"Boy was I wrong". Boy,have you never looked at the hundreds of other volcanic deposits around the world. Geologists knew all this crap way way before 1980. You don't even have to concentrate on volcanoes in your geology education to know it because it's in pre grad sedimentology and stratigraphy text books that every geology student reads.To act suprised about what happened at Mt St Helen's is like a mathematician being suprised that 1+1 = 2
He also likes to go on about the widely different reading geologists have gotten from dating in the GC. What the liar won't tell you is he is using results from 50 years ago when geologists knew their results were crude given the limitations of their equipment, especially their mass spectrometers. The liar won't tell you how tight the results have been since the 1980's when the techniques and the equipment had matured. Again, he is a liar.
Austin's dating of the GC is a lie. It was so flawed as to be laughable. His readings are from an area he knew beforehand (from a previous study) to give anomolous readings because the geology does not meet the criteria for performing isochronous testing. Repeat, he is a prime example of a creationist who is writing garbage for a selected audience of morons who will accept it unwillingly.
PS-Obviously the debunking you received the first time had little impact (where do you thing Morris got his information for his video?). I guess I have a little project ahead of me!
You decided to bring in my buddy, Steve-o! You know, I actually own this DVD. Interestingly, Steve-o is guilty of plagerism from another young-earth creationist. His claim on tree deposits in Spirit Lake, actually came from Harold G Coffin. For someone who claims to be presenting superior scientific evidence, you do like to be scrapping off the bottom of the burial!
I am gathering that you are not bothered by the fact that Austin had never written an article on the trees in Spirit Lake, yet claims on the video that the tree theory he associated with Specimen Ridge was his idea.
dingorex-I am not certain what sources you are using for your information (but as I already demonstrated twice) you really ought to find something more accurate and reliable. Darwin never developed the geologic timescale. That was developed in the late 18th and early 19th Century by "creationists." The current age of the earth was obtained through factual study and repeated many, many times. I believe this is a diversion to the true problem that Austin deliberatly committed fraud.
um, an exploding mountain might be a special case?
nedladdy 5 months ago
"Boy was I wrong". Boy,have you never looked at the hundreds of other volcanic deposits around the world. Geologists knew all this crap way way before 1980. You don't even have to concentrate on volcanoes in your geology education to know it because it's in pre grad sedimentology and stratigraphy text books that every geology student reads.To act suprised about what happened at Mt St Helen's is like a mathematician being suprised that 1+1 = 2
SkepticalAaron 1 year ago
@malthusia2
Correcting someone's lies is not character assassination.
He is talking about geology not evolution.
Geologists said the earth was millions of years old, 200 years ago. Nuclear Scientist say it is 4,566 million years old.
gregrutz 2 years ago
He proved volcanos are "Catastrophe"
wow
And they make layers, unlike floods.
gregrutz 2 years ago
He also likes to go on about the widely different reading geologists have gotten from dating in the GC. What the liar won't tell you is he is using results from 50 years ago when geologists knew their results were crude given the limitations of their equipment, especially their mass spectrometers. The liar won't tell you how tight the results have been since the 1980's when the techniques and the equipment had matured. Again, he is a liar.
jhbbunch 3 years ago
But what do you really think:)
dingorex 3 years ago
Austin's dating of the GC is a lie. It was so flawed as to be laughable. His readings are from an area he knew beforehand (from a previous study) to give anomolous readings because the geology does not meet the criteria for performing isochronous testing. Repeat, he is a prime example of a creationist who is writing garbage for a selected audience of morons who will accept it unwillingly.
jhbbunch 3 years ago 2
Fine. Show me some evidence presente by Steve Austin and we will talk.
lawilson200 4 years ago
Fine. Show me some evidence presented by Steve Austin and will talk.
lawilson200 4 years ago
PS-Obviously the debunking you received the first time had little impact (where do you thing Morris got his information for his video?). I guess I have a little project ahead of me!
lawilson200 4 years ago
You decided to bring in my buddy, Steve-o! You know, I actually own this DVD. Interestingly, Steve-o is guilty of plagerism from another young-earth creationist. His claim on tree deposits in Spirit Lake, actually came from Harold G Coffin. For someone who claims to be presenting superior scientific evidence, you do like to be scrapping off the bottom of the burial!
lawilson200 4 years ago 2
Great man Harold Coffin. I donated his books,among many others, to my church's home school library:)
dingorex 4 years ago
I am gathering that you are not bothered by the fact that Austin had never written an article on the trees in Spirit Lake, yet claims on the video that the tree theory he associated with Specimen Ridge was his idea.
lawilson200 4 years ago
Let's lynch the bastard then:)
Darwin wasn't the first to posit evolutionary long ages either, so is he a Joe Bidden,too?
dingorex 4 years ago
dingorex-I am not certain what sources you are using for your information (but as I already demonstrated twice) you really ought to find something more accurate and reliable. Darwin never developed the geologic timescale. That was developed in the late 18th and early 19th Century by "creationists." The current age of the earth was obtained through factual study and repeated many, many times. I believe this is a diversion to the true problem that Austin deliberatly committed fraud.
lawilson200 4 years ago 3
I would sue him but Christians cannot sue other Christians per Jesus' command:)
dingorex 4 years ago
You would sue who? Christian sue Christians all of the time. This point is nonsense.
Get on point. Why do you rely for your scientific evidence, a person who holds no creditability to the sciences and the facts?
lawilson200 4 years ago