Who does this and how do you know that is their motivation?
Radioactive dating
Discussion in 'Creation vs. Evolution' started by church mouse guy, May 6, 2018.
Page 2 of 3
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
It doesn't have to be war.
Faith versus the scientific imperatives (Hypothesis,Theory, Law).
Many atheist/agnostic folks are now accepting the theory of intelligent design (ID).
Do a google.
Here is a good place of common ground to have discussions with your friends of the other "tribe".
Irreducible Complexity (IC) - research it, scan the web for "examples of irreducible complexity"
you don't need to be a brain surgeon (but it would help).
then present it to your other tribe friends. -
Gold Dragon Well-Known Member
Their twisting of the truth is very easy to see if you look at their sources. They state their motivations on their websites.
The Big Bang
AIG states right off the bat that the Big Bang is based on naturalism and secularism when lemaitre, the discoverer of the Big Bang was a catholic who believes the opposite. -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Gold Dragon Well-Known Member
-
Gold Dragon Well-Known Member
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Gold Dragon Well-Known Member
Tribe (Internet) - Wikipedia
The concept of tribalism is loyalty to the tribe. Loyalty is a good thing that builds trust in communities and allows them to work together to achieve more than they could alone. However it can also be a bad thing in how it perceives and treats outsiders. -
Gold Dragon Well-Known Member
Are you saying that they believe the Big Bang Theory is compatible with the Bible? If that is the case then great. That is my view too as well as the view of its originator George's Lemaitre.
However that is not AiG's view as stated on their website. That is the reason they attack the Big Bang Theory. -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
American scientists are under intense pressure to conform. At stake is employment, tenure, and ability to be published. That may explain why Australians have been a little freer to express contrary scientific views. -
Is it scientifically possible for radioactive dating to lead to radar love?
So, what's the source of the statement that studies of the Mt. ST. Helen's eruption showed radioactive dating of 1500 years? -
-
Hello all,
Wow, no scientists here. . .
The speed of light is “slower” in different mediums. It why your glasses work. Basically, the light interacts with the atoms of the medium and the light has to wait for the interaction to complete to continue its journey.
Scientists didn’t try to prove that the speed of light was constant. In trying to find Newton’s Ether, they tried to find the relation of the Earth to this Ether. They repeated the experiment every way possible and only found one result - the speed of light is constant in vacuum.
It was the first fundamental constant measured. What you may not understand is not only is the speed of constant - it has to be constant. If the speed of light changes, everyone dies. Its more catastrophic than that, but I don’t want to get into the details. Space and time will actually bend and warp to keep the speed of light in vacuum constant.
God has set the speed of light and it’s not going to change unless He either performs a “miracle” defying the current laws of his creation or He really wants to mess things up.
Marty -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
On the second question, here is some info of how ten-year-old rocks from Mt. St. Helen's tested millions of years old:
It is clear that radioisotope dating is not the ‘gold standard’ of dating methods, or ‘proof’ for millions of years of Earth history. When the method is tested on rocks of known age, it fails miserably. The lava dome at Mount St Helens is not a million years old! At the time of the test, it was only about 10 years old. In this case we were there—we know! How then can we accept radiometric-dating results on rocks of unknown age? This challenges those who promote the faith of radioisotope dating, especially when it contradicts the clear eyewitness chronology of the Word of God.
Sample Age / millions of years
1 Whole rock 0.35 ± 0.05
2 Feldspar, etc. 0.34 ± 0.06
3 Amphibole, etc. 0.9 ± 0.2
4 Pyroxene, etc. 1.7 ± 0.3
5 Pyroxene 2.8 ± 0.6
Radio-dating in Rubble - creation.com -
-
Did you read my post? I gave you tons of of evidence. I can’t even find your article.
Marty -
The Scientific American article I mentioned is about 20 years old. One of my sons and i subscribed,
I am a pack rat and possibly I have that issue somewhere I'll look on occasion.
Here is another article
Speed of Light May Not Be Constant, Physicists Say -
-
Page 2 of 3