Challenge to YECs? Part 8

Before I start answering questions in this section, I want to point out what was written at the end of this section where the person who wrote this was indirectly admitting that the age dating process is not accurate. And was making an excuse as to why and justifying why it’s used anyway. The reason this was done is because this person knows very well what is going to be pointed out by most creationists. But this creationist (Me) also approaches from a different angle not only pointing out what has already been established by us that the evolutionist cannot address but like to instead ignore. But that simple logic proves that one cannot trust the current age dating methods. Here is what was said at the bottom of this section of the questions.

Like all scientific methods of analysis, radiometric dating techniques are not perfect and are subject to interferences that can sometimes produce false results. Analysis of inappropriate and/or improperly prepared samples gives erroneous values. Nonetheless, how does the YEC model account for the high level of consistency observed from using a variety of methods of analysis that place the age of the Earth far in excess of the biblical limit of about 10,000 years.

If you have been reading this since part one you will remember an analogy I did where I proved that evolutionists can be right and wrong at the same time. I will do it again because what is said above is an illustration of a person justifying they can be right and wrong at the same time and it does not matter.

The analogy: Let’s say an evolutionist is using certain evidence today to claim I am lying about my belief being true. Tomorrow that same evidence gets proven wrong, who was really the liar? Yet the evolutionist will justify his being wrong by saying: That’s how science works. Never having to admit to being wrong but always being able to justify that even though he was wrong it does not matter so actually he was right regardless and on both counts. So in other words the logic is that the old evidence made him right and the new evidence made him right as well. So the evolutionist will always be right even when wrong because their logic allows it. This is how science has rewritten what truth and lies are because in science they are both on the same level. But yet they will use the standard of right and wrong when judging or comparing themselves to everyone else. Basically science through evolution has a double standard. Where they can say and claim evolution is true but never really have to prove it to the same criteria they will require of everyone else. They cannot even define truth scientifically so why should they be required to tell it?

If a teacher would take this same logic on grading tests, where the truth can change so one can be right and wrong at the same time. The whole class would ace the test regardless of what their answer was or if they answered at all. While the class next door applies the criteria of what truth really is so therefore people will be right and wrong so some will pass and some will fail. In real reality do we live in a world where truth does not matter and there is no right and wrong questions or answers? Or do we live in a world where the real reality is what we live, what we see, not what we want to be true? So with really no criteria of ever having to meet real truth on any level, how could evolution or any of its support mechanism ever look wrong, or be wrong? There is a reason only an evolutionist can point out something that is a fraud in evolution. It’s because on all matters of evolution a evolutionist is close minded to anyone whom does not agree. This is also why only evolutionists can be scientists because first you have to believe there can be no absolutes so that therefore truth can be whatever you want it to be.

The reason that science requires different rules from real reality is so their ideas can look like another reality or truth if you buy into the supposed fact that there is another reality that is made up. Why else go to all the trouble to sell such logic and philosophy if the evidence itself is supposed to be empirical? It’s done this way because the real truth of the matter is that less than 5% of evolution can actually meet the real criteria of being empirical. Being empirical means the evidence has to be testable in a lab. The results and conclusions repeatable under real world conditions. The supposed fossil record that is often implied to be empirical evidence cannot meet being empirical. Neither can more than 95% of the rest of evolution. Why is it this way? Because 98-99% of evolution has to be interpreted. Which means words are the only real thing that says evolution happened. Why do you think it takes soooo many words to explain it? And when someone disagrees after soooo many words are used they are referred to as being ignorant and uneducated.

How can one tell that something is a made up reality? It’s when in its defense one must go outside the realm of actually proving it to actually making you feel that if you don’t believe you are lower than pond scum. And that is what we observe in every aspect of anyone whom dares to not believe, or dares to challenge evolution. How often does this occur? 100% of the time anyone dares to do either. It also has several names that has nothing to do with science. Bullying, which is what evolutionist like to do with the new in Christ to convert them (conversion is not science). Peer pressure which is to appeal to one’s ego, pride, or self-confidence. And then there is just plain hatefulness. This is where person is hated solely for what they believe that does not conform to evolution and nothing else. Which is another form of peer pressure that basically states that to belong and be accepted you must believe evolution. What is also used to convince more than using evidence is that the idea that “majority view” of what is considered the smartest minds in the world makes it so regardless of what anyone else may or could prove. They exalt themselves as the elite in everything they do while looking down upon everyone else except their peers (Stereotyping to belittle) . When something makes a person feel superior to everyone else, this is the example of the attitude that evolution breeds from a superiority complex. This is also why they will never accept anything a creationist says because to do so would be lowering themselves to pond scum level (in their opinion). Which is bigotry at it’s finest Now to the questions:

