Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Paleoclimate and creationism

16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Anti-atheist
Posts: 213
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 2:59:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Easy. A carbon box change in the ice cores to give a massive amount of change in little time. Making it look like its thousands of years. In the flood massive amounts of CO2 would of been dropped into the ocean making the paleoclimate seem like thousands of years. Since the rain came down from the atmosphere it would have brought the co2 with it.
Anti-atheist

Registered genius
Certified butt-f*cker

imabench for fuhrer '13
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:05:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 2:59:59 PM, Anti-atheist wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Easy. A carbon box change in the ice cores to give a massive amount of change in little time. Making it look like its thousands of years. In the flood massive amounts of CO2 would of been dropped into the ocean making the paleoclimate seem like thousands of years. Since the rain came down from the atmosphere it would have brought the co2 with it.

But why assume a flood occured?
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Anti-atheist
Posts: 213
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 3:26:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:05:33 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:59:59 PM, Anti-atheist wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Easy. A carbon box change in the ice cores to give a massive amount of change in little time. Making it look like its thousands of years. In the flood massive amounts of CO2 would of been dropped into the ocean making the paleoclimate seem like thousands of years. Since the rain came down from the atmosphere it would have brought the co2 with it.

But why assume a flood occured?

Why not?
Anti-atheist

Registered genius
Certified butt-f*cker

imabench for fuhrer '13
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:18:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Is that site even dependable as a reference?? The Pres., VP, and Chairman all have the same last name, Idso. That seems kinda odd for a scientific organization.

How are the cores being dated??
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:28:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:05:33 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:59:59 PM, Anti-atheist wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Easy. A carbon box change in the ice cores to give a massive amount of change in little time. Making it look like its thousands of years. In the flood massive amounts of CO2 would of been dropped into the ocean making the paleoclimate seem like thousands of years. Since the rain came down from the atmosphere it would have brought the co2 with it.

But why assume a flood occured?:

Because there is physical evidence one did. The Bible says it did. Almost all civilizations say it did.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 4:31:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:05:33 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:59:59 PM, Anti-atheist wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Easy. A carbon box change in the ice cores to give a massive amount of change in little time. Making it look like its thousands of years. In the flood massive amounts of CO2 would of been dropped into the ocean making the paleoclimate seem like thousands of years. Since the rain came down from the atmosphere it would have brought the co2 with it.

But why assume a flood occured?

Who's assuming?? There are marine sediments and marine fossils found inland in areas where they shouldn't be, and polystrate fossils found around the globe. In spite of the incredulity of skeptics, there is evidence for a global flood.
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 7:05:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:18:43 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Is that site even dependable as a reference?? The Pres., VP, and Chairman all have the same last name, Idso. That seems kinda odd for a scientific organization.

Even if I wouldn't be inclined to trust the site, the article extensively cites outside material; you may as well ask whether Nature and Science are dependable as a reference.
Founder
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2013 7:20:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

"Uniformitarian scientists claim to be able to count annual layers in the Greenland ice sheet to determine its age, in the same way people can count tree rings. In doing so, they arrive at 110,000 years near the bottom of the Greenland ice sheet. Similar claims for a much greater age are made for the Antarctica ice sheet. These claims are equivocal and are essentially based on the uniformitarian belief that the ice sheets are millions of years old. The data from ice cores can be better explained within the post-Flood Ice Age model, which dramatically reduces the calculated age to well within the biblical limit." 'New Answers Book: Where Does the Ice Age Fit?'

http://www.answersingenesis.org...

http://www.icr.org...

The answer to your questions can be found by using the search engine on the Answers in Genesis, Institute for Creation Research (icr.org), and Creation Ministries Interational (creation.com) websites.
1Devilsadvocate
Posts: 1,518
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/2/2013 8:20:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 3:05:33 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:59:59 PM, Anti-atheist wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Easy. A carbon box change in the ice cores to give a massive amount of change in little time. Making it look like its thousands of years. In the flood massive amounts of CO2 would of been dropped into the ocean making the paleoclimate seem like thousands of years. Since the rain came down from the atmosphere it would have brought the co2 with it.

But why assume a flood occurred?

The same reason you'd believe the rest of the bible.
The flood story has the distinction of being the most widespread of traditions, existing in almost every ancient civilization.
I cannot write in English, because of the treacherous spelling. When I am reading, I only hear it and am unable to remember what the written word looks like."
"Albert Einstein

http://www.twainquotes.com... , http://thewritecorner.wordpress.com... , http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2013 5:20:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:18:43 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Is that site even dependable as a reference?? The Pres., VP, and Chairman all have the same last name, Idso. That seems kinda odd for a scientific organization.

Fine, don't trust the site. But you can easily search the references they provide if you don't trust their summary.


How are the cores being dated??

http://en.wikipedia.org...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2013 5:28:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/1/2013 4:31:25 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 4/1/2013 3:05:33 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:59:59 PM, Anti-atheist wrote:
At 4/1/2013 2:54:22 PM, 16kadams wrote:
How do creationists respond to the Paleoclimate records?

For example, ice cores give us data from 400,000 years - present. Some even present evidence from the last two million years (http://www.co2science.org...).

I am not a creationist at all, but I'm wondering if they can respond to the Paleoclimate issue.

Easy. A carbon box change in the ice cores to give a massive amount of change in little time. Making it look like its thousands of years. In the flood massive amounts of CO2 would of been dropped into the ocean making the paleoclimate seem like thousands of years. Since the rain came down from the atmosphere it would have brought the co2 with it.

But why assume a flood occured?

Who's assuming?? There are marine sediments and marine fossils found inland in areas where they shouldn't be, and polystrate fossils found around the globe. In spite of the incredulity of skeptics, there is evidence for a global flood.

Old earth described that. NM used to be an ocean. Oceans move. No flood is needed to explain that.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross