My Favorite (to date) take down of Creationism.

[Guest]

Returning yet again to the thread topic from persistent derails, here is yet another proof against a young earth.

Where did Ar-40 in earth's atmosphere come from?

In the universe, and in Jupiter and the Sun locally, Ar-36 is the most abundant argon isotope, followed by Ar-38. In the cosmic scheme of things, Ar-40 is so rare that we don’t even know what its overall abundance is.

In the Sun and in primordial star-forming clouds, argon consists of < 15% Ar-38 and mostly (85%) Ar-36. Similarly, the ratio of the three isotopes Ar-36: Ar-38: Ar-40 in the atmospheres of the outer planets is measured to be 8400: 1600: 1

Earth is a rocky planet. It was not able to hold onto much gas during its formation, so there is very little Ar-36 and Ar-38 here. Earth has lots of potassium though, so almost all the argon in the atmosphere of Earth is Ar-40, which is the decay product of K-40.

Breakdown of the isotopes of argon in the Earth's atmosphere:
Ar-40 99.60%
Ar-38 0.063%
Ar-36 0.337%

Earth's atmosphere contains a little less than one percent of the inert gas argon, an approximate total of 6.59 x 10^19 grams. In the radioactive decay of K-40, 11.2 percent decays into Ar-40 and the remainder into Ca-40. The lithosphere (outer layers) of the earth has been estimated to be 2.59 percent potassium, of which about 0.01167 percent is K-40. An approximately total of 5 x 10^21 grams of K-40 in the earth of which 11.2 percent could eventually decay into Ar-40. K-40 has a half life of 1.26 billion years (1.26 x 10^9). To generate the amount of Ar-40 found in the atmosphere would require in round numbers 250 million years.

references:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 9/abstract
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_argon
http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Physical_Ch ... e_Elements
http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/atmargon.html

[Guest]

This site gives a devastating point by point refutation of YEC's 101 evidences for a young earth, including their so called "flood geology."

But it really isn't necessary to go through this whole list to see the irrationality of YEC. Gravity and math alone devastatingly refutes YEC "flood geology."

[_spotlight]

But it really isn't necessary to go through this whole list to see the irrationality of YEC. Gravity and math alone devastatingly refutes YEC "flood geology."

YECs-"The grand canyon is a washed out spillway."

Right, because a receding flood does not carve anything. So YECs have to assert that there was a lake that remained after the flood receded and that it broke and washed out the Grand Canyon. But Gunnar's reference shows why that isn't a possibility. But for the sake of argument let's assume there isn't a problem with the YEC explanation.

Then YEC's can't stop there. They'd have to have a similar lake that broke for all the other canyons and gorges on earth as well.

Americas

Atuel Canyon, Mendoza Province, Argentina
Black Canyon of the Gunnison, Colorado, United States
Breaks Canyon. Kentucky/Virginia, United States
Canyon de Chelly, Arizona, United States
Canyon Sainte-Anne, Quebec, Canada
Chicamocha Canyon, Santander, Colombia
Colca Canyon, Arequipa, Peru
Columbia River Gorge, Oregon and Washington, United States
Copper Canyon, Chihuahua, Mexico
Cotahuasi Canyon, Arequipa, Peru
Fraser Canyon, British Columbia, Canada
Grand Canyon, Arizona, United States
Grand Canyon of the Stikine, British.Columbia, Canada
Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone, Wyoming, United States
Grand Canyon of Torotoro, Torotoro, Potosi Department, Bolivia
Guartelá Canyon, Paraná, Brazil
Hells Canyon, Idaho and Oregon, United States
Horseshoe Canyon, Alberta, Canada
Itaimbezinho, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Kings Canyon National Park, California, United States
Little River Canyon, Alabama, United States
Logan Canyon, Utah, United States
Nine Mile Canyon, Utah, United States
Ouimet Canyon, Ontario, Canada
Palo Duro Canyon, Texas, United States
Saturban canyon, Santander, Colombia
Somoto Canyon, Somoto, Madriz, Nicaragua
St. Christopher's Canyon (Cañon de San Cristobal), Barranquitas/Aibonito, Puerto Rico
Sumidero Canyon, Chiapas, Mexico
Huasteca Canyon, Monterrey, Mexico
Waimea Canyon, Hawaii, United States

