oenophile

If the earth is approximately 6,000 years old then it would follow that radioisotope dating must be flawed. What evidence exists to undermine it as a measure of geologic time? If the proponents of "young earth" are correct then recent discoveries regarding the background noise of the Big Bang must be in error. How would they interpret the recent findings?

What evidence do you have to show that C-14 has not been relatively constant over the course of the last 6,000 (just a little more than its half life) so as to render it ineffective as a measurement of time? What conditions would you care to assert?

The article you link discusses Carbon 14 dating not radioisotope dating. Carbon 14 dating can be used to approximate the age of organic matter, i.e. fossils up to 50,000 to 60,000 years old. C-14 reaches the earth as a result of radioactive particles colliding with the earth's magnetic fields. C-14 eventually reaches the surface of the earth carried by precipatation. Plants and animals consume C-14 throughout their lifetimes and the element has a 1.0: 1.5 ratio to the more stable C-12. When the organism dies C-14 begins to decay at a fairly predictable rate. It reaches its half life in approximately 5,300 years. After Carbon 14 has gone through 9 half lives, the amount of Carbon 14 remaining in the fossil is so miniscule that dating becomes problematic. C-14 has been used to date hominid fossils like Cro Magnon and Neanderthal. Paleotologists use stratigraphy to date older fossils. The date them according to the strata of rock in which they are found. They use radioisotope dating of the surrounding rock to date the fossil. To do this, they use U-235 to lead dating. U-235 decays at a constant rate. It's half life is 700 million years, which allows for the older dating. http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/...ssildating.html

Unfortuately, all too often a discussion like this devolves into a raw, emotionally charged gladiatorial combat spectacle between differing points of view. Bolshevik, far from having "met his match" with me, is the academically trained scientist at the post graduate level and I am not. My degree is in the humanities. Although I am not ready to accept much of what he presents as true but what he does argue is usually researched and thought provoking. I simply am engaging a form of socratic dialogue (as best I understand it) to bring focus on some problems that arise from accepting the literal Creation and Flood accounts from Genesis as actual events. The metaphysical implications surrounding this topic are far reaching. However, we should be able to ignore the dogmatic line in the sand and examine the evidence in the cool, light of day without resorting to questioning each others sanity or intelligence which serves no purpose in a quest for understanding.

Kinda presumptive on their part, isn't it? What evidence do they show to account for such a dramatic acceleration at the time of the Flood?

Kingdom, Phylum and Order are observed characteristics of all life. So you are using a literal interpretation of Genesis as your a priori premise? How scientific is that? .I refer you again to the table showing the speed of tectonic plate movement. Centimeters per year x 5-6K years doesn't add up to allow for the Asia and Australia to be contiguous. http://hypertextbook.com/facts/ZhenHuang.shtml

How did the kangaroo and koala learn and then unlearn to swim? Remember it has been well documented that Asia and Australia were not connected 5-6,000 years ago. You readily concede that microevolution in nature is a given over the course of thousands of years. How is it that you can discount macroevolution given millions? Doesn't microevolution lend credence to the idea of a common ancestor since so many species of within the same family, so many families within the same order and so many orders within the same phylum?

Just curious. How does the model account how Noah collected over 900,000 presently known species of insects (we are finding hundreds of new species every year) not to mention the conservatively estimated 2 to 30 million species that are believed to exist in nature? A very daunting task. Even more daunting would be the determination of sex. Most of these insects have lifespans less than 40 days and many have lifespans less than a day. Many of these need breeding conditions that could not be not be replicated on the Ark. The question still stands how did the koala and kangaroo make it to Australia. Why do you only find the coqui in Puerto Rico. Why is it that the Galapagos have 4 endemic species (only found on one location) of mockingbirds, 14 endemic species of buntings as well as the flightless cormorant.? Why is the orange crested sunbird endemic to southwest South Africa?

Did I get any? Nope, there were no fireworks here.

