Re: News (extra)

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (
Date: Thu Sep 11 2003 - 22:05:51 EDT

  • Next message: Keith Miller: "Re: Tit for Tat?"

    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" <>
    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 ( 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