How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Cave geology, biology, and similar topics. Also visit the NSS Biology Section, or the Cave Geology and Geography Section, or the NSS Paleontology Section.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby Pitbully » Jun 10, 2008 8:19 am

6000 years is not based on assumptions. It is based on more consistent science. Carbon Dating is super flawed because if it were hundred of millions of years old there would be no carbon to date. They assume that it is a uniform disenigrating of carbon, when in fact it was laid down by one large flood 5000 years ago, where u would expect to see billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. That is exactly what we see today. No progression in the fossil record, just extinction and death.
Pitbully Out
User avatar
Pitbully
Infrequent Poster
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 10:10 pm
NSS #: 59735
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Chattanooga Grotto
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby Dwight Livingston » Jun 10, 2008 9:50 am

Pitbully wrote: . . .if it were hundred of millions of years old there would be no carbon to date.


This is pretty much correct, though you're just talking about carbon 14. Other carbon isotopes are stable and have hung around for far longer than hundreds of millions of years. Carbon 14 is radioactive and has a half life of just 5730 years, so it is useful for dating back only about 60,000 years. For longer times, other radioactive isotopes are used. You might also note that it would not be the case that "no" carbon would remain. The decay is exponentional, so there's really old carbon 14 around, but it's in quantites too small to be useful for dating.
***************
Dwight Livingston
User avatar
Dwight Livingston
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Sep 6, 2005 7:17 am
NSS #: 27411
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Baltimore Grotto
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby Pitbully » Jun 10, 2008 3:43 pm

I just know that there is not dating system that is accurate because it is based on historical assumptions. the C12 stays around longer but it is what they use to compare the C14 which is the main way of checking dates. It is just another way of promote evolutionary thinking. I believe there is a young earth by my obversations. I thank u for the corrections.
Pitbully Out
User avatar
Pitbully
Infrequent Poster
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 10:10 pm
NSS #: 59735
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Chattanooga Grotto
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby shibumi » Jun 10, 2008 4:06 pm

Pitbully wrote:I just know that there is not dating system that is accurate because it is based on historical assumptions. the C12 stays around longer but it is what they use to compare the C14 which is the main way of checking dates. It is just another way of promote evolutionary thinking. I believe there is a young earth by my obversations. I thank u for the corrections.


Ummmm. Do you realize that what you just wrote above is gibberish? I'm not talking about the premise you seem to be promoting, but that your reasoning itself makes no coherent sense.

Personally, I believe the flying spaghetti monster created all...
shibumi
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 502
Joined: Sep 26, 2006 9:26 pm
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby Squirrel Girl » Jun 10, 2008 4:34 pm

shibumi wrote:
Pitbully wrote:I just know that there is not dating system that is accurate because it is based on historical assumptions. the C12 stays around longer but it is what they use to compare the C14 which is the main way of checking dates. It is just another way of promote evolutionary thinking. I believe there is a young earth by my obversations. I thank u for the corrections.


Ummmm. Do you realize that what you just wrote above is gibberish? I'm not talking about the premise you seem to be promoting, but that your reasoning itself makes no coherent sense.

Personally, I believe the flying spaghetti monster created all...

Come on now. Let's be nice. You can disgree with someone and disbelieve their logic, but careful about how you phrase it. Plus, no religious talk.

(Disclaimer: I am a pastafarian)
Image
Barbara Anne am Ende

"Weird people are my people."
User avatar
Squirrel Girl
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sep 5, 2005 5:34 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM
NSS #: 15789
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby ArCaver » Jun 10, 2008 7:18 pm

Squirrel Girl wrote:
shibumi wrote:
Pitbully wrote:I just know that there is not dating system that is accurate because it is based on historical assumptions. the C12 stays around longer but it is what they use to compare the C14 which is the main way of checking dates. It is just another way of promote evolutionary thinking. I believe there is a young earth by my obversations. I thank u for the corrections.


Ummmm. Do you realize that what you just wrote above is gibberish? I'm not talking about the premise you seem to be promoting, but that your reasoning itself makes no coherent sense.

Personally, I believe the flying spaghetti monster created all...

Come on now. Let's be nice. You can disgree with someone and disbelieve their logic, but careful about how you phrase it. Plus, no religious talk.