I love my 2003 Honda Civic Si. It has a 2.0 DOHC i-VTEC with 5 speed transmission and it rocks. I like the hatchback with easy fold down rear seats; it's great for stacking cases of wine / beer to take to my customers who are in a pinch for product. Mine is black.

Dying is easy. Living can be a bitch in both the good and bad connotations. Since I don't respond to threats of impending judgment and hell because a much crueler fate for me would be having to be subject to spending eternity with pious morons - my death at it's worst is just a mirror image of the eternity that preceded my birth. It didn't seem all that bad as I recall (if I could recall). I have hope that it will be a "twinkling of an eye" experience that will bring me to the big feast of fat things and wine aged on its lees and well refined as referred to in Isaiah. So death holds little fear for me. I wish I could say the same things for deadlines, planning for retirement and irrate customers.

Q. Why did the chicken cross the road? A. To teach the stupid deer. Therefore, the chicken is more evolved than the deer. (I suppose that you need to live in Michigan to get it.) Bolshevik, you wax socratic. As with all life at the lowest rungs , biological processes such as reproduction are simple. A bacterium simply makes copies of itself and divides asexually. As a species mutates to adapt to the demands of its environment, it necessarily becomes more complex and its physical attributes become more specialized, like sexual reproduction.

You may want to read the link I posted about the proof of evolution. Essentially, it says that scientists have a high standard of proof and very few theories have been proven. Evolution like Einstein's theory of relativity have not been proven but continue to the best explanations within the scope of their scientific study because of subsequent discoveries, criticism and refinements. Once a theory is put forward, scientists being the skeptics they are set out to disprove it. The fact that evolution has not been disproven after almost a century and a half should be a testament of its validity.

It is interesting that the word "replenish" in Genesis 2.28 means "fill" as in verse 22. However, the article dodges "without form and void" tohu va bohu in 1.2 and in Isaiah 45.18. I found this "Ask a scientist" article that talks about proof in scientific terms. http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askas...logy/bio039.htm More on the terrestial ancestors of whales. http://www.talkorigins.org/features/whales/

The plates of the earth's crust move at differing speeds. Yet, all of them it seems can be measured in centimeters per year according to the table linked below. http://hypertextbook.com/facts/ZhenHuang.shtml The swiftest plate moves a little more than 8.5cm per year.

Dooj, You would be correct that there is strong evidence that the continents once formed one land mass and drifted apart due to the geological phenomenon known as plate tectonics. Just look how neatly the continents fit together. However, as with most things geological the continents drifted apart over the course of millions of years rather than thousands. T-Bones article notes that the large connected land mass (Pangaea) existed some 200 million years ago. The article linked below indicates that during the Jurassic Period (130 million years ago) Pangaea began to break up. The Genesis flood is recorded to have happened some scant 5 thousand years ago. The continents were pretty much where there are today at that time. http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/...Contdrift.shtml

Happy albeit belated birthday.

T-Bone and Bolshevik, Why are kangaroos and koalas only found in Australia? Why was the coqui treefrog only found in Puerto Rico until recently? (It stowed away on a ship and now sings happily in Hawaii now also.) If the kangaroo, koala and the coqui emerged from the Ark on Mt. Ararat, wouldn't their populations be more evenly distributed across the globe. How did they survive the en masse swim across shark infested waters to their present habitats? When did they unlearn to swim? Wasn't it because of the unique flora and fauna of the very isolated Galapagos that gave rise to the notion of natural selection and evolution in the first place? What provisions were made on the Ark for the climatic needs of penguins, polar bears and walrus? Did the Ark have refrigerated compartments? How about the tropical rainforest environment necessary to sustain the toucan and howler monkeys? A steam room maybe? In answer to Bolshi's question about Dr. Collins not denying evolution because of his fear of losing his position, Dr. Collins in his book indicated if credible evidence was found that challenged natural selection as the explanation of why life is on earth it would come forward. Nobel Prizes and grant money follow such discoveries.

