Answers to Creationist Attacks on C-14 Dating

[_spotlight]

What you seem to totally overlook is that GOD during HIS 6 day creation epic, would have created an ecological perfect environment including the level of C-14. God would have also have originally created fully grown trees (Eat from any tree except for the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil) with rings and Adam and Eve with navels as everything was in a prototype stage. I know this is more than you can swallow ------ so don't let me drown you by suggesting the Flood would have played havoc with the once perfect environment.

What you seem to totally overlook is that whatever the level of C-14 you imagine god may have created in the first 6 days, that scenario CAN'T be made to fit the data. If the level is high then there is no explanation of remains with low content. If the level is low there is no explanation of anything with high content AS YOU STILL WOULD NEED 30,000 YEARS TO GET FROM ONE EXTREME TO THE OTHER SINCE THERE EXISTS BOTH IN OUR WORLD!
Trees created fully formed would be trees whose tree rings have the SAME C-14 date! Those do not exist! Besides that would make god a deceiver/liar. Then the Bible is self contradictory (which it already is but I digress). Not just trees but the remains of dead things with arbitrary levels of C-14 would have to have been created by god. The Bible states that all he created was good. Creating already dead lifeforms is not good and supposedly death awaited the fall. So your "hypothesis" is a FAIL!

Note that if you are trying to use the "flood of Noah" to affect C-14 dating the only way is with that canopy to block C-14 formation. If the level was high initially then merely removing carbon from the environment as by a flood would not affect the C-14 concentration relative to the C-12. Fill a jar with any relative abundance of two gases say 70% oxygen and 30% nitrogen and then remove 90% of the mixture from the jar. The remaining gas will still be 70% oxygen and 30% nitrogen. But as I don't expect FrankThatTalks to change his mind I don't expect you too either and for the same reason which is you can't reason with a two by four.

[_LittleNipper]

What you seem to totally overlook is that GOD during HIS 6 day creation epic, would have created an ecological perfect environment including the level of C-14. God would have also have originally created fully grown trees (Eat from any tree except for the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil) with rings and Adam and Eve with navels as everything was in a prototype stage. I know this is more than you can swallow ------ so don't let me drown you by suggesting the Flood would have played havoc with the once perfect environment.

What you seem to totally overlook is that whatever the level of C-14 you imagine god may have created in the first 6 days, that scenario CAN'T be made to fit the data. If the level is high then there is no explanation of remains with low content. If the level is low there is no explanation of anything with high content AS YOU STILL WOULD NEED 30,000 YEARS TO GET FROM ONE EXTREME TO THE OTHER SINCE THERE EXISTS BOTH IN OUR WORLD!
Trees created fully formed would be trees whose tree rings have the SAME C-14 date! Those do not exist! Besides that would make god a deceiver/liar. Then the Bible is self contradictory (which it already is but I digress). Not just trees but the remains of dead things with arbitrary levels of C-14 would have to have been created by god. The Bible states that all he created was good. Creating already dead lifeforms is not good and supposedly death awaited the fall. So your "hypothesis" is a FAIL!

Note that if you are trying to use the "flood of Noah" to affect C-14 dating the only way is with that canopy to block C-14 formation. If the level was high initially then merely removing carbon from the environment as by a flood would not affect the C-14 concentration relative to the C-12. Fill a jar with any relative abundance of two gases say 70% oxygen and 30% nitrogen and then remove 90% of the mixture from the jar. The remaining gas will still be 70% oxygen and 30% nitrogen. But as I don't expect FrankThatTalks to change his mind I don't expect you too either and for the same reason which is you can't reason with a two by four.

Why would you assume that trees formed full grown at Creation would have the same C-14? There was the Flood, there were days of creation where organisms were added. We don't know how long Adam was alone in the Garden of Eden. We don't know how long both Adam and Eve lived in the Garden before the Fall. They didn't actually start to age until after they made their choice... So the age of Adam may in fact only measure from the moment he Fell. We do understand that Adam was a fully grown creation likely looking 30.

As for the sour grapes notion that God would be a liar because He did what he wished, and revealed what He did, and YOU choose not to accept what HE revealed ---- then that is totally on YOU and those who wish to explain away Genesis. The planet likely was much flatter (mountains came from upheavals later). Oxygen seeks the lower levels. I don't expect you to change you mind that you are the end product of the evolution of apes, I just don't see man morally, spiritually, or even physically progressing. I see him degenerating and in need of technology to prop himself up. Go live a year without electricity, pills, transportation, fertilizer, and construction equipment. Then tell me who is progressing...

