Author Topic: When did 'LIFE" begin? (Science in relation with the Biblical description)  (Read 3312 times)

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Dumbass, C14 doesn't go back as far as the first dates for life. You do stupid very well.
Why the swearing.
And why the straw-man tactic.
Didnt I agree that C14 does up to about 40YK?
Is it not true that on organic matter, C14 is the test?
What other tests do you know of to see whether some piece of charcoal is say +10Yk?
Do you know that in a fossil there are no organic matter to test, and this render only rock ages with Uranium lead tests?
Therefore, I specifically said I will use C14 to prove that that test is correct and can be reconciled with Biblical descriptions of Life at 6YK!
I also said we will go to inorganic fossil dating with a whole range of dating techniques with everything using Uranium to lead, argon potassium etc.
So why all the swearing?
Dont you like what you hear?
Evolution, the religion whereby one believes your children more human, and your parents more ape, than you!

The Human Mind, if it has nothing to do with Evolution...What an incredible entity...
If it does, what a waste!

Atheism, what a wonderful religion, where one believe to believe is erroneous.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No, actually I merely dismiss you from any rational scientific consideration.  As you have no actual knowledge, your theistic opinions are meaningless to me.
And this is something I would never accuse Atheists of.
They are educated, open-minded, listen to other points of view, self searching, not pre judgemental and many more Honrable than these close minded uneducated and idiotic Theists that place posts on this forum where they should be banned from.
Ha!
Evolution, the religion whereby one believes your children more human, and your parents more ape, than you!

The Human Mind, if it has nothing to do with Evolution...What an incredible entity...
If it does, what a waste!

Atheism, what a wonderful religion, where one believe to believe is erroneous.

Offline Cavebear

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why the swearing.
And why the straw-man tactic.
Didnt I agree that C14 does up to about 40YK?
Is it not true that on organic matter, C14 is the test?
What other tests do you know of to see whether some piece of charcoal is say +10Yk?
Do you know that in a fossil there are no organic matter to test, and this render only rock ages with Uranium lead tests?
Therefore, I specifically said I will use C14 to prove that that test is correct and can be reconciled with Biblical descriptions of Life at 6YK!
I also said we will go to inorganic fossil dating with a whole range of dating techniques with everything using Uranium to lead, argon potassium etc.

You are fortunate I am bored with fools.  I would be a LOT meaner otherwise.  So, you are just SO wrong about the age of the Earth and not even worth debating it.
So why all the swearing?
Dont you like what you hear?
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

OK, now that the Atheists here on this forum decided that I will never reconcile C14 or other testing with a 6YK age of life, I will humbly post my claim and show them what science really says. Not what they were forced to listen too, but we will use their scientific experimentation to show them that the Bible is correct and science supports this factor also.

First of all, when we look at C14 / C12 testing, we know that it is done on a piece of organic mater such as charcoal, bone, skin, wood or sonething similar.
In the test of C14/C12, the ratio of C14 is measured in relation to C12 as C14 decays back into N14.

If I look at this test and the methodology, it is impossible to dismiss it as erroneous, as some creationist sites would claim, whilst others agree.
From what I learned is that some Creationists' sites, especially Creation . org, who has some of the worlds' best scientists believing in a Creator,  they produce a case which does carry some merits.

Again, I do net support any Creationist website or organisation, but love the explanations they supply to scientific radio isotope testing.
One of these objections Creation . org placed on the Table is that they believe that the atmosphere was not in equilibrium as claimed by Libby et al.

Allow me to explain. An animal that lived say 4 000 years ago will eat plant-material that contains C14 and this C14 will absorb into the animals body.
When this animal dies, the C14 can not enter into this body anymore, and it will decay into N14 again.
Lets say we find this animals' bones today in a cave, and we do a radio carbon test.
It will not show 4000 Years, but possibly 40 000 years.

Why?
Because of equilibrium if C14 in the atmosphere 4 000 years ago.

The factor to take into consideration is that according to the Biblical description, the atmosphere was completely different 4YK back than what it is now!
First, If the Atmosphere was very high in water containing vapour, as the Bible describes, and as I showed by the use of the Nebular theory, then the N14 would not have had any cosmic radiation at all!
Think about this, If Cosmic radiation did not change N14 into C14, because of a wet atmosphere, then the atmosphere would not have reached equilibrium. If the ration of C14 and C12 was not as we have it today, then the tests will show a very low C14/C12 ratio, because C14 was much less than expected.

This means that C14/C12 testing is 100% accurate, but the interpretation of the Results are in error.

Good, now our Atheists will say I am changing scientific principals by claiming an atmosphere had less C14, but science accepts that the Atmosphere is millions of years old.
the answer to that criticism is as follow, the atmosphere might be millions of years old, but... and this is what I still need any scientist to disprove, ...the Atmosphere was very higher in containing water, and the Biblical description also attests to this theory.

It says 2 things that I realized was something to keep in mind when looking at C14 tests.
There was a global flood, and there was for the first time a rainbow visible after rain.
This is something that I understood as previously explained.
The Atmosphere was wet, and it did not rain before this global flood.
After all this water fell onto the Earth, the atmosphere was clear, and refraction of light is mentioned, the Rainbow!

