recovering

Joined

• started 48 topics
• posted 853 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by recovering

• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  Don't take my word for it . Read the citations everyone has provided for you. I want you to think for yourself.
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  Hooberus

  You refuse to see that your experts conclusions are flawed . What if I showed you that even your so called experts admitted that they where incorrect with regards radiometric dating? Would that be enough to persuade you?

  A small group of YECs with legitimate Ph.D.s (including D. Russell Humphreys and John R. Baumgardner) have formed the RATE (Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth) committee to attack the validity of radiometric dating. Rather than embracing the embarrassing distortions and nonsensical accusations of Woodmorappe or John and Henry Morris, Humphreys and Baumgardner have finally realized that geology and geochemistry are not going to give them the answers that they want. In an Answers in Genesis (AiG) article Carl Wieland had this to say:

  When physicist Dr Russell Humphreys was still at Sandia National Laboratories (he now works full-time for ICR), he and Dr John Baumgardner (still with Los Alamos National Laboratory) were both convinced that they knew the direction in which to look for the definitive answer to the radiometric dating puzzle. [new paragraph] Others had tried—and for some, the search went on for a while in the early RATE days—to find the answer in geological processes. But Drs Humphreys and Baumgardner realized that there were too many independent lines of evidence (the variety of elements used in "standard" radioisotope dating, mature uranium radiohalos, fission track dating and more) that indicated that huge amounts of radioactive decay had actually taken place. It would be hard to imagine that geologic processes could explain all these. Rather, there was likely to be a single, unifying answer that concerned the nuclear decay processes themselves.

  Btw the above quote was from a creationist site called Old Earth Ministries
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  Hooberus i was unclear indeed the author was

  Tas Walker . However he also tries to discredit radiometric dating see here

  http://thecreationclub.com/the-fatal-flaw-with-radioactive-dating-methods-tas-walker/

  So now we have discredited both your experts
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  What if I told you that your expert specifically attempts to refute all forms of radiometric dating. Would you be suprised ? I told Cofty I Would Be Laying A trap for you!.

  Here is Part 1

  http://www.icr.org/article/117/

  You See Baumgardner indeed attempts to refute all forms of radiometric Dating. By his own words he has demonstrated that he is in disagreement with accepted science
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  a form of radiometric dating—called Radiocarbon dating—can date wood, cloth, skeletons, and other organic material.
  
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  Can't you read? What do you think radiometric dating is?

  You still have not addressed the issue of scientific peer review
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  • By the way Hooberus , Creation Research Society Quarterly is not considered a scientific journal by most scientist so peer review by it is suspect.
  • 
    
  • The Creation Research Society Quarterly has been published since July, 1964. Creation Matters containing popular level articles has been published bi-monthly since 1996. CRS has also published an assortment of special papers, monographs and books. Creationist publications have been criticized by scientists, such as Massimo Pigliucci,[10] as "nonsense" in their attempt to blend faith with empirical fact. Glenn R. Morton is an author of more than 20 articles published by CRS in an attempt to "solve scientific problems" of creationism.[11] Morton later left the creationist movement complaining "The reaction to the pictures, seismic data, the logic disgusted me. They were more interested in what I sounded like than in the data!".[11]
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  Right here. Did you not read your own evidentiary citation?

  Most people think the idea of billions of years comes from radiometric dating. But clearly that’s not true, since this dating method was not developed until the beginning of the 20th century, about 100 years after Hutton died. Hutton based his idea of an old earth on an assumption. It was not a discovery. He assumed that the same slow processes eroding the Scottish highlands in the present formed the ancient rocks by the North Sea in the past. So an old earth is the outworking of an unbiblical philosophy (cf. 2 Peter 3:3–7).
  
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  By the way this is how Baumgardner is described in scientific circles.

  Baumgardner is a Christian who sometimes pursues pseudoscientific creationist research. He has, for example, created a computer simulation called Terra to model the Noachian flood.[1][3] In 1985, Baumgardner joined the controversial amateur archaeologist Ron Wyatt and salvage expert David Fasold to Durupınar, Turkey for an expedition recounted in Fasold's The Ark of Noah to locate the biblical ship's remains.[7] Baumgardner did not support Wyatt's and Fasold's claims to have found a boat-shaped 'object' which was the Ark. He argued that the object was a natural formation.[8][9] In 1997, US News and World Report described him as "the world's pre-eminent expert in the design of computer models for geophysical convection".[3]
  
• 
  95

  Evolution is a Fact #31 - Ten Questions for Creationists

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i thought this would be a good time to pose some questions based on the series so far.. if creationism is true these should be easy.

  answers that don't involve copy-paste would be really interesting to read.. ... .

  1. since some proteins can be assembled in more ways than there are atoms in the universe why do the sequences of amino acids and bases vary between species in exactly the way evolution predicts?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  recovering

  Hooberus there is a logical error in the cited work you have provided. The author of the article says that the methodology used to date the site by scientists is flawed. He relates that since radio carbon dating was not used the accepted age of the site is incorrect. He has missed the mark , he obviously does not understand how radiocarbon dating works.

  1 Radiocarbon dating only works on specimens 70000 years old and younger.

  2 Radiocarbon dating needs the specimen to be a carbon based. biological specimen.