Africa

Blyde River Canyon, Mpumalanga, South Africa
Fish River Canyon, Namibia

Europe

Bletterbach, South Tyrol, Italy
Dniester Canyon, Ukraine
Fjaðrárgljúfur Canyon, Iceland
Greenland's Grand Canyon, Greenland
Kanionet e Skraparit, Albania
Matka Canyon, Republic of Macedonia
Mides Canyon, Tunisia
Nfeye Canyon, Portugal
Rugova Canyon, Kosovo
Tara River Canyon, Montenegro
Verdon Gorge, France

Asia

Charyn Canyon, Kazakhstan
Harmanköy Canyon, Bilecik Turkey
Indus River Gorge through the Himalaya, Pakistan
Shnizow Canyon, Uşak, Turkey
Tiger Leaping Gorge, Yunnan, China
Valla Canyon, Kure, Kastamonu, Turkey
Yarlung Zangbo Grand Canyon, Tibet Autonomous Region, China

Australia

Barfold Gorge, Victoria
Barron Gorge, Queensland
Bouldercombe Gorge, Queensland
Cambanoora Gorge, Queensland
Carnarvon Gorge, Queensland
Cataract Gorge, Tasmania
Dimond Gorge, Western Australia
Galston Gorge, New South Wales
Katherine Gorge, Northern Territory
Kings Canyon, Northern Territory
Lerderderg Gorge, Victoria
Loch Ard Gorge, Victoria
Little River Gorge, Victoria
Mossman Gorge, Queensland
Murchison River Gorge, Western Australia
Nepean Gorge, New South Wales
Porcupine Gorge, Queensland
Palm Valley, Northern Territory
Ravine des Casoars, South Australia
Sturt Gorge, South Australia
Windjana Gorge, Western Australia

New Zealand

Skippers Canyon, New Zealand

List of gorges

Aragvi River Gorge, Georgia (country)
Ardèche Gorges, Rhône-Alpes, France
Avon Gorge, Bristol, England
Barron Gorge, Queensland, Australia
Bog Walk Gorge, Saint Catherine Parish, Jamaica
Bued Gorge, Benguet, Philippines
Buller Gorge, Buller, New Zealand
Cataract Gorge, Launceston, Australia
Cheddar Gorge, Somerset, England
Chovar Gorge, Kathmandu, Nepal
Columbia River Gorge, Oregon/Washington, United States
Corrieshalloch Gorge, Ullapool, Scotland
Ebbor Gorge, Somerset, England
Daluis Gorge, Provence, France
Flume Gorge, New Hampshire, United States
Galston Gorge, NSW, Australia
Gorropu, Sardinia, Italy
Hell's Gate Gorge, Hell's Gate National Park, Naivasha, Kenya
Ironbridge Gorge, Shropshire, England
James River Gorge, Virginia, United States
Kali Gandaki Gorge, Gandaki, Nepal
Kloof, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (The word Kloof means 'gorge' in Afrikaans)
Komati Gorge, South Africa
Lanner Gorge, South Africa
Lehigh River Gorge, The Poconos, Northeastern Pennsylvania.
Letchworth State Park (Genesee River Gorge), New York, United States
Liechtensteinklamm, Salzburg (state), Austria
Linville Gorge Wilderness, North Carolina, United States
Manawatu Gorge, Manawatu, North Island, New Zealand
Montalban Gorge, Philippines
New River Gorge, West Virginia, United States
Niagara Gorge, Canada/United States
North and South Gorges of North Stradbroke Island, QLD, Australia
Katherine Gorge of Nitmiluk National Park in Australia
Olduvai Gorge, Great Rift Valley, Africa
Pankisi Gorge, Georgia (country)
Painted Chasm, Chasm Provincial Park, British Columbia, Canada
Pine Creek Gorge, Pennsylvania, United States
Quechee Gorge, Vermont, United States
Red River Gorge, Kentucky, United States
Richtis Gorge, Crete, Greece
Rio Grande Gorge, New Mexico, United States
Ripogenus Gorge, Maine, United States
Royal Gorge, Colorado, United States
Samaria Gorge, Crete, Greece
Siq, Petra, Jordan
Talari Gorges, Mali
Tallulah Gorge, Georgia, United States
Gorges du Tarn, France
Taroko Gorge of Taroko National Park, Taiwan
Three Gorges, Chongqing, China
Tiger Leaping Gorge, Yunnan, China
Verdon Gorge, Provence, France
Viamala, Graubünden, Switzerland
Vikos Gorge, Vikos–Aoös National Park, Greece