8. OBSERVATIONS FROM AGE DATING STUDIES

  • Essentially all radioactive isotopes with half-lives shorter than half a billion years are no longer in existence. For the most part, the only radioactive isotopes present are those with half-lives close to a billion years or longer. The only radioactive isotopes present with shorter half-lives are those that are being constantly replenished by natural means. This distribution of isotopes is in good agreement with the other evidence that shows Earth is about 4.56 billion years old. How does the YEC model account for this current isotopic distribution?
  • Response: 1) If something is no longer in existence how does one tell it was ever there? 2) So one point the isotopes are accurate because they have half-lives close to a billions years, yet on the other hand they can also be replenished by natural means? Does anyone besides me see the problem here? 3) How does one tell by the isotopes that the earth is 4.56 billion years old when: a) they can be replenished. b) They don’t last 4,56 billion years. c) How can one tell how long one isotope has been replenished?

YECs can accept the age dating as accurate because we know the Creator had to create with age in order to make what was created work under the laws that existed before and after sin. You see time without sin is eternal or infinite. Which means creation was done under different laws of physics because the first 6 days where without sin and therefore infinite. This is the main reason when we use the laws that exist after sin they cannot explain it nor will it make any sense. But when one realizes what has to be different in the laws of physics to make an infinite time-line work, then the pieces and evidence for creation start to fit. So what has to be different to make an infinite time-line work?1) You first have to understand that time exists in the infinite time-line which is proven by this verse: rev 8:1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour…. Time cannot be measured where time does not exist.
2) Time and aging are two separate processes. In other words time continues while age remains a constant (the age of all matter remains constant). In this way all that is created has to be created with age already added. This is because as long as the infinite laws exist, nothing get’s older. We are so used to time and age moving as one that it is hard to comprehend time moving forward yet nothing ages.
3) This is why all matter, both living and dead, were created with age already added. Ageless matter passing from the infinite time-line would not work under finite laws that we currently observe. Adam and Eve plus all the plants and animals were created with age. This is shown in the Bible because all were told to go forth and multiply right after being created. Offspring cannot do that.
4) Why create the whole universe with age already added? Because man had a choice to sin or remain sinless. God had to make a creation that would work under the laws that would exist in either time-line (infinite or finite). If not, man’s sin would have destroyed what was created which would have made for an imperfect creation.
5) Would not that make for a deceptive Creator? No. This is because in the infinite time-line, time does not have to pass for age to increase. So leaving the dating markers on how old God created everything was relaying just how creation was done. The attempt here to make the Creator sound deceptive is only justification to continue disbelieving because this method fits and explains everything so their only come back is to say this. These types of answers are only used when science cannot debunk what is claimed. Because if there were any science to use they would have used it.

  • There are in excess of forty different radiometric dating methods, and a number of other methods such as those involving thermoluminescence, electron spin resonance, and tree-ring, varve, and ice-core measurements. These methods are in agreement the great majority of the time covering time spans encompassing millions of years.
  • Response: The only methods used and accepted are those who support evolution. 1)There are no trees that have tree rings that go beyond 10,000 years because trees don;t live that long. 2) Ice annual rings are not made by seasonal changes only like a tree because ice is not a biological life form. So because of this the rings are formed through temperature changes that go from above freezing to below freezing. And because this can happen from night to day and not years, a supposed annual ring can be made in a 24 hour period. Besides that was there ever any test done to confirm one ice core ring takes approximately one year to make? No. it was accepted as fact only because claiming it takes a year makes it fit in the evolution time-line. Because if there was a test done to confirm this the test results and how it was done would have been released. But there is zero confirmation on this. And if not any evolutionist can send me the test results and how it was done and I will post it right here. But because this was “never” done I don’t have to worry about this. But this does bring up an important question. How was it established that rings found in ice are annual? Being that there is not test to confirm this means it was based in opinion and not fact. And because it’s still accepted as fact, makes one wonder just how science can let this continue when it’s actually fraudulent? Of course like I said before they can be right and wrong at the same time so using fraudulent evidence makes not difference. It’s how science works.
  • Vast amounts of data overwhelmingly lend support to the old Earth model. Several hundred laboratories around the world are active in radiometric dating. Their results consistently agree with an old Earth scenario. Over a thousand papers on radiometric dating are normally published in scientific, peer-reviewed journals in a year, and hundreds of thousands of dates have been published in the last 50 years. Essentially all of these strongly favor an old Earth.
  • Response: You see here is the perfect example of majority view makes new truths and reality. Hundreds of laboratories agree so it’s true. Peer review by other evolutionists agree the evolution is true. Problem is with all of this is that age dating is flawed from the beginning. According to their origins of everything, all matter came from the same source 15 billion years ago. So should not there be a trace back to that age if all matter is related to the source? of course. But does it? Nope. In fact not one planet, not one star, or anything else date as old as 15 billion. This is because age dating markers are not left until the said matter cools down enough to leave them. So our planet that came from a source 15 billion years ago will only date 4.5 billion years old means there is 10 billion years to account for. Get the picture?

