[_ Old Earth _] The Age of the Earth – The Helium Clock

[AlexBC]

But evolution can't be said to have a purpose in that sense. It just is.

I think people argue in defense of it not because it offers them a philosophical "why?". It's simply because it's well documented and heavily supported by the evidence.

 

[Tri Unity]

But evolution can't be said to have a purpose in that sense. It just is.

I think people argue in defense of it not because it offers them a philosophical "why?". It's simply because it's well documented and heavily supported by the evidence.

Evolution is not supported by the "evidence"; the observed data is explained by the worldview of evolution. This is a very deceiving merry-go-round.

Evolution gives people purpose, otherwise you would not be here defending it. Again, it is very deceiving.

When there is evidence that contradicts the "belief" of evolution, such as Helium amounts in the atmosphere, that evidence is discarded in favour of the worldview, which is akin to a faith. There are thousands of examples where the observed data contradicts the worldview of evolution; but like any religion, once you have come to believe it, you suffer the same blinding discord that every other religion suffers from. This is why I say that evolution is not only a worldview; it is a competing faith against Christianity.

See also:

Creation vs Evolution: The War of the Worldviews

http://www.midwestoutreach.org/journals/creation_evolution.htm

Evolution and Worldview

http://www.challies.com/articles/evolution-and-worldview

The Irrationality of an Evolutionary Worldview

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v4/n1/morality-and-irrationality-evolutionary-worldview

 

[AlexBC]

Evolution doesn't give me purpose. It's defended not as a worldview but just as a matter of education.

And there's no difference between macro evolution and the micro evolution we see in the lab. Look at dogs for an example of micro evolution. Look at fruit fly genetations in evolution research.

Why is abiogenesis not being roped into tne discussion. If anything, that would satisfy the "purpose" argument.

 

[Free]

Let's get this thread back on topic as there is a separate one for whether or not evolution is a process or worldview.

 

[Tri Unity]

Evolution doesn't give me purpose.

And thete's no difference betwrrn macro evolution and the micro evolution we see in the lab. Look at dogs for an example of micro evolution. Look at fruit fly genetations in evolution research.

Why is abiogenesis not being roped into the discussion. If anything, that would satisfy the "purpose" argument.

The terms you use, such as macro and micro evolution, and abiogenesis, are doctrinal branches of the evolution faith system; just like justification and atonement are branches of the Christian belief system. All of this gives more meaning to you, otherwise you would be completely ambivalent to the terms or the worldview. That you are even asking the question, 'how did we get here', and have sought to answer that question within the framework of evolution, proves that you are seeking philosophical answers and evolution is treated as a school of philosophy. Evolution had begun as a philosophy with Epicurus and Democritus pre-Christ. They were at least honest about it. Today's evolutionists like to pretend they do not espouse a philosophy.

 

[Tri Unity]

Let's get this thread back on topic as there is a separate one for whether or not evolution is a process or worldview.

Now you want to get back on thread. : This appears to me to be double standards.

 

[AlexBC]

I read those articles and im just now thinking that this discussion should move over to the other thread on evolution and morality.

I think we can preserve this threads topic that way.

 

[AlexBC]

Ha. Free posted that the same time as me. I guess im not the only one who thougjt we were way off topic.

 

[Tri Unity]

Helium deposits in the atmosphere, as a clock, do not support the construct of evolution. Helium is another example how the data is ignored to safeguard the worldview of evolution. Evolution is not a "mechanism", and it is not the observed data; it is an interpretation that squeezes data into the worldview mold it espouses. Evolution is a philosophy. Evolution is a religion. Hiding behind science does not alter that fact.

 

[AlexBC]

You seem to be verging into the "conspiracy theory of evolution" here.

How could the vast majority of biologists be hiding that?

And evolution is BASED on the observed facts. How could those facts be squeezed into evolution if the idea of evolution only arose out of an observance of those.......oh great! You broke the time continuum.

 

[Tri Unity]

You seem to be verging into the "conspiracy theory of evolution" here.

How could the vast majority of biologists be hiding that?

And evolution is BASED on the observed facts. How could those facts be squeezed into evolution if the idea of evolution only arose out of an observance of those.......oh great! You broke the time continuum.