[_Gunnar]

Yes! To repeat what AronRa concluded in the link I provided in my OP:

2. ...but once sincere believers begin to investigate the evidence and arguments on either side of this alleged controversy, they will very quickly find themselves making a life altering choice--whether to remain Creationists or whether to remain honest, because it is no longer possible to be both.

So to LittleNipper and other YECs, are you going to remain a Young Earth Creationist or remain honest? If you have really examined the evidence available and the arguments on both sides, it is simply not possible to be both, like it or not. If you refuse to even look at or address the overwhelming contrary evidence, that, in itself, demonstrates a profound lack of integrity and honesty.

[_jo1952]

Yes! To repeat what AronRa concluded in the link I provided in my OP:

2. ...but once sincere believers begin to investigate the evidence and arguments on either side of this alleged controversy, they will very quickly find themselves making a life altering choice--whether to remain Creationists or whether to remain honest, because it is no longer possible to be both.

So to LittleNipper and other YECs, are you going to remain a Young Earth Creationist or remain honest? If you have really examined the evidence available and the arguments on both sides, it is simply not possible to be both, like it or not. If you refuse to even look at or address the overwhelming contrary evidence, that, in itself, demonstrates a profound lack of integrity and honesty.

When people believe something, that belief is truth to them. Who is anyone to say that the truth of another demonstrates a lack of integrity or honesty? I recognize what I used to think of as a lack of integrity or a form of dishonesty, as nothing more than cognitive dissonance wherever I saw holes from one thought to another. From any one person's perspective the perspective of another can appear to be flawed. No one is right or wrong....just different. We base our beliefs not only what we have been taught, but also upon our personal experiences (which then, inevitably, get compared with what we've been taught). Unless we are willing to open our minds to other possibilities (and there is nothing wrong with NOT opening our minds that way), we just aren't going to be able to see or hear differently. While our choices have consequences, my new paradigm allows for all choices because, as advanced humans (the Father...."Gods"--according to religion) participating inside of mortality, how can we think that any of us is better, or superior, or chosen above others? To borrow a religious phrase, "who can know the mind of God"? We each, as unique and individual "gods"...and to each of us, we are the most important "god"---and we should also be treating others as the gods they are...are experiencing our existence in our own way. We can't possibly know how someone else experiences their life...we can't know what their experiences have been because we aren't the ones who are experiencing their life. Neither can they know ours. Each journey is personal and unique.

I now look at the consequences of belief systems...to see how they treat those who don't agree with them. I don't see much tolerance or kindness being shown on any board. I try, but I still fail...a LOT. What I have found is that neither do we treat each other kindly via the virtual Internet world, we also don't treat each other nicely in person face-to-face. The rich think poorly of the poor, the religious think they are saved and that non-believers aren't, science types think that those who don't agree with them are stupid or fools, the educated think they are superior to the uneducated, etc., etc.

Still, because I now see us as the Father....as "Gods", I can't help but recognize that we are ALL the Father. It changes my perspective about everything. It doesn't make me right or wrong...just different. I AM my own unique "god"; as are each of you.

[_Gunnar]

Jo, what is the difference between what you are claiming here and solipsism?

sol•ip•sism‌ (ˈsɒl ɪpˌsɪz əm)

‌n. ‌
‌ 1. ‌ the theory that only the self exists, or can be proved to exist.
‌ 2. ‌ self-absorption.
[1880–85; < Latin ‌sōl(us)‌ only, sole1 + ‌ips(e)‌ self + -ism]
‌sol′ip•sist,‌ ‌n. ‌
‌sol`ip•sis′tic,‌ ‌adj. ‌
‌Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.