So to cover up the possibility that God created everything with age, which the evidence of age dating supports, they ignore this really big difference in age dating and treat it as if the problem does not exist. So what accounts for 10 billion years of missing age? So what this means is that the matter that made the earth is actually 15 billion years old because it’s source (the dot) is supposed to be that old even though it only dates 4.5 billion years.

  • When radiometric dating techniques are applied to meteorites, they consistently give values close to 4.6 billion years.
  • Response: But the actual age dating back to the supposed origins of matter is 15 billion, so the age dating is wrong again/
  • Radioactive decay rates have been measured for over sixty years now for many of the decay clocks without any observed changes. And it has been close to a hundred years since the uranium-238 decay rate was first determined. Radioisotopes commonly used in dating techniques have been subjected to extremes of heat, cold, pressure, vacuum, acceleration, and corrosive chemical treatment without causing any significant changes in rates of radioactive decay. Both long-range and short-range dating methods have been successfully verified by dating lavas of historically known ages over a range of several thousand years.
  • Response: Still wrong since the source of all matter is supposed to be 15 billion years old.
  • Using the current, observed rate of motion of the Pacific Plate and the distances between the modern Hawaiian Islands, it is possible to calculate the relative age differences between the Islands. The ages determined by this method are in good agreement with those obtained by K-Ar radiometric dating.
  • Response: That is if one could prove that the plates moved at a constant rate throughout all time. That cannot be done.
  • Carbon-14 dates of about 38,000 years ago have been correlated with several other methods (ice layers, tree rings, uranium-thorium isotope ratios, etc.) to within about 5% agreement.
  • Response: So there are now trees that date 38,000 years old through tree rings? I’d like to see that. And again, ice is not a biological life form to seasonal changes from summer to winter don’t make the ring, changes in temperature does. And all matter comes from a 15 billion year old source so all matter is actually 15 billion years old.




Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
Good news! 🎉 The Ararat Ridge Zoo’s petting area is now open from 10:00 - 5:00 every day! 

Our 25 goats like Abednego here can’t wait for guest interaction again. We have sinks and hand sanitizing stations as well as a bathroom facility in the zoo for guests to wash their hands before and after interacting with the goats.

Be sure to swing by the petting area during your visit to the Ark Encounter!

Good news! 🎉 The Ararat Ridge Zoo’s petting area is now open from 10:00 - 5:00 every day!

Our 25 goats like Abednego here can’t wait for guest interaction again. We have sinks and hand sanitizing stations as well as a bathroom facility in the zoo for guests to wash their hands before and after interacting with the goats.

Be sure to swing by the petting area during your visit to the Ark Encounter!
... See MoreSee Less

Origins and Independence

How old is the USA? This is not meant as a trick question. While we could make a case for several different dates of the United States’ founding, Americans celebrate the Fourth of July as the nation’s birthday.

Given the date of 4 July 1776 as the declaration of the nation’s independence, it’s easy to calculate the age of the United States of America.

Imagine that we didn’t know the date and instead had to rely on natural processes such as population growth or technological level to estimate the country’s age. How reliable would these natural calendars be? They would only be as reliable as the assumptions put into their model’s framework. 

While a natural process might be useful in some situations (given correct assumptions), the only way to know the precise age is by a reliable witness. We base age on the testimony of a reliable witness, whether it’s a birth certificate for a person or the Declaration of Independence for the United States of America.

How old is planet earth? Some believe that natural processes can provide an estimate for the age of the earth. The only way to know with certainty is by the testimony of a reliable witness. The plain words of God in the Bible show that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. There is much scientific evidence to collaborate this age also.

We can celebrate the fact that we have reliable witnesses to the founding of nations and to the founding of the planet itself.

GHL

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org

Origins and Independence

How old is the USA? This is not meant as a trick question. While we could make a case for several different dates of the United States’ founding, Americans celebrate the Fourth of July as the nation’s birthday.

Given the date of 4 July 1776 as the declaration of the nation’s independence, it’s easy to calculate the age of the United States of America.