[_spotlight]

Why would you assume that trees formed full grown at Creation would have the same C-14?

Because that is the nature of an isotope. It is chemically indistinguishable from other isotopes of the same element. Why would you assume that a tree created with all its rings intact would have different levels of C-14 in each ring, and not just different levels but a very specific pattern of variation that would correspond to the rate of decay of C-14 with time that matches perfectly with each ring representing a years passage of time?

There was the Flood,

Well no, not really, but you are oblivious to the facts, so there's that. And as I've shown, even if there had been a flood there is no mechanism for it to affect C-14 dating in the manner that makes any sense of the data.

there were days of creation where organisms were added.

Why do you think a single week of time is significant when it comes to C-14? Do you understand anything at all about the topic you are trying to criticize?

We don't know how long Adam was alone in the Garden of Eden. We don't know how long both Adam and Eve lived in the Garden before the Fall. They didn't actually start to age until after they made their choice... So the age of Adam may in fact only measure from the moment he Fell.

As long as something is alive and eating food their C-14 level is maintained. It does not decay away until they die and stop eating. So it doesn't matter how long Adam was in the garden prior to the fall. The C-14 concentration whatever you imagine it to be at the time of the fall is what would be significant and it CANNOT be made to fit the data.

We do understand that Adam was a fully grown creation likely looking 30.

You can imagine whatever you like. But if he was created fully grown he still would have to crawl around on all fours like a baby until his neural net gathered enough data to learn how to walk, etc. The Bible misses this, so the Bible is wrong again.

As for the sour grapes notion that God would be a liar because He did what he wished, and revealed what He did, and YOU choose not to accept what HE revealed ---- then that is totally on YOU and those who wish to explain away Genesis.

Who am I to reject what god apparently wants us to believe based upon the data that you say he contrived to paint a very false picture of reality. And where is it taught that this is the case in the Bible? Making stuff up? Adding to the Bible? (Rev 22:18)

The planet likely was much flatter (mountains came from upheavals later).

Which is neither here nor there as far as C-14 goes.

Oxygen seeks the lower levels.

Okee dokee. Have you studied any science at all in school?

I don't expect you to change you mind that you are the end product of the evolution of apes,

Well there is the fact that we have all of the same retro viruses in our DNA. The odds of that happening by chance are insurmountable. And you have the DNA to lay eggs that has become inactivated etc. In fact every bit of DNA that we have studied fits with this picture of common ancestry of all life and not one bit of DNA exists any where that violates that model. We also know that tinkering with the DNA affects the outcome of the growth of an organism so now you are stuck with a model where that particular arrangement of DNA that makes life the way it is just happens arbitrarily to coincide with the very same pattern that mimics common ancestry of all living things. That my friend is quite a STRETCH!

I just don't see man morally, spiritually, or even physically progressing.

Neither did I when I went to church.

I see him degenerating and in need of technology to prop himself up.

Except that the ability to create technology is due to mental progress, so you are contradicting yourself again.

Go live a year without electricity, pills, transportation, fertilizer, and construction equipment. Then tell me who is progressing...

All of which is the result of science which you throw under the bus the maintain your fables. If everyone on this planet had your level of intelligence none of those things would even exist.

[_Maksutov]

I wonder if good Nipper is a follower of the late Francis Schaeffer, who believed that civilization culminated in the lifetime and works of Jean Calvin and has deteriorated steeply ever since.

[_Themis]

Huckleberry:

You don't understand the depth's of Littlenippers ignorance.

Surely, God could have caused birds to fly with their bones made of solid gold, with their veins full of quicksilver, with their flesh heavier than lead, and with their wings exceedingly small. He did not, and that ought to show something. It is only in order to shield your ignorance that you put the Lord at every turn to the refuge of a miracle.
Galileo

You cannot have a rational discussion with an irrational person. Nipper believes God can do anything, so no matter what problem you come up with God can do it. God here can make the world look like it is very old or look like no global flood happened. So you cannot argue against this kind of irrational thinking other then maybe talk about why God would be so deceitful.

[_LittleNipper]

Why would you assume that trees formed full grown at Creation would have the same C-14?

Because that is the nature of an isotope. It is chemically indistinguishable from other isotopes of the same element. Why would you assume that a tree created with all its rings intact would have different levels of C-14 in each ring, and not just different levels but a very specific pattern of variation that would correspond to the rate of decay of C-14 with time that matches perfectly with each ring representing a years passage of time?

There was the Flood,

Well no, not really, but you are oblivious to the facts, so there's that. And as I've shown, even if there had been a flood there is no mechanism for it to affect C-14 dating in the manner that makes any sense of the data.

there were days of creation where organisms were added.

Why do you think a single week of time is significant when it comes to C-14? Do you understand anything at all about the topic you are trying to criticize?

We don't know how long Adam was alone in the Garden of Eden. We don't know how long both Adam and Eve lived in the Garden before the Fall. They didn't actually start to age until after they made their choice... So the age of Adam may in fact only measure from the moment he Fell.

As long as something is alive and eating food their C-14 level is maintained. It does not decay away until they die and stop eating. So it doesn't matter how long Adam was in the garden prior to the fall. The C-14 concentration whatever you imagine it to be at the time of the fall is what would be significant and it CANNOT be made to fit the data.

We do understand that Adam was a fully grown creation likely looking 30.

You can imagine whatever you like. But if he was created fully grown he still would have to crawl around on all fours like a baby until his neural net gathered enough data to learn how to walk, etc. The Bible misses this, so the Bible is wrong again.

As for the sour grapes notion that God would be a liar because He did what he wished, and revealed what He did, and YOU choose not to accept what HE revealed ---- then that is totally on YOU and those who wish to explain away Genesis.

Who am I to reject what god apparently wants us to believe based upon the data that you say he contrived to paint a very false picture of reality. And where is it taught that this is the case in the Bible? Making stuff up? Adding to the Bible? (Rev 22:18)

The planet likely was much flatter (mountains came from upheavals later).

Which is neither here nor there as far as C-14 goes.

Oxygen seeks the lower levels.

Okee dokee. Have you studied any science at all in school?

I don't expect you to change you mind that you are the end product of the evolution of apes,

Well there is the fact that we have all of the same retro viruses in our DNA. The odds of that happening by chance are insurmountable. And you have the DNA to lay eggs that has become inactivated etc. In fact every bit of DNA that we have studied fits with this picture of common ancestry of all life and not one bit of DNA exists any where that violates that model. We also know that tinkering with the DNA affects the outcome of the growth of an organism so now you are stuck with a model where that particular arrangement of DNA that makes life the way it is just happens arbitrarily to coincide with the very same pattern that mimics common ancestry of all living things. That my friend is quite a STRETCH!

I just don't see man morally, spiritually, or even physically progressing.

Neither did I when I went to church.

I see him degenerating and in need of technology to prop himself up.

Except that the ability to create technology is due to mental progress, so you are contradicting yourself again.

Go live a year without electricity, pills, transportation, fertilizer, and construction equipment. Then tell me who is progressing...

All of which is the result of science which you throw under the bus the maintain your fables. If everyone on this planet had your level of intelligence none of those things would even exist.

Technology builds on previous knowledge and is not one leap. The FACT remains that if there were an Atomic War III and a end to society as we know it, we would have to rethink technology one step at a time. In other words without the invention of the Telegraph 1837 (and this involved baby steps dating from 1750's), the sound writing device known as the Phonautograph 1860, the automatic telegraph message repeater 1863, the phonograph 1878, the gramophone 1887, the invention of the light bulb 1888, the invention of Marconi 1895, the improved wax record 1902, the vacuum tube 1907, electric orthrophonic recording process 1925, the electric pick-up 1930, new orthrophonic high fidelity, Stereo ------ And this isn't even close to being complete... We have what we have because of many baby steps over centuries. It was through many CREATORS and not some arbitrary natural process without blood, sweat, tears, and inspiration!

I don't throw science under the bus. I fight assumptions that are being passed off as "scientific" absolutes totally ignoring revelation. Adam talked with GOD. God created him with the ability to both walk and talk.

And yes, I did study science in school ----- did you know that oxygen is denser at the Dead Sea because it is below sea level there? I don't suppose you remember that!

[_spotlight]

Technology builds on previous knowledge and is not one leap. The FACT remains that if there were an Atomic War III and a end to society as we know it, we would have to rethink technology one step at a time...

