Fw: It's no joke

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue Apr 12 2005 - 01:10:54 EDT

 Subject: Re: It's no joke

> Actually tree-rings indicate alternate cold and warm weather spells, as do
> growth rings on corals . Now granted that neither grow during the winter,
> you often have alternate cold and hot spells in summer, as is developing
> now in Britain over the last 20 odd years. Here you can be in shorts in
> April and come May you have to put your winter woollies back on. Now just
> consider how that must translate into the growth of tree rings. Also I
> have observed variable growth among plants in my garden according to the
> fluctuations of weather.
>
> I hope that satisfies you David that there is a perfectly reasonable
> explanation.
>
> Michael
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "D. F. Siemens, Jr." <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 7:21 PM
> Subject: Re: It's no joke
>
>
>>I just read a news item in /Science/, 307:1841 (25 March 2005), that
>> radiocarbon dating has been calibrated back to "12,400 cal yr B.P." using
>> tree rings, and to 26,000 through corals and forminifera. The original
>> studies are in /Radiocarbon/, 46 (2005). Since an earlier calibration
>> brought out the explanation in the /Journal of the Creation Research
>> Society/ that bristlecone pines sometimes (~1 in 3 years ?) produced
>> double rings, and Vernon insists that nothing can be carbon-dated older
>> than 58,000 yr B.P., are we to recognize that every tree produces three
>> annual rings annually? Or is it that recognizing an old earth makes
>> scientists either unable to count or to recognize growth rings? Note
>> that, on YEC/flood geology assumptions, tree rings must have been
>> produced since the Flood, not since creation.
>>
>> I await the risible explanation, which contradicts the heading.
>> Dave
>>
>
Received on Tue Apr 12 01:12:36 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 12 2005 - 01:12:36 EDT