10 Oct 14
Originally posted by FabianFnasWhich is why I put this question to the so-called spiritual forum.
I agree totally. The spiritual ones are constantly trying to make the Science Forum to a spiritual forum. This thread is their latest try. And we constantly fall into their trap. We discuss YEC "science".
"Spiritual science" should be discussed in the Spiritual Forum and there alone.
Don't feed the spiritual trolls.
"How can YEC's ignore all the data of the true age of Earth'.
11 Oct 14
Originally posted by sonhouseThe more you feed the spiritual trolls here in Science Forum, the more they will be attracted to the Science Forum. Is it this we want?
Which is why I put this question to the so-called spiritual forum.
"How can YEC's ignore all the data of the true age of Earth'.
If you ask YEC scientific questions, they will answer with spiritual answers.
Stop feeding the trolls here. Go discuss with the YECers at the Spiritual Forum, because it's there they belong.
12 Oct 14
Originally posted by FabianFnasThat's where I went with it.
The more you feed the spiritual trolls here in Science Forum, the more they will be attracted to the Science Forum. Is it this we want?
If you ask YEC scientific questions, they will answer with spiritual answers.
Stop feeding the trolls here. Go discuss with the YECers at the Spiritual Forum, because it's there they belong.
13 Oct 14
Originally posted by RBHILLThere is no way for science to prove the age of the earth, because that relates to history, not science. We need recorded history to determine age. So as you point out, we have no recorded history that goes back more than 6,000 years at most. All scientists can do is speculate based on their assumptions. And to ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME.
http://www.raptureforums.com/CreationVsEvolution/ageoftheearth.cfm
101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe
By Don Batten
Published: 4 June 2009(GMT+10)
Some examples:
Human history is consistent with a young age of the earth
96. Human population growth. Less than 0.5% p.a. growth from six people 4,500 years ago would produce ...[text shortened]... ked out much sooner how to sow seeds of plants to produce food. See: Evidence for a young world.
14 Oct 14
Originally posted by RJHindsHave you ever heard of the Lascaux paintings? Now there's some history for you.
There is no way for science to prove the age of the earth, because that relates to history, not science. We need recorded history to determine age. So as you point out, we have no recorded history that goes back more than 6,000 years at most. All scientists can do is speculate based on their assumptions. And to ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME.
Originally posted by RJHindshttp://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=159726&page=1
There is no way for science to prove the age of the earth, because that relates to history, not science. We need recorded history to determine age. So as you point out, we have no recorded history that goes back more than 6,000 years at most. All scientists can do is speculate based on their assumptions. And to ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME.
What are you doing here? We had a deal, you and me, remember?
You stay out of Science Forum, and I don't interfere with you in Spiritual Forum.
Your christian deal wasn't much worth, was it?
14 Oct 14
Originally posted by FabianFnasI am quite sure his rational was due to me 'polluting' the spiritual forum with the same question, so he figures he can pollute here as well.
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=159726&page=1
What are you doing here? We had a deal, you and me, remember?
You stay out of Science Forum, and I don't interfere with you in Spiritual Forum.
Your christian deal wasn't much worth, was it?
14 Oct 14
Yes, science can determine the age of the earth to within a few hundred million years.
The dating methods for zircon crystals are robust. Based on laboratory tests we can do now, zircon forces lead atoms out of its lattice, but not uranium atoms. Once the zircon has crystalized lead atoms produced by radioactive decay of uranium are trapped in the lattice. This means that any lead present in zircon can only be there because of radioactive decay of uranium atoms after the crystal has been formed. By measuring the ratio of uranium to lead one can estimate the age of the rock. This places a lower bound for the age of the earth at around 4.5 billion years.
I learnt all of that from arguing with YEC's in general and RJHinds in particular. Provided that the forum is not overwhelmed by threads about the Book of Genesis which had become a problem I have no particular problem with RJ posting here.
16 Oct 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtAnyone who wants to discuss matters in a scientific manner are welcome in the Science Forum. But anyone who use the ultimate argument "God did it that way" and "Says so in Genisis" has no interest whatsoever to discuss things scientifically.
I learnt all of that from arguing with YEC's in general and RJHinds in particular. Provided that the forum is not overwhelmed by threads about the Book of Genesis which had become a problem I have no particular problem with RJ posting here.
There is already a forum where "God did it that way" and "Says so in Genisis" are good arguments, so why not discuss spiritual matters there?
16 Oct 14
Originally posted by FabianFnasIn fairness to RJ he did more than just say "God did it", he argued against well established scientific tools. Frankly if it was just one thread it wouldn't have been a problem, but he'd start one thread every couple of days and it was almost impossible to discuss anything else. Besides, over in spirituality I'm basically saying nothing different in sonhouse's thread than I would here.
Anyone who wants to discuss matters in a scientific manner are welcome in the Science Forum. But anyone who use the ultimate argument "God did it that way" and "Says so in Genisis" has no interest whatsoever to discuss things scientifically.
There is already a forum where "God did it that way" and "Says so in Genisis" are good arguments, so why not discuss spiritual matters there?
16 Oct 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtYou're right. That is why we made a deal, RJHinds and myself, that if I didn't ruined his thread in Spiritual Forum, then he in return would keep off Science Forum.
In fairness to RJ he did more than just say "God did it", he argued against well established scientific tools. Frankly if it was just one thread it wouldn't have been a problem, but he'd start one thread every couple of days and it was almost impossible to discuss anything else. Besides, over in spirituality I'm basically saying nothing different in sonhouse's thread than I would here.
I'm sure he made a mistake, like thinking he was in the Spiritual and felt an urge to give a comment, too late realizing that he in fact was in the Science Forum. I reminded him about his violation about our deal, and haven't been seen here after that. So his honour is restored in this respect. A humble 'sorry' would be appreciated, but as long his intention is clean, then I don't have much more to say about the matter.
What he writes in Spiritual Forum, I don't have any problems with. That's my part of the deal that I honour.
What sonhouse is doing is not of my business, as long as he does not provoke religious fundamentalists to enter here and make their anti-science propaganda in our Science Forum. The atmosphere in our Forum is much friendlier without a spiritual debate.
16 Oct 14
Originally posted by FabianFnasBTW, here is what I would consider direct evidence of an ancient Earth:
You're right. That is why we made a deal, RJHinds and myself, that if I didn't ruined his thread in Spiritual Forum, then he in return would keep off Science Forum.
I'm sure he made a mistake, like thinking he was in the Spiritual and felt an urge to give a comment, too late realizing that he in fact was in the Science Forum. I reminded him about his v ...[text shortened]... in our Science Forum. The atmosphere in our Forum is much friendlier without a spiritual debate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelagic_sediment
Sediment that accumulates at a rate of less than half a Cm per 1000 years! And the deposits are miles deep in some places.