites crawl to the Mesozoic or Cenozoic zones -- or succeed in surviving the Flood?

Coragyps

Trilobites were very, very sinful. They wouldn't stop eating creatures without scales. Didn't you know that?

MrDarwin

And yet oddly enough, geologists and other scientists concluded that the earth was many millions of years old several decades before the advent of radiometric dating. Their rejection of a 6,000 year old earth had nothing whatsoever to do with radiometric dating.

Hmmm, perhaps radiometric dating has merely confirmed the conclusions that were based on other lines of evidence entirely. Hey, that sounds an awful lot like how science works--develop a hypothesis based on evidence, then test it to see if it is supported or falsified by other evidence.

Spenser

LOL!!! Another good one. You should do a live show...

OK to destroy your 6000-10,000 year old Earth without radiocarbon dating.

The Green River Shale: The Rock That Killed God :notworthy

-Frank Zindler
Go Here To See The Source

Tada! The varves are ANNUAL DEPOSITS , meaning a new sedimentary layer is deposited each year. There are 6 MILLION of them, completely destroying the concept of a 6000-10,000 year old world without radiometric dating. Physical evidence of a much older world. One can go back each and every year and see a new layer, proof that this happens annually. Sorry Magus, you have a large hole to dig yourself out of...

Spaz

But you're assuming that the varves have been constant! How do you know, you weren't there! God was there and in this book it says that god says that he created the earth and stuff so it's the real truth, I don't even know why you people hang on to these absurd scientific theories, they're far too complicated for a complicated world, something this complicated must've been created very simply by something more complicated that didn't need to be created, c'mon! :banghead:

Spenser

I think neither Magus nor Noah have anyhting to say...

Spenser

Somehow I knew creationists would flee from this one...

Rhaedas

It's only been a few weeks...it takes time to compile all the biblical facts together into a convincing document.