Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Another YEC claim ?

Peter Henderson Posts: 298 Joined: Aug. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,16:22    This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today: http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood Quote Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land.

Occam's Aftershave Posts: 5287 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,16:55    Quote (Peter Henderson @ Dec. 10 2008,16:22) This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today: http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood   Quote Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land. Same ol' same ol' for the Cretos - use an inappropriate dating method on an inappropriate and almost certainly contaminated specimen, get completely bogus results, scream bloody murder that this overturns the other millions of pieces of positive evidence science has collected over the last 150+ years.     Snelling is so full of shit his eyes are brown. -------------- "CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way" "All the evidence supports Creation baraminology" "If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic." "Jews and Christians are Muslims." - Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

Assassinator Posts: 479 Joined: Nov. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,17:04    Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Dec. 10 2008,16:55) Quote (Peter Henderson @ Dec. 10 2008,16:22) This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today: http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood     Quote Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land. Same ol' same ol' for the Cretos - use an inappropriate dating method on an inappropriate and almost certainly contaminated specimen, get completely bogus results, scream bloody murder that this overturns the other millions of pieces of positive evidence science has collected over the last 150+ years. :D  :D  :D Snelling is so full of shit his eyes are brown. I just wanted to say: "I've read that on talk.origins loads of times." followed by a link to the article. But it seems that the archive isn't working. Anyone else having problems?

Dr.GH Posts: 2333 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,17:50    Yeah, it seems that T.O. is down. PT is up and I thought they were on the same server. ??? -------------- "Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy." L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

Dr.GH Posts: 2333 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,18:05    Reading Snelling is always disorienting. For example, Quote Two principal geological units are exposed in the Cottonwood District in the northern part of Ono Quadrangle—the Cretaceous (late Flood) marine sedimentary units of the Budden Canyon Formation, and the overlying non-marine, undifferentiated Tehama-Red Bluff Formations of Pliocene and Pleistocene (post-Flood) age (Rodda and Murphy, 1978, 1985, 1987). You have to remember that Rodda and Murphy never said anything about "late flood" or any similar bull shit. -------------- "Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy." L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,18:14    PT and AE are on the same server. The TOA is on a commercial hosting service. I'm looking into it. The TOA host machine also seems unresponsive, so it is likely a system-wide error. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,18:40    The host company is in the process of a datacenter migration. I was told there's probably another three hours of down time before service is restored. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Peter Henderson Posts: 298 Joined: Aug. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 10 2008,19:29    Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Dec. 10 2008,16:55) Quote (Peter Henderson @ Dec. 10 2008,16:22) This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today: http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood     Quote Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land. Same ol' same ol' for the Cretos - use an inappropriate dating method on an inappropriate and almost certainly contaminated specimen, get completely bogus results, scream bloody murder that this overturns the other millions of pieces of positive evidence science has collected over the last 150+ years. :D  :D  :D Snelling is so full of shit his eyes are brown. Thought it might have been something regurgitated !

dvunkannon Posts: 1377 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 11 2008,16:50    Quote (Peter Henderson @ Dec. 10 2008,17:22) This from Andrew Snelling on the AiG website today: http://www.answersingenesis.org/article....es-wood Quote Therefore, it was concluded that the measured 14C is in situ radiocarbon intrinsic to the ammonites and wood when they were buried and fossilized, so that they are very young, not 112–120 million years old. Furthermore, because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, and because the recent Genesis Flood removed so much carbon from the biosphere and buried it, the measured apparent radiocarbon ages are still much higher than the true ages of the fossil ammonites and wood. So their true ages are consistent with their burial during the Genesis Flood only, about 4,300 years ago, when the ocean waters washed sediments and ammonites onto this continental land. It is a pity Snelling doesn't report on radioactive dating with some other decay process of the same samples. My guess is that other radioactive dating method would yield ages consistent with the accepted scientific ages, not with Noachian ages. The real problem of course is that Snelling's sample have been contaminated by a powerful source - prayer. -------------- I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

jeffox Posts: 671 Joined: Oct. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 11 2008,17:45    dvunkanon wrote above: Quote It is a pity Snelling doesn't report on radioactive dating with some other decay process of the same samples. My guess is that other radioactive dating method would yield ages consistent with the accepted scientific ages, not with Noachian ages. The real problem of course is that Snelling's sample have been contaminated by a powerful source - prayer. Actually, it's been contaminated by an even more powerful force than prayer:  TARD.   My 2c.

Peter Henderson Posts: 298 Joined: Aug. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 15 2008,10:05    Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Dec. 10 2008,18:40) The host company is in the process of a datacenter migration. I was told there's probably another three hours of down time before service is restored. I notice the Talkorigins website is still down Wesley. It would be a great pity if all the articles (which no doubt involved many hours of painstaking work) were to be lost (I assume these are safe ?). Don't hand the YECs something they've always wanted on a plate. It'd be a crying shame if this valuable resource were to be lost. The Talkorigins website is indespensable.

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 15 2008,13:55    It's not lost. I noted on the "Board Mechanics" thread that we have a temporary alternative domain serving the pages. That's been up since Friday. http://toarchive.org Getting the original domain restored is likely to require several iterations of snailmail, so that may take a while. Don't be panicking or implying that abandonment is in the offing. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Peter Henderson Posts: 298 Joined: Aug. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 15 2008,18:54    Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Dec. 15 2008,13:55) It's not lost. I noted on the "Board Mechanics" thread that we have a temporary alternative domain serving the pages. That's been up since Friday. http://toarchive.org Getting the original domain restored is likely to require several iterations of snailmail, so that may take a while. Don't be panicking or implying that abandonment is in the offing. Brilliant Wesley. What a relief. I'm glad everything is OK. Far too good a resource to lose.

bluescat48 Posts: 1 Joined: Dec. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 22 2008,13:51    Quote because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, ?¿ What does the magnetic field have to do with C14 production? -------------- My insanity is the only thing that keeps me sane (W T Young , 1993)

Tracy P. Hamilton Posts: 1239 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 22 2008,14:17    Quote (bluescat48 @ Dec. 22 2008,13:51) Quote because the earth’s stronger magnetic field in the recent past reduced the atmospheric 14C production rate, ?¿ What does the magnetic field have to do with C14 production? Magnetic fields influce the incidence of cosmic rays, which produce thermal neutrons, which produces C-14.  Of course, the actual variation of C-14 is known for a long period of time, and is no way consistent with Snelling's YEC yarn. -------------- "Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV "The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen "We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard