Topic Creationist claim (again

From: Tim R. Rettger. 104731,216 To: Steve Estvanik, 105156,1365

Christian City Forum Section: SmokeHouse<debate> Msg #86623, No Replies

Thu, May 1, 1997, 3:57PM

" where do you want to start -- show me the evidence for a young earth or a Noah's flood....."

Steve, Steve.......open your eyes and mind. Do you really think that can come on here with your religion, which has no proof. Somethings may seem to agree with what you say but to try and push evolution off as fact! You have no more than a christian and his Bible. Except a bigger imagination. I have read your post for sometime and know that this is a waste of time. Check the internet, you will find many answers too YOUR questioins. Ask a scientist who does not belief in the "big bang" fairy tale. There is much out there. Here is some for you. I am a very busy man, but will try to hang around for awhile.

While examining thin sections (very thin slices) of granites, Dr. Robert V. Gentry found certain ring-type structures, {or "haloes"}, within samples of granites from all around the Earth. These impressions had to be put into the granites sometime during their formation, due to the fact that they are within the matrix,(or crystaline structure), and not stamped on the outside of the granites. Granites are the basement rocks of the world, and so it would be impossible to "doctor" or "fake" these results.

According to cosmological-evolutionary theory, it took hundreds of millions of years for the granites to form, and yet these haloes are WITHIN the granites!

If you find a sunken ship off the coast of Florida, and find some gold coins, you would know that the ship could have sunk no earlier than the newest coin found there!

Likewise, if you find something within the inner structure,(or matrix), of these granites, the granites HAD to form faster than the items would have taken to disappear, or degenerate.

Radioactive elements are called isotopes, and they have an elevated energy state. It is the natural process for these isotopes to give off their excess energy and to eventually "step-down" in energy level until they are no longer radioactive.

Each different radioactive element, or isotope, has a different amount of energy stored up in its particular "elevated energy state." This means that it will take different isotopes different amounts of time to give off their excess energy. This leads to different lengths of time for each individual isotope's "half-life."

What a half-life is, is that period of time in which a given radioactive element, or isotope, needs to give off enough of its excess energy for only half of the amount of the sample to be still radioactive. The length of time for each isotope, or radioactive element, is different. Some are fast, and some are very slow, or long lasting.

Scientists have determined that in order to show that a certain radioactive element, or isotope, existed at one time, you must record its emissions of its high energy particles, the alpha particles in general, within 7 of the isotope's half-lives, or else there will not be enough high-energy particles left to emit and leave trails on or within the matrix of the matter you are using to record the decay of the isotope.

So, you have to conclude that if you find radio-haloes of radioactive elements, (isotopes), within granites, then the granites had to form faster than the 7 half-lives of fastest isotope within the sample.

What is interesting about this is that the isotope Polonium 218 has a half-life of 3 minutes!! So if you find a radiohaloe of Polonium 218 within any sample of granite, that granite HAD to form within less than 21 minutes!!

Now this is really interesting!! The isotope Polonium 214 has a half-life of 164 microseconds,(164 x 10 to the -6 or, .000164 of ONE SECOND!!!) This means that the granites ABSOLUTELY, HAD to form in less than .001148 of ONE SECOND!!!

It also means that in order for the granites, the basement or foundation rocks of the planet Earth, to have formed in less than one second, that the entire Earth had to come into existence in less than one second!

This leaves us with only ONE conclusion, which is, that when the Bible says that Jesus spoke and the universe came into existence, {"ex-nihilo",(from nothing)}, the Bible is telling the Truth! The radiohaloes within the granites give irrefutable, physical evidence of this!

{UPDATE; 12/10/96, 11:49PM CST: Previously, I had reversed the order of which isotope was which, relative to the length of their respective half-lives. I sincerely apologize for this typographical error. The validity of the conclusions are still true, the Earth WAS CREATED instantaneously.}

{UPDATE; 03/22/97, 4:36PM CST: I have discovered that I made a mathematical calculation error for the times of the half-life of polonium 214. Previously I listed the half-life to be ".0000164 of ONE SECOND", it has been corrected to read: ".000164 of ONE SECOND", and the sum of the seven half-lives was incorrectly presented as: ".0001148 of ONE SECOND". It has been corrected to read: ".001148 of ONE SECOND." Again I sincerely apologize to everyone for the error. I will correct any error that I find, if you find an error in my calculations or presentation please do not hesitate to contact me via e-mail.}

20 Questions for Evolutionists

1.Where has macro evolution ever been observed? What's the mechanism for getting new complexity such as new vital organs? How, for example, could a caterpillar evolve into a butterfly?

2.Where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there if your theory is right? Billions! Not a handful of questionable transitions. Why don't we see a reasonably smooth continuum among all living creatures, or in the fossil record, or both?

3.Who are the evolutionary ancestors of the insects? The evolutionary tree that's in the textbook: where's its trunk and where are its branches?

4.What evidence is there that information, such as that in DNA, could ever assemble itself? What about the 4000 books of coded information that are in a tiny part of each of your 100 trillion cells? If astronomers received an intelligent radio signal from some distant galaxy, most people would conclude that it came from an intelligent source. Why then doesn't the vast information sequence in the DNA molecule of just a bacteria also imply an intelligent source?

5.How could organs as complicated as the eye or the ear or the brain of even a tiny bird ever come about by chance or natural processes? How could a bacterial motor evolve?

6.If the solar system evolved, why do three planets spin backwards? Why do at least 6 moons revolve backwards?

7.Why do we have comets if the solar system is billions of years old?

8.Where did all the helium go?

9.How did sexual reproduction evolve?

10.If the big bang occurred, where did all the information around us and in us come from? Has an explosion ever produced order? Or as Sir Isaac Newton said, "Who wound up the clock?"

11.Why do so many of the earth's ancient cultures have flood legends?

12.Where did matter come from? What about space, time, energy, and even the laws of physics?

13.How did the first living cell begin? That's a greater miracle than for a bacteria to evolve to a man. How did that first cell reproduce?

14.Just before life appeared, did the atmosphere have oxygen or did it not have oxygen?

15.Why aren't meteorites found in supposedly old rocks?

16.If it takes intelligence to make an arrowhead, why doesn't it take vastly more intelligence to create a human? Do you really believe that hydrogen will turn into people if you wait long enough?

17.Which came first, DNA or the proteins needed by DNA--which can only be produced by DNA?

18.Can you name one reasonable hypothesis on how the moon got there--any hypothesis that is consistent with all the data? Why aren't students told the scientific reasons for rejecting all the evolutionary theories for the moon's origin?

19.Why won't qualified evolutionists enter into a written, scientific debate ?

20.Would you like to explain the origin of any of the following twenty-one features of the earth:

The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons Mid-Oceanic Ridge Continental Shelves and Slopes Ocean Trenches Seamounts and Tablemounts Earthquakes Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor Submarine Canyons Coal and Oil Formations Glaciers and the Ice Ages Frozen Mammoths Major Mountain Ranges Overthrusts Volcanoes and Lava Geothermal Heat Metamorphic Rock Strata Plateaus Salt Domes Jigsaw Fit of the Continents Fossil Graveyards If so, I will point out some obvious problems with your explanation and refer you to 77 pages that explain them all as a result of a global flood.

Here is a challenge for you. Go to www.creationscience.com. Take this guy up on it.

More coming Tim

"more mumbojumbo -- ALL science is 'just' a theory, but that doesnt stop the earth from orbitting the sun. there's no religion involved here, just scientific fact. i dont care what people think of my ideas -- but i do challenge those who want to teach their religion as IF it were science in public schools.lk"

And I challenge those who teach evolution in schools as scientific! However I do not worry as much anymore due to the fact that most who grad. from the public schools are unable to read beyond a 5th grade level. And I say that your religion, evolution is the biggest fairy tale, bar none told on this earth.

Here is more food for thought......there is much info out there and your religion has many more obstacles then you will ever be able to come close to finding the answers!

AGREEMENT for WRITTEN DEBATE

updated November 15, 1995

This offer for a written debate has stood, untouched and untaken, for over 15 years by evolutionists. It still stands........

1.The two principal debaters are:

Evolutionist:

Dr. Creationist:

Dr. Walt Brown 5612 North 20th Place Phoenix, AZ 85016

2.The intent of this debate is

(a) To provide a vehicle for a dispassionate exchange and interpretation of scientific data on both sides of a heated issue in which little constructive dialogue has been occurring.

(b) To make available to interested readers a clear and unemotional enumeration of the major scientific evidences on both sides of the creation-evolution issue. The disciplines would include: the life sciences, the astronomical sciences, the earth sciences, and the physical sciences.

3.Each debater will present the evidence which he feels supports his model (or theory) of origins and refutes the opposing model of origins. These models will be defined by each side (in a 100 words or less) and submitted with this signed agreement. [POSSIBLE EXAMPLES ARE GIVEN BELOW.]

(a) The Creation Model of Origins:

(1) Everything in the universe, to include the stars, the solar system, the earth, life, and man, came into existence suddenly and recentlyAin essentially the complexity we see today. (2) Genetic variations are limited. (3) The earth has experienced a worldwide flood.

(b) The Evolution Model of Origins:

(1) Over billions of years, the universe, the solar system, the earth, and finally life developed from disordered matter through natural processes. (2) Mutations and natural selection brought about the development of present living kinds from simple earlier kinds. (3) Man and apes have a common ancestor.

4.The debate will consist of scientific evidence and the logical inferences from that evidence . Religious ideas and beliefs, while possibly correct, will not be allowed. The editor will strike such ideas from the record. Scientific evidence consists of potentially repeatable observations or measurements which are the basis for drawing conclusions on some proposition. Religious and philosophical ideas, on the other hand, are not derived from physical observation or measurement. Each side will define its terms, organize its evidence, and present its arguments in whatever way it feels will add clarity to his case.

