Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (8)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • ''But if we start with scriptures''... then it is not Science.

    @3;40 assume the layers were from the river. WRONG, the river did not make the layers, it made the canyon. The Coconinio Sandstone, the third layer down, is from wind blown Sand. Most of the layers were formed in a shallow sea, they are shales and limestone and slow growing corals.

  • WTF is Evolutionary Geology?  Is it like Paleontology?

  • On Wiki, Andew Snelling redirects to a page about a Church that is a daughter church. This is proof of social decay, over time. He may or may not have passed an exam qualifying him as a Dr. It isn't important "of what"since he starts asserting the walls of the grand canion were formed by the river. Tha't makes no physical sence. The river only exposed what predated it! He wants to refute science giving ABSOLUTE ages. But it actually estimates ages! He is an anti-scientist! Stone his nonsence!

  • If the radioactive decay rate increased,

    1. Radioactive heat released would blow up the Earth, or at least totally melt it.

    2. Kill all lifeforms via radiation poisoning, if they survived the Earth blowing up.

    3. Since the phenomena is, presumably, universal, the Sun would go Supernova.

    4. The planet Jupiter should be a small Star.

    5. etc.

    And even assuming this happened, but none of the above happened, it could happen again, blowing up every nuclear weapon & nuclear powerstation on Earth.

  • I know a Christian physicist / radiologist who thinks Andrew Snelling is clutching at straws on his RATE theory. The earth looks old because it is ancient. See Talkorigins and Truth-saves

    See Jerry Coyne, " Why evolution is true " and Dawkins, " The Ancestors Tale ". Try comparing the Bible myths to older ANE myths like the Epic of Gilgamesh. What is more likely, that Genesis is fact or that it is folkstories based on or similar to older myth. Miracle or Fiction ?

  • Well I don't know if you guys know this yet, But main stream science as of now Know that the rate of radioactive decay is not constant, In fact it varies with the suns cycles and the associated neutrino outbursts and solar flares. Again this is a recent publication in the most prestigious peer review journals and was done by Perdu and Stanford professors, research it and get back to me. . :)

  • @tahkevin This is good news, thank you.

  • @tahkevin Thats true, there are many things that can change the consistancy the radioactive decay rates of unstable atoms, nuclear fission is one of them and this can occur in nature, usually in magnetospheres of planets etc. Nuclear fusion in stars can also change the consistany and this happenes every second in the core of star. Ionizing radiation is another thing. Of course radioisitope dating is'nt going to be completely flawless, nothing is flawless.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more