(Disclaimer: I am a pastafarian)
Image



Methinks the OP is the one talking religion. Shows a lack of faith if one is always looking for proof.
User avatar
ArCaver
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Jul 31, 2006 12:42 pm
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby Scott McCrea » Jun 10, 2008 8:09 pm

:off topic:
Scott McCrea
SWAYGO
User avatar
Scott McCrea
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 3198
Joined: Sep 5, 2005 3:07 pm
Location: Asheville, NC USA
NSS #: 40839RL
Primary Grotto Affiliation: Flittermouse Grotto
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby graveleye » Jun 10, 2008 8:12 pm

be careful people. This thread is teetering on the verge of a violation of the Terms of Service. No religious debate please.

Back to the topic:

How to Date the Grand Canyon

you have to ask very nicely of course.
ad astra per aspera

http://www.myspace.com/jamthecontrols

The views expressed in this post are not necessarily those of any organization I am affiliated with.

Become a sustaining member of the SCCI
User avatar
graveleye
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2934
Joined: Mar 14, 2006 11:12 am
Location: Georgia, USA
Name: Kevin Glenn
NSS #: 57238RL
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby shibumi » Jun 10, 2008 8:21 pm

Squirrel Girl wrote:
shibumi wrote:Ummmm. Do you realize that what you just wrote above is gibberish? I'm not talking about the premise you seem to be promoting, but that your reasoning itself makes no coherent sense.

Personally, I believe the flying spaghetti monster created all...

Come on now. Let's be nice. You can disgree with someone and disbelieve their logic, but careful about how you phrase it. Plus, no religious talk.

(Disclaimer: I am a pastafarian)
Image


Heh. I was being nice. I have no problem with people who have differing beliefs from mine, but if he is going to try to defend his beliefs by discrediting something else, at the very least his argument should be cogent and capable of being followed. Do note, I have not made any commentary on the validity of his beliefs ;). I shan't post any further on the issue.
shibumi
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 502
Joined: Sep 26, 2006 9:26 pm
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon

Postby GypsumWolf » Jun 10, 2008 8:30 pm

To date the grand canyon, in my opinion, you need to have a good idea of how the earths landforms were in the past and understand different ways that could have caused the Grand Canyon to form (similar to the formation of caves). It would be very advisable to study how weather was affected by the patterns of land form in that region (if not the whole earth). Then you have whether Pangea really existed or was the land way different from then. You can date rocks, but that does not mean how long ago they were eroded, it just means how old they are as long as your dating methods are correct (Ive herd of recently dead animals being dated to thousands or millions of years). There is a lot involved. Also, there are other Canyons in the world deeper then the Grand Canyon, like Kings Canyon; I have herd of one in Mexico but don't recall its name. There are larg areas to consider like Canyon Lands (Ever see the Grand View Point Overlook at Island In The Sky!?).
User avatar
GypsumWolf
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Jan 24, 2006 9:02 am
Location: TAG
  

Re: How to Date the Grand Canyon: Go With the Flow

Postby ron_miller » Jun 10, 2008 9:00 pm

WildWolf wrote:
I know cavechat does not like religious vs. evolution debates so be careful how this thread goes.


I don't mean to pick on you, Wildwolf, but this is a classic example of why religious discussions are not appropriate for cavechat. Setting up religion in conflict with evolution is a false argument. If you want valid opposites, choose something like "creationism vs. science". I am personally offended by the insinuation that somehow religion and science are necessarily in conflict; they are two different ways of seeking truth, and there is no reason that they cannot co-exist. Many scientists are deeply religious, yet they have no problem accepting the overwhelming empirical evidence that evolution is a fact, and that the earth is billions of year old. The scientific consensus has been arrived at through dispassionate inquiries by literally hundreds of thousands of independent scientists; the only individuals who try to challenge this consensus are inherently biased toward making the facts fit their pre-established world view based on their particular religious tradition. Starting from the conclusion and trying to make the facts fit is just not how science works.

I have no problem co-existing with those whose religious views lead them to the conclusion that the world is only 6,000 years old, or that evolution doesn't happen. However, those who hold such views should understand that such views are inherently religious, not scientific, in nature, and thus are inappropriate on cavechat.
ron_miller
NSS Hall Of Fame Poster
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Jan 5, 2007 6:24 pm
  

Previous

Return to Speleology Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users