Into the Night
Contributor
Personally I think that's cool as long as they keep it private and don't try to stop others from learning about science because of their god stuff.
You deny science. You don't WANT to learn about science.
Personally I think that's cool as long as they keep it private and don't try to stop others from learning about science because of their god stuff.
It's the same with Muslims and any other religious people.
Are you saying they were biblical literalists and also physicists?
How did they explain it?
No person should be forced to endure another person's beliefs.
you have a habit of responding to what you wish I wrote, rather than what I actually wrote.Papers are not a proof. Isotopes continue to change even in solid rock. If they did not change, radiometric dating wouldn't work at all.
Not exactly sure what the evangelical Christian physicists thought, but their particular brand of Protestantism encourages a literal reading of the bible.
I did run across a couple of geologists who actually gave credence to literall creationism and had serious doubts about evolution.
My theory is that for some reason they are perfectly capable of passing college level tests in physics, chemistry, earth sciences while still holding on to their personal opinion about biblical creation..
Exactly.
We live within a time bubble. Outside, if there is one, there is no time. It's eternal.
We experience time in one direction and moment by moment when all there is and all there ever will be already exists.
Not a physics guy, but I look at reality like a movie reel. It's all there even though we only see it one frame at a time.
Sure. You and I could pass a test, after study, of Islam without actually believing the religion.
It's odd to go the other way; disregard fact in favor of faith.
The problem with the concepts of eternal and forever is that it assumes time exists.
Time cannot exist without space. So what is space?
Movement (space) cannot exist without time. So what is time?
You have a habit of denying your own argument.you have a habit of responding to what you wish I wrote, rather than what I actually wrote.
So?All educated people are aware of radioactive decay.
Radioactive decay always occurs in materials capable of radioactive decay.The radiometric clock doesn't work unless the isotopic distribution in the medium is isolated from reacting with the environment, aka atmosphere, fluids, active metabolism. That happens when a body's metabolism ceases, when a rock lithifies, or when an air bubble is trapped in ice. Then the radioactive decay actually can be used as a radiometric clock.
You have a habit of denying your own argument.
So?
Radioactive decay always occurs in materials capable of radioactive decay.
"[In the uranium-series dating method] since the primary long-lived daughter, 230Th, is largely water insoluble, in any process involving dissolution and redeposition of uranium there will be effectively no thorium present in the newly formed crystal matrix, and, provided the system remains closed, the proportions of generated thorium and other daughters can be used as a clock. "
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/uranium-series-dating
How many ‘mortal blows’ has creationism received now lol?
I’ve lost count.
Apparently zero mortal blows up until now.
The 2019 Gallup poll reported that 40 percent of Americans believe that God made humans in their current from less than ten thousand years ago.
How many ‘mortal blows’ has creationism received now lol?
I’ve lost count.
Apparently zero mortal blows up until now.
The 2019 Gallup poll reported that 40 percent of Americans believe that God made humans in their current from less than ten thousand years ago.
So lol?
Why does that matter? Don’t we have some bigger fish to fry?
I accept your tacit confession that you were wrong, and a mortal blow has never been landed on creationism in USA.
I am not clicking on that link.
You will have to tell me in your own words what point you are trying to make