From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Sep 11 2003 - 22:05:51 EDT
Jim's forward reminded me of one related YEC explanation. The bristlecone
pines are some of the oldest living things, if not absolutely the oldest.
By using dendrochronological methods with living and fallen trees, dates
can be extended back certainly before the earliest date of the Flood, and
probably before the date of creation. Part of the explanation was that
the trees produced more than one ring per year, so the true date was much
later than the apparent date. However, the rings' dates match the revised
radiocarbon dates. This was explained by a nearby nova that produced an
excess of C-14. I checked the figures, which did not match what is
possible. But, of course, everybody (that is, everybody who reads
creation research literature) knows that half-lives are not constant.
I'm going back in memory quite a few years for this. But there was an
article in the /Creation Research Society Journal/ (Quarterly ?) on the
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:02:57 -0700 "Jim Armstrong" <email@example.com>
Here's an interesting dilemma for the young earth advocates! JimA
From Don Winterstein on the ASA thread:
"Here's a question that is too early to develop an official answer.
Today's Nature has an article that confirmed the Biblical date of the
Siloam Tunnel (http://www.nature.com/nsu/030908/030908-9.html). The
question to ask is the radio carbon dating of this accurate or not. If
yes, why is radio carbon not accurate for other things? If no, then how
did it get to be right since unbelieving science is always trying to
disprove the Bible?"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Sep 11 2003 - 22:51:47 EDT