|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 58 (9200 total) |
| |
Allysum Global | |
Total: 919,191 Year: 6,448/9,624 Month: 26/270 Week: 22/37 Day: 1/13 Hour: 1/0 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 6129 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Meaning Of The Trinity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 6062 Joined: Member Rating: 7.6
|
However, I will state my objections to carbon-dating methods as soon as my wife and I return from our vacation. Study assumptions. In the meantime, STUDY WHAT RADIOCARBON DATING IS AND WHAT IT'S BASED ON (ie, where the C14 comes from and where it DOESN'T)! The Wikipedia article, Radiocarbon dating, would be a good place to start. . Pay particular attention to the section, Carbon exchange reservoir, and its accompanying graphic, "Simplified version of the carbon exchange reservoir, showing proportions of carbon and relative activity of the 14C in each reservoir". In particular, note in that graphic that it does not include subterranean C14 produced continuously by radiation sources deep underground, because that subterranean C14 plays no role in radiocarbon dating and has nothing to do with the method. That is important because that false creationist "objection" (ie, that trace C14 in coal and diamonds presents problems for radiocarbon dating) is so far the only "objection" that you have presented and it has been thoroughly debunked.
Learn something! CAVEAT: DO NOT RELY ON A CREATIONIST SOURCE! Creationists are lying to you. If you do use a creationist source, then verify it thoroughly! You admonish us to "Study assumptions"? We have! Why haven't you done the same? We have tried many times in vain to explain to you what the actual assumptions are, but you have steadfastly refused to explain what your creationist assumptions are!
Stop your hypocrisy! Put up or shut up!
ABE:
The reappearance of this issue arose organically in my Message 576 as one of the several examples of candle2's false claims that we have been able to check and which proved to be false, leading to the obvious (and so far ignored) question:
DWise1 writes: You also blather on about things that cannot be checked, namely about the supernatural. Why would you expect us to believe you about that and how could you possibly expect us to believe you about the supernatural when everything else you've posted has turned out to be false? Since it is off-topic here as pointed out by candle2, I will propose a new topic for this discussion, even though I have no doubt that candle2 will yet again cut and run or otherwise do his best to sabotage discussion -- ie, being a creationist, he will undoubtedly do what creationists always do. Nonetheless, I will propose that new topic referring back to these messages and my request/demand that he first study up on the subject since his past lack of performance demonstrated that he clearly does not understand radiocarbon dating (despite his false claims to the contrary). candle2 indicated that he is just now leaving vacation, so in order it doesn't scroll off the All Topics page before he gets back from vacation I will wait about a week or so before proposing the topic. After that, I will wait an appropriate amount of time before posting bump messages for him.
Edited by dwise1, : got more specific about that false creationist claim candle2 used and refused to support Edited by dwise1, : ABE: plan to start a new topic for this
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8637 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
I'm willing to bet you $1.55 that what the Catholic Church teaches is the truth ... but you don't have the courage of your atheist conviction to accept this wager. Child.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4597 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 9.5 |
what the Catholic Church teaches is the truth What the Catholic Church teaches is that sexual predators make the best priests, and bishops, and archbishops, and cardinals, and popes and that the oldest church traditions are cannibalism and vampirism. Go ahead and flush the $1.55.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2855 From: Australia Joined: |
I knew it ... you're not game to accept my wager.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 633 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
No. The fact that YOU can't come up with a test doesn't mean anything. It does suggest that you haven't put any thought or research into it. You want me to come up with a test for an hypothesis that can't be tested? The test is fitting it into the nested hierarchy of all living things. If it fits, that demonstrates relationships to the other organisms that it fits between. If, on the other hand, you try to fit a winged horse into the nested hierarchy, you'll notice that there are no vertebrates with six limbs.
Dredge writes:
You should laugh less. It just exposes your ignorance. ... that's pretty funny!"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg. What's going on? Where are all the friends I had? It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong. Give me back, give me back my Leningrad." -- Leningrad Cowboys
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 633 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Dredge writes:
I'll take your bet. I knew it ... you're not game to accept my wager. In Message 645, you said, "I'm willing to bet you $1.55 that what the Catholic Church teaches is the truth ..." Go ahead and do a DNA test on your next communion wafer. If it has any Jewish ancestry there's $1.55 on it's way to you. (See how easy it is to test hypotheses?)"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg. What's going on? Where are all the friends I had? It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong. Give me back, give me back my Leningrad." -- Leningrad Cowboys
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18581 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Though the RCC has had a sordid history regarding molestations and coverups, one must remember that even among the 12 Disciples there was one bad apple. (Judas)
Hopefully, the RCC has not exceeded the 12:1 ratio. Their shame is and was in the coverups. It would be as if 11 Cardinals and the Pope defended 1 rotten Cardinal. (which brings up another speculation. Did Judas "go to Hell"? Orrrrrr did Jesus forgive him at a later point in time?) The world may never know. Edited by Phat, : added thought Edited by Phat, . Edited by Phat, . "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18581 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Idolator! Your behavior and veneration of a totally secular concept known as "Science and Critical Thought" is a thinly veiled attempt to worship human intellect itself. You and your kind won't last long.