Surely everyone has the right to believe what they want, no matter how foolish or contrary to reality, but that doesn't preclude one from being a fool or dishonest for choosing to believe or claim to believe something that is massively contradicted by the best available evidence. To me, choosing to believe in YEC is on the same level of foolishness as adamantly denying that 2 + 2 really equals 4. Interestingly, some biblical inerrantists even go so far as to say they would even accept that 2 + 2 = 5 if they could be shown that the Bible said so!

You said

We base our beliefs not only what we have been taught, but also upon our personal experiences (which then, inevitably, get compared with what we've been taught). Unless we are willing to open our minds to other possibilities (and there is nothing wrong with NOT opening our minds that way), we just aren't going to be able to see or hear differently.

I don't agree with you that "there is nothing wrong with NOT opening our minds that way." I think it is irrational and arrogant (and can, in some cases, be dangerous or even fatal) to refuse to open one's mind to honestly presented and well evidenced alternatives when they become available. The problem with YEC is that it is neither honestly presented nor supported by the available evidence. Worst of all, many YECs threaten hell and eternal damnation for anyone who doesn't subscribe to their world view. At least you don't ever to that, for which I commend you.

[_jo1952]

Jo, what is the difference between what you are claiming here and solipsism?

sol•ip•sism‌ (ˈsɒl ɪpˌsɪz əm)

‌n. ‌
‌ 1. ‌ the theory that only the self exists, or can be proved to exist.
‌ 2. ‌ self-absorption.
[1880–85; < Latin ‌sōl(us)‌ only, sole1 + ‌ips(e)‌ self + -ism]
‌sol′ip•sist,‌ ‌n. ‌
‌sol`ip•sis′tic,‌ ‌adj. ‌
‌Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.

I don't believe that only the self exists. In fact, I think there are around 15 billion of us who are going to be participating inside of mortality. Only about a third of that number have started entering before Christ sets up His government. The other two-thirds are waiting. All 100% are advanced humans...and all of them are watching not only what is happening inside of our solar system (our current eternal round); they are also watching what is happening inside of other solar systems (the eternal rounds of other advanced humans).

I don't agree with you that "there is nothing wrong with NOT opening our minds that way." I think it is irrational and arrogant (and can, in some cases, be dangerous or even fatal) to refuse to open one's mind to honestly presented and well evidenced alternatives when they become available. The problem with YEC is that it is neither honestly presented nor supported by the available evidence. Worst of all, many YECs threaten hell and eternal damnation for anyone who doesn't subscribe to their world view. At least you don't ever to that, for which I commend you.

I was asked what proof I have for what I believe. I have no proof which will pass the peer-review process....though what I believe would at least be something I think Einstein would consider because of his opinion "that some spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe, one that is vastly superior to that of man". I have no proof which would pass what religion teaches, either. As I have already said, those who believe in religion reject my belief right off the bat because it is blasphemy to what they currently believe about "God". As far as those science types who DO believe in "God"...they are probably going to reject it as well because they more than likely believe in the "God" of religion....so to them it would also be blasphemy.

I DO very much believe that, as advanced humans, we send True Messengers to mortality from time to time in order to offer something that counters the belief systems mankind has created which have so much power over our thinking. I believe that those TM's most often are sent to counter religious belief. Among those would be the likes of Isaiah, Moses (though I think that the man who is represented by the Moses of religion has become subject the same type of myth as the Christ), Ezekiel, Mohammad (whose teachings have become completely corrupted by the religion of Islam), Joseph Smith, and others. One who I believe was sent to counter the power of philosophy over man's thinking was Socrates. I bring these individuals up because their message is just as valuable to all of mankind, even though they were sent to counter the power of only some of our beliefs. Also, the words of those who entered into religion can only be found inside of religious canon---or other teachings of religion (though not necessarily canon)...though they have been twisted and built upon according to the precepts of man (of which religion is the most powerful). In fact, it is TM's themselves who wind up giving the people (whose religion they came to counter) more religion because the people's desire was to have more (such as Moses, Christ, and Joseph Smith). So it is that from inside of religion is where I now find some of their prophecies being fulfilled in the modern world. Unfortunately, since the believers in religion can't see or hear other than through their religious beliefs, they won't believe that the prophecies are being fulfilled. Those of science who don't believe "that some spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe, one that is vastly superior to that of man" will reject that prophecy has been fulfilled because they reject that something outside of their beliefs is taking place.