Imagine that we didn’t know the date and instead had to rely on natural processes such as population growth or technological level to estimate the country’s age. How reliable would these natural calendars be? They would only be as reliable as the assumptions put into their model’s framework.

While a natural process might be useful in some situations (given correct assumptions), the only way to know the precise age is by a reliable witness. We base age on the testimony of a reliable witness, whether it’s a birth certificate for a person or the Declaration of Independence for the United States of America.

How old is planet earth? Some believe that natural processes can provide an estimate for the age of the earth. The only way to know with certainty is by the testimony of a reliable witness. The plain words of God in the Bible show that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. There is much scientific evidence to collaborate this age also.

We can celebrate the fact that we have reliable witnesses to the founding of nations and to the founding of the planet itself.

GHL

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org
... See MoreSee Less

Leah the donkey is honking in celebration because it’s her 7th birthday! Leah is on exhibit with Zacchaeus the zebra at the Ararat Ridge Zoo and serves as his companion.

Did you know that donkeys have been used as guard animals for livestock throughout history? They are not afraid to fight off predators much later than themselves! Donkeys are extremely tough animals and can survive in harsh conditions with very little food and water.

Come see Leah and Zac during your next visit to the Ark Encounter!
... See MoreSee Less

May we have faith like Noah to do what God has called us to do.

May we have faith like Noah to do what God has called us to do. ... See MoreSee Less

EPISODE 2 in a 4-part series looking at Bethel Church based out of Redding, California.

In Part 2 of our series on Bethel Church we examine not only what is going on inside the walls of Bethel Church, but we also examine those who are involved with Bethel outside the walls of their church. We look into the teachings of Beni Johnson, Jenn Johnson, and friends of Bethel, such as Kris Vallotton, Todd Bentley, Todd White, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, and strange practices such as "grave soaking".

Pastor Joe Schimmel and host Chad Davidson continue to discuss the issues with Bethel Church and call attention to those things which need to be marked out and rebuked.

Below are the titles of each video in the series and their Premiere date:

Friday, June 26
Examining Bill Johnson's Bethel Church

Friday, July 3
The Bethel & Friends Contagion

Friday, July 10
Bethel's Sozo Obsession

Friday, July 17
Hogwarts School of Supernatural Ministry & Witches at Bethel?

***FOLLOW US***

Facebook | www.facebook.com/GoodFightMin...
Instagram | www.instagram.com/GoodFightMi...
Twitter | twitter.com/GoodFightMin

To learn more about our ministry, please visit:
www.goodfight.org
... See MoreSee Less

Video image

It's Starting...NOW!!

**The Bethel & Friends Contagion**

EPISODE 2 in a 4-part series looking at Bethel Church based out of Redding, California.

In Part 2 of our series on Bethel Church we examine not only what is going on inside the walls of Bethel Church, but we also examine those who are involved with Bethel outside the walls of their church. We look into the teachings of Beni Johnson, Jenn Johnson, and friends of Bethel, such as Kris Vallotton, Todd Bentley, Todd White, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, and strange practices such as "grave soaking".

Pastor Joe Schimmel and host Chad Davidson continue to discuss the issues with Bethel Church and call attention to those things which need to be marked out and rebuked.

Below are the titles of each video in the series and their Premiere date:

Friday, June 26
Examining Bill Johnson's Bethel Church

Friday, July 3
The Bethel & Friends Contagion

Friday, July 10
Bethel's Sozo Obsession

Friday, July 17
Hogwarts School of Supernatural Ministry & Witches at Bethel?
... See MoreSee Less

Current CRS-sponsored Research Projects, Part 7

Dr Gene Chaffin, vice-president of the Creation Research Society listed several of the current research projects that have been awarded grants from the Creation Research Society. He states, “Each grant is awarded based on review and vote by the members of the research committee. We are grateful to the donors who have made these grants possible.” 

Numerical Model Development of Earth’s Mantle Dynamics during the Genesis Flood: Multiphase Mantle Compositions and the Effects on Solid Mantle’s Dynamics 

Computer simulations of Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT) will be performed using improved numerical modeling approaches to study the realistic rock deformational behavior under conditions of the Genesis Flood. The model will include the multiple mineral phases of the Earth’s mantle, and thereby will take into account the effects of those phases on overall rock’s mechanical properties. The microscopic features (e.g., grain size, recrystallization, and phase transformation) and the associated macroscopic thermal and mechanical properties of the rocks will be treated in more detail than ever before, in an attempt to model runaway plate movements. 

