@sonhouse saidYour mind reading skills need work.
@KellyJay
But you unerringly leave open the possibility of a young Earth in your secret hope that will turn out to be true which is going to be impossible, just looking at the bent rock formations where they are visible doing 180 degree bends if that happened ANYTIME within the last few thousand years would have created such high level earthquakes as to make most life on Earth go extinct in a few years.
But you still allow at least the POSSIBILITY we are all wrong.
@sonhouse saidYoung or old they are both out of my ability to prove one way or the other, you leaping to one over the other is all on you. For every discussion we have I don’t assume either that is you and you do it without me pushing one over the other. If you think it 12 billion or 9 billion years old its up to you to prove.
@KellyJay
MIND READING? 'I have admitted I don't know and cannot prove any age of the universe old or young', which clearly opens the possibility for you, Earth could be young.
I am only interested in can what is proposed actually reasonably possible or highly impossible/improbable. I keep saying timing not time is the key, you just ignore that!
@KellyJay
TimING not time.
Why don't you expand on that, not sure what you mean by that.
I am assuming you don't believe ANY time measurements like charting how much Uranium has decayed and I assume you are aware of the term half life and what that means, which is if you find a chunk of Uranium 238, a half life of 4 odd billion years and if you see a chunk of it with half of it turned into decay products it for sure is billions of years old and that has experimental evidence up the Kazoo.
But you refuse to accept that kind of clock, which puts you in the way out fringe if so.
@sonhouse saidBelieve what you want, as I have REPEATEDLY SAID take any age you want, use any means you want, I will accept them all!!! How many times do I have to say the same thing to you? I'll just from here on say, "timing not age is the issue" as my only words for you when you cast about age. You could be right, I don't know so I don't argue age.
@KellyJay
TimING not time.
Why don't you expand on that, not sure what you mean by that.
I am assuming you don't believe ANY time measurements like charting how much Uranium has decayed and I assume you are aware of the term half life and what that means, which is if you find a chunk of Uranium 238, a half life of 4 odd billion years and if you see a chunk of it with half ...[text shortened]... the Kazoo.
But you refuse to accept that kind of clock, which puts you in the way out fringe if so.
@sonhouse saidSome events require you do them, then the next or next things immediately after, because they have a short self life, or environment changes could change and pollute the whole.
@KellyJay
I still don't know what you mean by timing.
The clock on possibilities does not tick if there isn’t a chance to move in a life friendly way.
@sonhouse saidAnything that will degrade, anything that requires a pure solution, any chemical reaction that needs to be bonded properly to produce a necessary fold, these are not hidden unknown substances and reactions. I’ll give you a list later I am sitting in my car right now.
@KellyJay
Can yo give me specific examples of that?
@sonhouse saidCarbohydrates are Kinetic products if they happen to form they will decompose in relatively short amounts of time, can life exist without them? On top of that, reactions that make them will continue, turning what was needed and turns them into not-life-friendly material.
@KellyJay
Can yo give me specific examples of that?
I can give you links to listen to Chemist speak to these things if you want, I'm not going to bother if you don't care to watch them.
@sonhouse saidThanks I find the one I have in mind and post it in the morning.
@KellyJay
I'll look at your link.
BTW, I am up to 401 tracks on Soundcloud now.
My poem for my daughter got put into a song by a friend who mine. He used free pictures of other people and scenery with a hand full of pictures of her and a snippet of a film of her. Because it’s on YouTube it pops up once and a while on me unexpectedly my wife likes it but can’t listen to it.
@KellyJay
You have link to that You tube?
One thing I see, there is new work showing a much earlier evidence of life on Earth than was thought at the time of this video:
https://new.nsf.gov/news/new-models-shed-light-lifes-origin
Also he talks about the chemical experiment zapping chemicals with electricity and uses that as an argument against natural development of life but he considers that ignoring the fact those experiments were a few weeks long or so and ignoring the millions of years there was no life on Earth and then there was.