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 633 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
I hope you realize that to us normals (as dwise1 calls us) are about as insulted by that word as you would be if you were called a "Little-Endian". (That's a Lilliputian "Little-Endian".)
Idolator! Phat writes:
Why would it be "thinly veiled"? Why would it be veiled at all? Human intellect is all we have (and that includes you). What would be more worthy of worship?
Your behavior and veneration of a totally secular concept known as "Science and Critical Thought" is a thinly veiled attempt to worship human intellect itself. Phat writes:
We're winning now. You and your kind won't last long."Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg. What's going on? Where are all the friends I had? It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong. Give me back, give me back my Leningrad." -- Leningrad Cowboys
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 892 Joined: |
Dwise 1, one of the grandkids got sick, and granny had to
to come back home. So here is what I mean by assumptions. Assumingsomething to be true is not good science. In fact it is not science at all. Scientists who believe in evolution are among the mostassuming scientists in the world. When dating dead organisms utilizing the Carbon-14dating method two facts need to be established. One is the decay rate of C-14.The other is the starting amount. There is no way to determine if the ratio of C-14 to C-12in the atmosphere has always been the same as it is today. If one assumes that the ratio is true, and the assumptionis true, the dating method is valid up to perhaps 75,000 years. If the assumption is not true the method will giveincorrect dates. Since we have no way of knowing the ratio of C14 to C-125000 years ago, we do not have the empirical or observational science necessary for interpretations of past events. When we lack observational knowledge/science, we areleft with historical science. Historical science can be highly subjective. Evolutionists rely heavily on historical science, which involves assumptions. The founder of the Carbon-14 dating method, Dr. WillardLibby, assumed (ain't this what evolutionists do) the rate to be constant based on evolution. Then he noted that the atmosphere did not appear to bein equilibrium. By this I mean that the amount of Carbon atoms in theatmosphere must equal the amount being removed. The Specific Production Rate of C14 per gram iscurrently twice that of Specific Decay Rate. Dr. Libby ignored the nonequilibrium state. By Dr. Libby's own estimation it would be 30,000 yearsto reach equilibrium. I am not even taking into account the effects of theworldwide flood, or earth's changing magnetic field. Nor am I taking into account contamination, or any ofthe other issues involved with dating techniques. Evolutionists thrive on assumptions, especially falseones. But, even when wrong no one calls them on it. Evolutionists are the ones who get the grants, and theones who run our universities. They can and do distort facts to fit their agenda. I knowthis as fact. And nobody is going to change my mind.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17893 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
quote: That’s not exactly true any more. There have been plenty of measurements of samples where the age has been determined by other methods. So we can use those rather than guessing the starting amount.
quote: Wrong again. We know that it hasn’t.
quote: Good job we have all that observational knowledge then. You make the mistake of assuming that creationists tell the truth. Maybe you should examine your own assumptions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4597 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 9.5 |
They can and do distort facts to fit their agenda. I know this as fact. And nobody is going to change my mind. And yet you have not shown a shred of evidence to support this lie.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member (Idle past 106 days) Posts: 303 Joined:
|
Hi candle2
It is expected that the level of C14 in the atmosphere will vary over time principally because the rate of production from solar radiation is not constant, and increased old carbon can be produced by volcanic activity and introduced into the atmosphere. So a means of calibrating is required so a raw C14 date can be converted to a more accurate real date. This is done by dating something by another method, such as known historical artefacts, tree rings, limestone cave deposits, lake and sea floor deposits, dating corals by C14 and Uranium/Thorium dating on the same specimen.. Using these methods tables have been published to calibrate raw C14 dates to 55,000 years agoagainst real dates. The result of course is not a straight line relation. In fact there can be a plateau so one C14 date can be a range of actual dates. If this is not an honest investigation honestly reported, then what do you think is actually going on? Who is fooling whom? Who is benefitting? There are over 100 C14 laboratories around the world with the biggest doing 10,000 tests a year. Researchers are content to spend $500 I am told per test. The results are sent in reports to journals to be published and read by other researchers. If the tests are so unreliable, what do you think is going on here? Who is fooling whom? Who is organising things?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
candle2 Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 892 Joined: |
Dredge, you ask if my Biblical interpretations are always
