Dianeroy@peoplepc.com wrote:
>> > A. The sedimentary rocks are as much as millions of years old.
>> > B. Fossils represent the record of life forms which existed over
>> >millions of years.
>> >Both of these assumptions are not provable, and are accepted on faith.
>>
>> huh? did radiometric dating and the physics which supports it vanish in
>> thin air? "on faith" may mean something different to you and me. "Proof,"
>> as such is a mathematical concept, not a biological one. However, the
>> evidence for an ancient earth is immense. Faith usually doesn't require any
>> evidence at all.
Allen:
> One of the assumptions of all radiometric dating is that the rocks are
>old enough to be measured by whichever of the radio-isotope pairs (or
>more) you choose. Since you must first assume old rocks, the dates
>acquired by measuring the radio-isotopes cannot be used to prove the
>rocks old. You can use all the physics you want, but it still won't get
>around this fact of logic: You can't prove what you assume.
I'd wonder where you got this nonsense, but I know it is widely spread
around creationist websites and books. Please read:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dating.html
The assumption underlying radiometric dating is that isotopes decay at a
steady rate and that rate is measurable.
Alan:
>> >the eyewitness evidence
>> >given in the Bible.
Me:
>> There is also eye witness evidence that Spider Woman gave birth to the
>> world. There is also eyewitness evidence that the world was created by
>> Brahaman >from a cosmic egg. Etc.
Alan:
> It all comes down to which is true. The Bible is. All others are not.
and why is that? because you believe so? or do you have some evidence? There
is an identical amount of evidence for Spider Woman and the Cosmic Egg.
Susan
--------
Peace is not the absence of conflict--it is the presence of justice.
--Martin Luther King, Jr.
Please visit my website:
http://www.telepath.com/susanb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 29 2000 - 22:43:55 EST