5.One side, selected by a flip of a coin, will nominate three possible and willing editors. The other side will select which of the three will be the editor. The editor should have no strong feelings on the creation/evolution issue.

6.The debate will consist of four submissions by each side of up to 30,000 words each. Each figure, graph, or sequence of equations will be considered the equivalent of 300 words. These submissions, along with a floppy disk version written by a well-known word processor selected by the editor, will be sent by registered mail at four month intervals to the editor. The process will begin four months after the last signature is made on this agreement. After the editor receives both submissions, he will delete any religious ideas, personal attacks, or comments that do not contribute to the intent of the debate. The editor will inform the author of any such deletions, and then mail each side's paper to the other side so that both papers arrive on about the same day.

7.The editor will:

(a) Make whatever rulings are necessary to help accomplish "2" above.

(b) Resolve any procedural disagreements brought to his attention by either side.

(d) Collect from each participant two black and white photographs and a 100-200 word biographical sketch.

(e) Direct each side, if needed, to address the more important unanswered points made by the other side, to include new issues raised during the last submission.

(f) Terminate the debate if in his opinion one side is not participating adequately.

(g) Act as editor and organizer of the final written product. (h) Write a preface to the final written debate stating these agreements, whether or not both sides followed them, and any other observations that would contribute to 2(b).

(i) Mail a copy of the final manuscript to both sides within four months of the last submission. (Cover design and obtaining an ISBN number will be the responsibility of the publisher.)

8.Both sides will bear their own expenses and share equally in the phone, mailing, and manuscript preparation expenses of the editor. The editor will receive an agreed upon royalty from the sales of the published exchange.

9.Outside parties who contribute ideas, data, or logic to the written product, must be referenced. Those who contribute substantially to the debate may become joint participants. However, the lead debater for each side (whose signature appears below), is responsible for integrating all viewpoints on his side into one coherent case.

10.References will be cited but will not contribute to the word count. Short statements taken from those references, which capture the thrust of that source, may also be considered part of that reference. This will reduce the need for a reader to look up that reference and will enhance the readability of the final written debate.

11.One side may feel that his opponent has given insufficient documentation. If the editor concurs after consulting with each side, the debater who omitted the reference will have what the editor feels would be a reasonable time to provide the reference.

12.If one debater feels that the other has quoted an authority out of context, he will notify his opponent and the editor of this in writing. If the editor concurs and the opponent fails to modify or qualify his quotation, the editor can rule that a sufficiently large portion of the quoted material become an appendix to the written debate.

13.Each side may have difficulty locating certain technical papers cited by the other side. Once these needs are made known to the editor, he will direct that each side supply specific documents to the other. The editor, after considering the number and costs involved, will use his judgment to try and balance the burden placed on each side.

14.Each side will be permitted four extensions of one month each. The side requesting the extension should notify the editor and the other side as soon as possible but at least one week before the submission is due.

15.If one side withdraws from the debate, as confirmed and explained in writing by the editor, the other party will have exclusive rights to publish any or all of the partially completed debate. The remaining side can include in the final published document the 30,000 word submission it was working on at the time of the withdrawal.

16.Within one month after the fourth submission, each side can notify the editor if it feels new issues were raised in that submission. If the editor concurs, he may permit that side to answer those new issues.

17.Each side is encouraged to correct errors that it discovers in its case. Corrections (or deletions) of previously made arguments are allowed as long as they do not exceed the word limit of the current submission. If, however, a correction is suggested by an opponent's rebuttal, that error can only be changed as described in paragraph 18 below.

18.When the fourth submission has been made and all new issues have been answered, each side can propose that certain of its arguments be deleted or modified. This "bartering process" between the sides is intended to aid the reader by eliminating, in balanced fashion, earlier statements which are superfluous, inaccurate, or have been effectively rebutted. The editor may propose, but will not dictate, what deletions are made.

19.The final form of the written debate should be as clear and readable as possible. Therefore, after the fourth submission, the editor will direct each side to assemble into one coherent argument any scattered arguments dealing with a narrow topic. No new ideas can be added. In this way the opposing arguments can then be most easily contrasted and studied by readers. The completed written debate will be in the format directed by the editor and will include, insofar as possible, the evidence and arguments placed side-by-side and point-by-point. It will consist of two main parts: (1) the evolutionist case with the creationist rebuttals placed immediately below each argument, and (2) the creationist case with the evolutionist rebuttals placed immediately below each argument. The shorter of the two cases will be placed first in the final book.

20.The drafted manuscript, minus the evaluations, will be mailed to each side for their editorial comments.

21.After the editor completes the final manuscript, each side will have the right to publish the debate or sell it. Printed copies of the debate must contain the entire debate in final form, including the editor's preface.

22.This agreement can be mod ..............