Among the prophecies being fulfilled are publications that have now been made available...and, as prophesied, they have come through yet another TM. I could point you to them, but I predict that you will reject them for the reason already stated. Since they are available in order that those who enter mortality can't say that the Real Truth was never made available, it doesn't matter whether they are rejected or not. In fact, I have mentioned this elsewhere on this website and was told I was foolish and didn't know what I was talking about; just an example of how what I now believe gets rejected. Meh...no harm; no foul. It is always up to the individual to accept or reject whatever they want to. If we want to find out what is now offered about our human reality, as well as John's Revelation (which fulfills prophecy written about both), we can now find them. What we do with it is up to us. If you want to find them, your advanced self will help you out. If, OTOH, you don't think it is necessary, your advanced self is not going to help....and without penalty....after all, you are an extension of your own advanced self. Your advanced self does not have the desire to punish itself. Yeah, I know....I've got to be sounding crazy by most...if not all who are reading this. It's just that there are rules that have been set up for participation inside of mortality...and they need to be followed in order for certain things to be made manifest to the individual. Being allowed to even find Real Truth has its own rules. We aren't punished for not following them....we just wind up getting to experience mortality while having accessed it. It's no bed of roses...that's for sure. But it does change my perspective about everything; and the biggest thing it has done is it has allowed me to abandon very powerful beliefs systems created by mankind. It scared the hell out of me (hahaha...quite literally) for me to have the courage to allow myself to believe that religion was teaching me about false concepts.

What is taking place here is being recorded through the use of advanced technology (of which we have only begun to scratch the surface in mortality). It is through these "memories" being created inside of mortality, that we will be able to access the things our avatars have experienced with opposition to how things are from the second estate, which serve our advanced self. We are able to access those memories any time we want to. This is HOW we are able to experience joy in our existence....through the avatars we send who do the experiencing of imperfectness and opposition to the second estate.

Peace to you, Gunnar!!! And to all other participants!!! You are helping to make my experience pretty awesome!!!

[_Gunnar]

Peace to you also, Jo! I'm glad that you feel you are benefiting from this discussion! I know that I have benefited from it and what I have learned from several of the participants here. I hope you understand why I am so upset with what is clearly the dishonest and irrational claims of Young Earth Creationism, and especially their penchant for threatening hellfire and damnation for anyone who rejects them. I also feel sorry for those YEC's who are genuinely deceived into believing the narrow, limited world view presented by YEC. The actual reality of biological evolution and fantastic diversity and beauty made possible by it, and the awesome grandiosity of the universe that we observe is so much broader than that, much more interesting, and even more inspiring than the narrow YEC worldview in my honest opinion, whether or not there is actually a God or gods behind it all.

[_LittleNipper]

There is no complete geological scale (as understood by evolutionists) found anywhere on the planet.

The concept quite prevalent among some Christians that the geologic column does not exist is quite wrong. Morris and Parker (1987, p. 163) write:

"Now, the geologic column is an idea, not an actual series of rock layers. Nowhere do we find the complete sequence."