correct. No one is infallible. Catholics claim that the Pope is always infallible whendictating church doctrines. Furthermore, the RCC is adamant in that the Church haspriority over the Bible. When one accepts this premise one depends on othersto tell them what is and is not acceptable to God. And, they have no scripture to verify or annul what they are told. My church has opened my eyes to God's plan forhumans, but I always search the scripture in order to prove or disprove whether they are right or not. God gave us His 10 Commandments. They were engravedon stone to show their permanence. Jesus says in John 14:15 "If you love me, keep myCommandments." 1 John 5:3 "For this is the love of God, that we keep HisCommandments: and His Commandments are not grievous." Revelation 14:12 "Here is the patience of the saints:here are they tha/ keep the Commandments of God..." Revelation 22:14 "Blessed are theythat do HisCommandments, that they may have right to the tree of life..." Speaking of the 10 Commandments in Deuteronomy 6:8,God states "And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontiers between thine eyes." This is repeated in Deuteronomy 11:18. We accept God's Holy Commandments with our mind,and we obey them with our hands. We shake on it. We honor God's Commandments because we love Him,and we worship Him. Those that worship the beast and its image also accepthis authority with their mind, and they obey with their hands. Those who worship this false religious system receive amark in their hand and/or mind. The RCC deleted God's 2nd Commandment which states: "Thou shall make unto thee any graven image, or anylikeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath...thou shall not bow down to them." The RCC worship images, and they bow down to them.They also worship relics (bones of supposedly dead saints). They replaced the Sabbath with "Remember to keep Holythe Lord's Day." In order to still have 10 Commandments, the RCC dividedThe 10th. 9.Do not covertly thy neighbor's wife.10. Do not covet thy neighbor's goods. The RCC thinks to change times and laws.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 6062 Joined: Member Rating: 7.6
|
Dwise 1, one of the grandkids got sick, and granny had to to come back home. Short vacation! Though I shouldn't talk since I've been incapacitated by a knee injury the past few days. Getting better.
So here is what I mean by assumptions. Assuming something to be true is not good science. In fact it is not science at all. True enough about making assumptions, which is why one must examine, test, and verify one's assumptions. And when assumptions are found to be wrong, then acting on that testing by correcting and refining those assumptions that can be corrected and dropping the ones that cannot be corrected. That is what science and scientists do all the time, while it is the creationists who never test their own assumptions and will never ever act upon any of their assumptions found to be wrong. Read my draft HTML page which examines the major differences between scientists and creationists: Fundamental Differences Between Scientists and Creationists. A very quick summary is that scientists are trying to discover something, so they take their research seriously. Of necessity, they base their research in part on the research of other scientists (eg, "don't reinvent the wheel", "I stand on the shoulders of giants."), which means that scientists have a strong vested interest in the veracity and validity of that other research, which means that when a scientist publishes the findings of an experiment, other scientists will repeat that experiment to see if they get the same results; IOW, they test each other's work trying to prove them wrong. Science demands it. Case in point was the bombshell news of the discovery of "cold fusion". The moment the paper was published, it was FAX'd out (remember, no Internet back then) throughout the physics community and everybody eagerly read it and repeated the experiments. They found that it wasn't true and they all dropped "cold fusion". In contrast, creationists are not trying to discover anything, but rather they just want to convince others (and more importantly themselves) of their groundless, unverified, and never-tested assumptions. If another creationist comes up with a claim or argument, they never ever even think of testing it for being true, but rather they just blindly believe it and repeat it as long as it sounds convincing (at least to them in their willful ignorance, though not convincing to anyone who knows anything about the subject). They have no need for any of it to be true, just so long as it sounds convincing. And they will only stop using those groundless arguments when they get too much bad press for that argument (eg, moon dust, protein comparisons). Case in point: leap seconds show that the earth's rotation is slowing down at a rate that would mean the mere millions of years ago it had to have been spinning impossibly fast. In reality, 4 billion years ago the earth would have been spinning only twice as fast. The originator, most likely Walter Brown in 1979, didn't understand what leap seconds are nor how they work. Even though the claim was decisively refuted in 1982, creationists keep repeating it -- a Canadian group proved that to 15 creationist sites and none of them repented of that particular lie. See my page on it, Earth's Rotation is Slowing for more information. So you have our roles reversed: scientists test their assumptions (AKA "hypotheses") rigorously in order to eliminate the wrong assumptions, while it's the creationists who make refuse to test their assumptions and instead declare them to be Gospel. What you're doing there is described as "the pot calling the silverware black." More to come.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024