This study will provide crucial new understanding on how the microstructures and mechanical properties of multiple mineral phases cooperatively acted together to produce the extreme weakening that allowed the global Flood cataclysm to unfold as it did.

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org

Current CRS-sponsored Research Projects, Part 7

Dr Gene Chaffin, vice-president of the Creation Research Society listed several of the current research projects that have been awarded grants from the Creation Research Society. He states, “Each grant is awarded based on review and vote by the members of the research committee. We are grateful to the donors who have made these grants possible.”

Numerical Model Development of Earth’s Mantle Dynamics during the Genesis Flood: Multiphase Mantle Compositions and the Effects on Solid Mantle’s Dynamics

Computer simulations of Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT) will be performed using improved numerical modeling approaches to study the realistic rock deformational behavior under conditions of the Genesis Flood. The model will include the multiple mineral phases of the Earth’s mantle, and thereby will take into account the effects of those phases on overall rock’s mechanical properties. The microscopic features (e.g., grain size, recrystallization, and phase transformation) and the associated macroscopic thermal and mechanical properties of the rocks will be treated in more detail than ever before, in an attempt to model runaway plate movements.

This study will provide crucial new understanding on how the microstructures and mechanical properties of multiple mineral phases cooperatively acted together to produce the extreme weakening that allowed the global Flood cataclysm to unfold as it did.

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org
... See MoreSee Less

Mr. P and Dr. Hall Rivera unlock the science of botany with flower dissections that you can do at home.

Download instructions for today’s experiment at:
answersingenesis.org/unlocking-science/

Watch Answers.tv
Answers in Genesis videos, live streaming, and more—all in one place.

Please help us continue to share the gospel around the world: AnswersinGenesis.org/give
... See MoreSee Less

Video image

I'm live now with Emilio Ramos from Red Grace Media! Join us and say hi. www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpZgY4L1rKs ... See MoreSee Less

Current CRS-sponsored Research Projects, Part 6

Dr Gene Chaffin, vice-president of the Creation Research Society listed several of the current research projects that have been awarded grants from the Creation Research Society. He states, “Each grant is awarded based on review and vote by the members of the research committee. We are grateful to the donors who have made these grants possible.” 

Catastrophism in the Type Area of the Lance Formation (Maastrichtian, Cretaceous) 

In Wyoming there is an Edmontosaurus dinosaur bone bed in the Upper Maastrichtian Lance Formation. The exact stratigraphic position of the bone bed in the Lance is of interest, seeing as it is very close to the famed Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary (the uppermost stratigraphic record of the dinosaurs, and a possible Flood/post-Flood boundary). However, since the stratigraphy of the roughly 2500-foot-thick Lance has never been worked out, the stratigraphic position of the bone bed in the Lance is unknown. Both the bone bed and associated strata appear to be underwater debris flows covering at least hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of square miles, and having traveled at least scores, and probably hundreds of miles. This, combined with evidence of massive earthquake activity, suggests the Lance Formation was formed in the Flood or soon thereafter. 

The research will look for evidence of these types of catastrophism in the region.

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org

Current CRS-sponsored Research Projects, Part 6

Dr Gene Chaffin, vice-president of the Creation Research Society listed several of the current research projects that have been awarded grants from the Creation Research Society. He states, “Each grant is awarded based on review and vote by the members of the research committee. We are grateful to the donors who have made these grants possible.”

Catastrophism in the Type Area of the Lance Formation (Maastrichtian, Cretaceous)

In Wyoming there is an Edmontosaurus dinosaur bone bed in the Upper Maastrichtian Lance Formation. The exact stratigraphic position of the bone bed in the Lance is of interest, seeing as it is very close to the famed Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary (the uppermost stratigraphic record of the dinosaurs, and a possible Flood/post-Flood boundary). However, since the stratigraphy of the roughly 2500-foot-thick Lance has never been worked out, the stratigraphic position of the bone bed in the Lance is unknown. Both the bone bed and associated strata appear to be underwater debris flows covering at least hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of square miles, and having traveled at least scores, and probably hundreds of miles. This, combined with evidence of massive earthquake activity, suggests the Lance Formation was formed in the Flood or soon thereafter.

The research will look for evidence of these types of catastrophism in the region.

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org
... See MoreSee Less

Emilio Ramos from Red Grace Media will be interviewing me tomorrow at 7pm CST (5pm PST, 8pm Eastern). Catch it here: youtube.com/redgracemedia

Emilio Ramos from Red Grace Media will be interviewing me tomorrow at 7pm CST (5pm PST, 8pm Eastern). Catch it here: youtube.com/redgracemedia ... See MoreSee Less