Geologists admit that coal is formed by flood conditions covering rain forest type plants then pressure and heat applied over time (not necessarilly long periods either as coal can be formed under lab conditions) So as we have massive coal deposits on this planet we can obviously account for massive flood conditions. It is interesting that confusion is added to the equation when it is assumd that as coal is at different depths in the various sediment layers following the Flood that each occurred at diffent time periods separated by millions of years -a conclusion based on a delusion as oviously bog type conditions could easily exist at different elevations before the Flood even if we didn't ajust for the earths tilt as a result of it.
It actually seems odd to me that the most prolithic defense against the evidence of a young earth by the use of the reveered C14 dating method is to reject the findings of the method, ridicule those who believe there is substance in the findings then maintain that there is no scientific way to measure the time of the formation of coal or oil.
28 comments
"prolithic defense"
Is that a stone wall?
"prolithic"
Great, so you got the forest and the wetness, now explain the pressure - and how there's oil and coal in the desert.
It's not true coal that's created under lab conditions, it's a form of carbon, that can be utilised rather like coal, in some situations. And please stop claiming carbon-dating is used to refute the young earth "evidence".
"It actually seems odd to me that the most prolithic defense against the evidence of a young earth by the use of the reveered C14 dating method is to reject the findings of the method, ridicule those who believe there is substance in the findings then maintain that there is no scientific way to measure the time of the formation of coal or oil. "
wat
Are you aware that you just slammed creationism, misspellings and all?
"then maintain that there is no scientific way to measure the time of the formation of coal or oil."
There are. Coal/oil companies use them to identify potential sources of the raw material their multi-billion dollar industry is built upon.
Do you think all those companies are wasting millions on geological surveys based on "old-earth/non-flood" science because they are part of a secret cabal. Or could it possibly be because they work?
You can date coal-bearing strata using potassium-argon or uranium-lead methods. For example, when the later technique was used on zircons embedded in the coal seams of the Parana Basin in Brazil, unsurprisingly, for anyone not a YEC twonk, the beds come out at around 250-300 MYO.
(Raised by Horses)
Actually, the only place I've ever seen that mistake made is in My Immortal . Strange that you should use that as an example. *gigglesnort*
Or
This claim has no validity even with the Biblical geneology as no dates are given for births or the ages of most. Your Literalist churchs are in fact proven to be the most uneducated and misinformed and ironically illiterate flocks about the Bible itself.
Here's what you need to know. The 6000 year old Earth is a ridiculous invention of one man and there is nothing that supports it.
@Da Rat Bastid
I've read the whole thing. It makes the average FSTDT post look like Hawthorne on his best day.
Anyway, you'll hear it if you pay attention to people with heavy British accents, (say, Cockney, rather than Received Pronunciation). The 'th' has a tendency to morph into a double 'f' sound.
"the most prolithic defense"
Hey, have some respect! Rocks have rights too, you know.
(Raised by Horses)
*sad sigh* Oh, I'm sure it does. You poor thing. *hugs RbH*
I love how YEC's claim that coal can be made under laboratory conditions, but fail to realize that the world's coal deposits were not made under laboratory conditions.
And I'd like to refudiate your prolithic defense.
anevilmeme
Carbon 14 dating is only accurate to about 5000 yrs.
Yeah, well this is wrong by an order of magnitude. C14 can be used up to around 50-60,000 year old carbon rich samples. For other samples or older dates, one has to use one of the myriads of other dating methods, mostly based upon halflifes of other isotopes.
a conclusion based on a delusion
Why do fundamentalists always miss the obvious?
Come on, God created those strata of coal to test our faith. Like, duh. ;-)
(not necessarilly long periods either as coal can be formed under lab conditions)
I'm betting that "laboratory conditions" means something like apply 1,000,000 psi of pressure and heat to 1,000 degrees for a month. Sure sounds like something that would happen on its own in nature! If you buy that, I've got some lead I'll sell to you for $100/ounce. You can easily convert it to gold under "laboratory conditions" and make a fortune selling it!
@Meeeh: I don't actually know the stats for carbon dating, but "accurate to within 5000 years" generally means "returns a figure within 5000 years of the correct date," not "only works on stuff less than 5000 years old," so based on your actual posts, you could very easily both be right.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