Everything builds upon incremental change one step at a time, which is why religious dogma is so dangerous. It nips that change in the bud when it doesn't agree with one's religious beliefs.

I don't throw science under the bus. I fight assumptions that are being passed off as "scientific" absolutes totally ignoring revelation.

Like evolution? It happens to be the most well established fact ever in the history of science.

Adam talked with GOD. God created him with the ability to both walk and talk.

Also an established scientific fact is that there was never a population of humans less than about 10,000 in number at any point in our past. But you don't throw science under the bus.

And yes, I did study science in school ----- did you know that oxygen is denser at the Dead Sea because it is below sea level there? I don't suppose you remember that!

Ummm, that is simply the result of variation in gas density with altitude dude. Oxygen doesn't "seek" to be lower unless you are referring to the effect of gravity.

And yes, I did study science in school...

And look at you now. Able to cut and paste your life away! What progress! What growth! When we assume that we have an eternity of time awaiting us after the grave we can treat what little real time we have with indifference and abandon!

[_LittleNipper]

Technology builds on previous knowledge and is not one leap. The FACT remains that if there were an Atomic War III and a end to society as we know it, we would have to rethink technology one step at a time...

Everything builds upon incremental change one step at a time, which is why religious dogma is so dangerous. It nips that change in the bud when it doesn't agree with one's religious beliefs.

I don't throw science under the bus. I fight assumptions that are being passed off as "scientific" absolutes totally ignoring revelation.

Like evolution? It happens to be the most well established fact ever in the history of science.

Adam talked with GOD. God created him with the ability to both walk and talk.

Also an established scientific fact is that there was never a population of humans less than about 10,000 in number at any point in our past. But you don't throw science under the bus.

And yes, I did study science in school ----- did you know that oxygen is denser at the Dead Sea because it is below sea level there? I don't suppose you remember that!

Ummm, that is simply the result of variation in gas density with altitude dude. Oxygen doesn't "seek" to be lower unless you are referring to the effect of gravity.

And yes, I did study science in school...

And look at you now. Able to cut and paste your life away! What progress! What growth! When we assume that we have an eternity of time awaiting us after the grave we can treat what little real time we have with indifference and abandon!

Change was not nipped in America. However, for a time it was nipped in the USSR, The Peoples Republic of China, North Korea, Communist Hungary, West Germany. Simply because you say that there was never a population of human less than 10,000 doesn't make it a reality and only an "educated" guess based on secular logic. The computer is a wonderful thing; however, it is the result of the creativeness of humans founded on older technical advances. When we are told that the reason we exist is a fluke of nature and that our life is meaningless "naturally speaking" then one turns to sex, entertainment, drink, and drugs to fill the void ---- or perhaps even governmental propaganda movements...

http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth

[_Choyo Chagas]

Communist Hungary

what do you know about communist hungary --- or hungary at all
is its capital bucharest or budapest?

my wife is echte hungarian

[_Maksutov]

Change was not nipped in America. However, for a time it was nipped in the USSR, The Peoples Republic of China, North Korea, Communist Hungary, West Germany. Simply because you say that there was never a population of human less than 10,000 doesn't make it a reality and only an "educated" guess based on secular logic. The computer is a wonderful thing; however, it is the result of the creativeness of humans founded on older technical advances. When we are told that the reason we exist is a fluke of nature and that our life is meaningless "naturally speaking" then one turns to sex, entertainment, drink, and drugs to fill the void ---- or perhaps even governmental propaganda movements...

http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth

So you couldn't answer Spotlight and had to reach for the "life is meaningless unless you believe and act like me". Thud. Your atheist strawmen convince nobody but you, dude.

I find it amusing that you always speak in terms of technology. It's clear that it's because you have so little grasp of science. And "secular logic"? Here again you think that the religious get to operate under their own little made up laws. If you step out in front of a moving train, you'll find out that physics is neither religious nor secular, but you won't have much time to think about it. That's okay, thinking is *not* your personal superpower. But really, don't stand in front of that train. Take the advice of someone whose life is meaningless and yet very happy not to be saddled with the "meaning" of ancient peoples who represent an early and far more ignorant stage of our development, long since superseded.

You, of course, are welcome to return to the makeshift shelter of primitive cultures but you should surrender your internet connection and your computer as works of the secular devils. Otherwise we will corrupt you and take away from you your most precious possession, the virginity of your brain preserved from the darkness and pollution of cognition and analysis.