Yes,blind faith is very entertaining to say the least.Robin, I once asked you, if you believe God talks to his kids, and you replied,"Yes" Did Noah question God in this matter..I dont know...your talking about the food chain..maybe, these animals are not set up to be predators of each other. LAE, I am reading The Language of God by Francis Collins. Collins, who was the head of the human genome project and an unabashed Christian while maintaining an acceptance of evolution as the only scientific and logical explanation of how we and other living things are here. I recommend to anyone would like to thoughtfully consider the evolution vs. creationism / intelligent design debate. One of the figures of speech is allegory. I seem to remember that even VPW referred to the book of Jonah as allegory. Why is it not possible to accept the six day creation and Noah as allegory? It is interesting to note that almost all religions in the ancient Near East refer to Flood. Google Gilgamesh.

Ok, I'll come out of retirement offer you these posers? Forget about the dinosaurs on the Ark. How did Noah find two of every animal no matter how small? How did Noah determine the sex of the gnats? Did he keep predators and their prey separate? If so, how did the predators survive? If he didn't, how did those species occupying lower levels of the food chain survive? How did the kangaroos and koala bears get to the Fertile Crescent all the way from Australia? Did they swim or did God beam them aboard and then back?

A month or so ago, I bade Greasespot my farewell. I acknowledge the "Good riddance" cries and raise my glass to you all, my detractors and dear friends alike. I emerge this one time only to speak up for my very dear friend Pipes. I have known her for some time now and I can assure you that if she is anything she is unswervingly truthful. She has a tender and pure heart. She would never seek to hurt anyone - or allow anyone to hurt someone she loves in a secret forum by foul and mean spirited "cattiness" and gossip, especially when that person is unaware of what is happening and cannot speak for him/herself.

Abi, Bow et. al. Let me say again. No one is suggesting that you put your children at risk by letting anothen or any other pedophile have access to your life or children. I'm tired. Let's just say that I am not as comfortable as you are to label someone as unredeemable as you. I'm done with this thread. I am done with Greasespot. I have nothing to say here from this point on. I have no more need for the heartache. I am out of step with most here on philosophical terms. I need a life and it isn't to be found here. Peaceout!!!

I can understand your outrage and hurt that this brings up for you as a victim of abuse. However, I do not think that you are being asked to compromise your safety or the safety of your children. No one expects you to invite a pedophile over for dinner. What is being asked is to allow his story to come out into the open. Pedophilia is a form of psychosis. Until recently most psychotics were relegated to institutions without much hope of life beyond the walls. Now thanks to advances in treatment, many are able to lead productive lives and are contributing citizens. To continue to heap shame on the mentally ill only forestalls the day that POSSIBLY such an advance might be forthcoming in their treatment. Dooj, In his opening post I seem to recall Anothen stating he is not expecting forgiveness from anyone here. Let me be clear. I am neither validating pediphilia nor accepting any excuse or minimization for acts of pediphilia. It is very presumptuous to read validation into anything I have said to this point. I am only saying that just maybe if a person has the courage to make the first few timid steps toward owning up to his wrongdoing, why shouldn't we be more encouraging for him to make the next step? I am aware that it's much easier to shame than to journey beside such a person.

How was anyone here wronged by Anothen? Isn't forgiveness a matter between the injured ones and ones who caused the injury?

Do your lighter grays justify casting the first stone? Is it not possible that Anothen come to terms with a conscious tortured by guilt? While it is true that sexual predators of children cannot be "cured" and do present a risk if given access to children. I am not advocating that Anothen should be hired to teach your kids, coach their soccer team or be their scoutmaster. Everyone involved in his life should be aware of his weakness and take the proper precautions so that he is not presented with the opportunity to act on his urges. But as a human being made in the image of God, is he not entitled to seek reconciliation with Him and make what contribution that he may in His service?