They are wrong. Not only is the whole column piled up in one place where one oil well can drill through it in North Dakota, the entire geologic column is found in 25 other basins around the world, piled up in proper order. These basins are:

The Ghadames Basin in Libya
The Beni Mellal Basin in Morrocco
The Tunisian Basin in Tunisia
The Oman Interior Basin in Oman
The Western Desert Basin in Egypt
The Adana Basin in Turkey
The Iskenderun Basin in Turkey
The Moesian Platform in Bulgaria
The Carpathian Basin in Poland
The Baltic Basin in the USSR
The Yeniseiy-Khatanga Basin in the USSR
The Farah Basin in Afghanistan
The Helmand Basin in Afghanistan
The Yazd-Kerman-Tabas Basin in Iran
The Manhai-Subei Basin in China
The Jiuxi Basin China
The Tung t'in - Yuan Shui Basin China
The Tarim Basin China
The Szechwan Basin China
The Yukon-Porcupine Province Alaska
The Williston Basin in North Dakota
The Tampico Embayment Mexico
The Bogata Basin Colombia
The Bonaparte Basin, Australia
The Beaufort Sea Basin/McKenzie River Delta

(Sources:
Robertson Group, 1989;
A.F. Trendall et al , editors, Geol. Surv. West. Australia Memoir 3, 1990, pp 382, 396;
N.E. Haimla et al, The Geology of North America, Vol. L, DNAG volumes, 1990, p. 517)

Please view the following and ponder a bit more: http://creation.com/does-geologic-column-exist

[_LittleNipper]

The Deluge is the obvious explanation for most fossils found today.

Really? Then please explain the previous post I gave you on chemostratigraphy. Oh and here is another for you to explain as well.

Creationists must explain to us how sediment and rock laid down in a mere year can yield such fantastic, orderly differences in radiometric ages. This poses a fatal problem whether one believes in the accuracy of radiometric dating or not! One would think that the flood sediments (gathered from the four corners of the old antediluvian world) and their associated igneous rock (formed during the flood) would all register very little radiometric age. At the very least we would expect random fluctuations if the radiometric methods were completely in error. Why should the percentage of lead to uranium in zircon crystals (the key to ordinary uranium-lead, radiometric dating) depend on which geologic period they are found in? If most of the geologic column were created during Noah's flood, would it really matter whether a zircon crystal was found in Cambrian strata or Cretaceous strata, in Jurassic strata or Tertiary strata? Noah's flood might just as easily deposit the same crystal in one place as another.

Thus, we have a mystery. Pressure has nothing to do with it, and zircon crystals all have about the same density as their total lead content is small. Just what is it that a Cambrian stratum has which a Cretaceous stratum lacks? What does the Jurassic strata have that the Tertiary strata do not? If rock type mattered then we would expect a zircon crystal's lead content to vary dramatically within the Cambrian or Cretaceous strata according to their local rock types. No, that's not what we observe. How about neutrinos or cosmic rays? Neutrinos penetrate the earth so easily that they would affect all strata more or less equally, to the extent that they affect anything at all. Cosmic rays, on the other hand, don't penetrate that far into the earth to begin with, so we can rule them out. The depth of burial, itself, has little to do with our mystery. In some parts of the world the Cretaceous is found deeper than is the Cambrian in other parts of the world. The depth at which either is found can vary dramatically. In the Grand Canyon area the Cambrian lies beneath a huge column of strata; in California's Mojave Desert portions of the Cambrian are exposed at the surface.

For the young-earth creationist, this is an unsolvable mystery, a mystery with parallels in each of the radiometric clocks used by geologists. The potassium-argon, rubidium-strontium, samarium-neodymium, luteium-hafnium, rhenium-osmium, thorium-lead, and the two uranium-lead dating methods all point to the same amazing fact. The ratio between tiny amounts of radioactive elements and their decay products have this uncanny ability to determine which strata a rock will appear in! What is this magic ingredient that each of the geologic periods have which affects rocks and zircon crystals so? For those who believe that each of the geologic periods were laid down in days or weeks by Noah's flood, the mystery has no intelligent answer. For the rest of us, the answer is as plain as daylight. The answer to our riddle is time. The Cambrian has simply been around a lot longer than the Cretaceous, and the radioactive uranium in its zircon crystals has had more time to decay into lead. The same radioactive elements in different geologic periods will have decayed by different amounts.

ref:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-gc.html

I would suggest you reconsider: http://www.icr.org/index.php?action=sub ... odule=home