RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: Another YEC claim ?, Anti-evolution< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,16:22   

This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood

Quote
Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land.

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1773
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,16:55   

Quote (Peter Henderson @ Dec. 10 2008,16:22)
This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood

 
Quote
Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land.

Same ol' same ol' for the Cretos - use an inappropriate dating method on an inappropriate and almost certainly contaminated specimen, get completely bogus results, scream bloody murder that this overturns the other millions of pieces of positive evidence science has collected over the last 150+ years.

:D  :D  :D

Snelling is so full of shit his eyes are brown.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
Assassinator



Posts: 479
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,17:04   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Dec. 10 2008,16:55)
Quote (Peter Henderson @ Dec. 10 2008,16:22)
This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood

   
Quote
Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land.

Same ol' same ol' for the Cretos - use an inappropriate dating method on an inappropriate and almost certainly contaminated specimen, get completely bogus results, scream bloody murder that this overturns the other millions of pieces of positive evidence science has collected over the last 150+ years.

:D  :D  :D

Snelling is so full of shit his eyes are brown.

I just wanted to say: "I've read that on talk.origins loads of times." followed by a link to the article. But it seems that the archive isn't working. Anyone else having problems?

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,17:50   

Yeah, it seems that T.O. is down. PT is up and I thought they were on the same server. ???

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,18:05   

Reading Snelling is always disorienting. For example,
Quote
Two principal geological units are exposed in the Cottonwood District in the northern part of Ono Quadrangle—the Cretaceous (late Flood) marine sedimentary units of the Budden Canyon Formation, and the overlying non-marine, undifferentiated Tehama-Red Bluff Formations of Pliocene and Pleistocene (post-Flood) age (Rodda and Murphy, 1978, 1985, 1987).
You have to remember that Rodda and Murphy never said anything about "late flood" or any similar bull shit.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4807
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,18:14   

PT and AE are on the same server. The TOA is on a commercial hosting service. I'm looking into it. The TOA host machine also seems unresponsive, so it is likely a system-wide error.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4807
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,18:40   

The host company is in the process of a datacenter migration. I was told there's probably another three hours of down time before service is restored.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,19:29   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Dec. 10 2008,16:55)
Quote (Peter Henderson @ Dec. 10 2008,16:22)
This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood

   
Quote
Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land.

Same ol' same ol' for the Cretos - use an inappropriate dating method on an inappropriate and almost certainly contaminated specimen, get completely bogus results, scream bloody murder that this overturns the other millions of pieces of positive evidence science has collected over the last 150+ years.

:D  :D  :D

Snelling is so full of shit his eyes are brown.

Thought it might have been something regurgitated !

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 11 2008,16:50   

Quote (Peter Henderson @ Dec. 10 2008,17:22)
This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood

Quote
Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land.

It is a pity Snelling doesn't report on radioactive dating with some other decay process of the same samples. My guess is that other radioactive dating method would yield ages consistent with the accepted scientific ages, not with Noachian ages.

The real problem of course is that Snelling's sample have been contaminated by a powerful source - prayer.

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
jeffox



Posts: 667
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 11 2008,17:45   

dvunkanon wrote above:

Quote
It is a pity Snelling doesn't report on radioactive dating with some other decay process of the same samples. My guess is that other radioactive dating method would yield ages consistent with the accepted scientific ages, not with Noachian ages.

The real problem of course is that Snelling's sample have been contaminated by a powerful source - prayer.


Actually, it's been contaminated by an even more powerful force than prayer:  TARD.  :)

My 2c.   :)    :)

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 15 2008,10:05   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Dec. 10 2008,18:40)
The host company is in the process of a datacenter migration. I was told there's probably another three hours of down time before service is restored.

I notice the Talkorigins website is still down Wesley.

It would be a great pity if all the articles (which no doubt involved many hours of painstaking work) were to be lost (I assume these are safe ?).

Don't hand the YECs something they've always wanted on a plate. It'd be a crying shame if this valuable resource were to be lost. The Talkorigins website is indespensable.

:angry:

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4807
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 15 2008,13:55   

It's not lost. I noted on the "Board Mechanics" thread that we have a temporary alternative domain serving the pages. That's been up since Friday.

http://toarchive.org

Getting the original domain restored is likely to require several iterations of snailmail, so that may take a while. Don't be panicking or implying that abandonment is in the offing.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 15 2008,18:54   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Dec. 15 2008,13:55)
It's not lost. I noted on the "Board Mechanics" thread that we have a temporary alternative domain serving the pages. That's been up since Friday.

http://toarchive.org

Getting the original domain restored is likely to require several iterations of snailmail, so that may take a while. Don't be panicking or implying that abandonment is in the offing.

Brilliant Wesley. What a relief. I'm glad everything is OK. Far too good a resource to lose.

  
bluescat48



Posts: 1
Joined: Dec. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 22 2008,13:51   

Quote
because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate,


?¿ What does the magnetic field have to do with C14 production?

--------------
My insanity is the only thing that keeps me sane (W T Young , 1993)

    
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 22 2008,14:17   

Quote (bluescat48 @ Dec. 22 2008,13:51)
Quote
because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate,


?¿ What does the magnetic field have to do with C14 production?

Magnetic fields influce the incidence of cosmic rays, which produce thermal neutrons, which produces C-14.  Of course, the actual variation of C-14 is known for a long period of time, and is no way consistent with Snelling's YEC yarn.

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
  14 replies since Dec. 10 2008,16:22 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]