LOL

All belief systems, evolution included, become victims of their own parameters. What does not fit inside the box becomes discarded.

 

[Free]

Now you want to get back on thread. : This appears to me to be double standards.

It doesn't matter what it appears to you to be, there is another topic for the off-topic discussion.

 

[Tri Unity]

It doesn't matter what it appears to you to be, there is another topic for the off-topic discussion.

Take a deep breath free. Breathe in all that helium. You can be grateful we have not been here for 4.7 billion years, as you might suppose, otherwise that helium would make you fly off into the atmosphere. This is how God confounds the wisdom of the wise.

 

[Barbarian]

Take a deep breath free. Breathe in all that helium. You can be grateful we have not been here for 4.7 billion years, as you might suppose, otherwise that helium would make you fly off into the atmosphere.

As you learned, off-gassing from the atmosphere keeps it from accumulating. Your "age of the Earth" is just the equilibrium time right now. This changes over time, depending on the tectonic activity of the Earth, which releases helium at different rates in different geological ages.

The principal source of information concerning the outgassing history of the atmosphere is the isotopic composition of helium, argon and xenon in the modern atmosphere and emerging from the upper mantle. Helium provides the best indication of current noble-gas outgassing rates which are seen to be extremely low in comparison to the mean rates over geological time. Extremely high (40Ar/36Ar) ratios in MORB (Mid-Ocean Ridge Basalt) indicate conclusively that the major release of primordial volatiles occurred before there had been significant growth of radiogenic 40Ar in the mantle, i.e. within the first 500 Ma or so of Earth history. High (129Xe/130Xe) ratios in MORB combined with the argon data can be used to indicate that 80% or more of the release occurred in the first 50 Ma of Earth history, though alternative interpretations are possible. The data can be used to constrain a narrow range of acceptable mathematical models. However, the major conclusion that outgassing occurred early in Earth history is inescapable and model independent. Further information on the detailed dependence of outgassing rates with time may come from a study of the isotopic composition of palaeoatmospheres.
http://jgs.lyellcollection.org/content/146/1/147.abstract

This is how God confounds the wisdom of the wise.

And the ignorant.

 

[Tri Unity]

As you learned, off-gassing from the atmosphere keeps it from accumulating. Your "age of the Earth" is just the equilibrium time right now. This changes over time, depending on the tectonic activity of the Earth, which releases helium at different rates in different geological ages.

This research (in your post) has been debunked.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tj/v8/n2/helium

Please keep your comments respectful. I will do the same. That you are emotionally attached to the correct assertion is gratifying. It shows you have a value system and you must therefore have been designed by a creator.

 

[Free]

This research has been debunked.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tj/v8/n2/helium

Please keep your comments respectful. I will do the same. That you are emotionally attached to the correct assertion is gratifying, however. It shows you have a value system and you must therefore have been designed by a creator.

Personally, I would tend not to put much stock into what AIG has to say. Having been designed by a creator really has nothing to do with the topic.

 

[Tri Unity]

Personally, I would tend not to put much stock into what AIG has to say. Having been designed by a creator really has nothing to do with the topic.

Answers in Genesis (AIG) directly tackles the subject of this thread: Helium. It is very convenient for you to not "put much stock in what AIG has to say." You are adept at side-stepping evidence that debunk your beliefs.

 

[Free]

Answers in Genesis (AIG) directly tackles the subject of this thread: Helium. It is very convenient for you to not "put much stock in what AIG has to say." You are adept at side-stepping evidence that debunk your beliefs.

It's because of their past history. Besides, evidence has been given to the contrary already but I can just accuse you of "side-stepping evidence that debunk your beliefs."

 

[Tri Unity]

It's because of their past history. Besides, evidence has been given to the contrary already but I can just accuse you of "side-stepping evidence that debunk your beliefs."

This game keeps going round and round... like I said, you are adept.

The evidence 'given already' was dealing with other research. You really need to pay more attention.

 

[Free]

This game keeps going round and round... like I said, you are adept.

The evidence 'given already' was dealing with other research. You really need to pay more attention.

I don't think you really read the responses to your claim that the research is so different that there is nothing in common. This game will always go round and round.