Great, then something else was mentioned about life on Earth that changed everything I thought I knew when I was still and atheist.
The Bible say people were almost 1 000 years old, but after the flood the ages of humans declined steadily down to 70. I found this very peculiar.

Remembering that what I learned from the Nebular Hypothesis, I now knew not to discard something like this, and went on the investigation again..

Guess what I found.
The evidence that The Bible and Science is 100% in support of each other.

I learned that the Human body ages because of cells that dies.
I learned that the greatest source of this attack on our bodies is Radiation!
I learned that even if one lives on Mars, we will age 10 times faster due to radiation.
I learned that If we can prevent C14 radiation intake, we will age much slower.
I learned that there are already companies that grows crops in tunnels using c14-free atmospheres to produce this products to attain a longer life.

Now, how the heck did the Bible reproduce a story of an atmosphere that was wet, that cleared, that people lived very long, and that the lifespan of humans deteriorated to what we now have.

therefore, I can read in this description, that the atmosphere only reached C14 equilibrium after the Global Flood, after the Atmosphere cleared, at about 3500 years ago!

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

And here is the Paper
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I agree that there are critics that claim that C14 reduction will not have a huge effect on the Human body in ageing, but the question remains,
How old can we get when there is no C14 in our bodies.
I mean,
Quote from: Environmental Chemistry Letters
Such an individual therefore experiences about 3,150 radiocarbon decay events every second, 99 billion per year, and 6.8 trillion over an average 77.9 year lifetime (adjusting for fewer cells during the growing years), due solely to natural background radiocarbon.
6.8 trillion cells in your body would not have died, had there not been C14 in our food.
Enjoy your weekend.
Evolution, the religion whereby one believes your children more human, and your parents more ape, than you!

The Human Mind, if it has nothing to do with Evolution...What an incredible entity...
If it does, what a waste!

Atheism, what a wonderful religion, where one believe to believe is erroneous.

Oh, the above explanation I made is only to show that by testing organic material, one does not prove Charcoal in Goble Tepe, or Summer is older than 6000 years old.
On teh contrary, the reconciliation is 100% in line with science.

Next week we will go over the age tested and determined about Fossils.
Evolution, the religion whereby one believes your children more human, and your parents more ape, than you!

The Human Mind, if it has nothing to do with Evolution...What an incredible entity...
If it does, what a waste!

Atheism, what a wonderful religion, where one believe to believe is erroneous.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why the swearing.
And why the straw-man tactic.
Didnt I agree that C14 does up to about 40YK?
Is it not true that on organic matter, C14 is the test?
What other tests do you know of to see whether some piece of charcoal is say +10Yk?
Do you know that in a fossil there are no organic matter to test, and this render only rock ages with Uranium lead tests?
Therefore, I specifically said I will use C14 to prove that that test is correct and can be reconciled with Biblical descriptions of Life at 6YK!
I also said we will go to inorganic fossil dating with a whole range of dating techniques with everything using Uranium to lead, argon potassium etc.
So why all the swearing?
Dont you like what you hear?
I radiometrically dated you,  you came back as a dumbass. Science wins again.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Online Hydra009

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Next week we will go over the age tested and determined about Fossils.
How kind of you to teach us stuff we already know, but in a shoddy and clearly faith-addled way that makes a mockery of actual education.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How kind of you to teach us stuff we already know, but in a shoddy and clearly faith-addled way that makes a mockery of actual education.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Offline Munch

currently he's thinking because of all the shit he wrote out and people responding to them, that he's managed to plant a seed in peoples heads about his beliefs.

reality is, we're laughing at him and he's not been banned yet because its entertaining to watch him try.

Offline Cavebear

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
..."Creation . org, who has some of the worlds' best scientists believing in a Creator"

That pretty much says it all.  There are crazy and stupid people in the world, and any Creation site will collect them like bears to honey.  You can't stop them, they are immune to facts that they don't like and I'll bet they might even vote Republican (only because they don't know there are actually other crazier parties "out there").

Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Offline trdsf

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
OK, now that the Atheists here on this forum decided that I will never reconcile C14 or other testing with a 6YK age of life, I will humbly post my claim and show them what science really says. Not what they were forced to listen too, but we will use their scientific experimentation to show them that the Bible is correct and science supports this factor also.

(remainder deleted)
I'm going to put this in the most maximally clear way I can:

WRONG.

You clearly haven't got the faintest idea what you're talking about, much less what the scientific method is or how to apply it.
Sir Terry Pratchett, on being told about the theory that the universe is a computer simulation: "If we all get out and in again, would it start to work properly this time?"

Offline Cavebear

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm going to put this in the most maximally clear way I can:

WRONG.

You clearly haven't got the faintest idea what you're talking about, much less what the scientific method is or how to apply it.

See, now if *I* had said it that way.  Baruch and all the nuts would be arguing with me. 

So thank you.  I don't care WHO says the truth, but you did it great!  And I think I'm maybe the wingman here...
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

When did life begin? Well, I got a little bored last Tuesday, so I thought, "Why not?" I also planted some evidence that the world has been around for longer than just last Tuesday because I like to fuck with people. Can you prove me wrong? If you can't, my claim is just as valid as your claim that I did not create life last Tuesday.
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville

As predicted by many in the other thread, Mousetrap is just another hubris-filled creationist spouting quite predictable creationist nonsense.

Offline Munch

creationist scientists?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk