The earth is 13,000 years old and it is soon to be renewed when Christ comes

[FFH]

Okay click on this link and then left click and hold button down then drag the image down until you come to the rim or edge of where the falls began to erode the earth 7 miles down stream..

This is a young river, as are all the rivers of the eartb, which proves young earth thoeries and more specifically an approximate 13,000 year old earth..

According to my theory, and the Bible text, erosion of dry land started around 12,000 and 11,000 years ago.

The Great Flood runoff would have sped up erosion, for a little while at least, which would account for the 1,000 or so year discrepancy in the length of time of erosion as stated by the Niagra Falls park officials and geophysicists.

Niagra Falls satellite movable view

Move the image down until you get to the edge/rim where the falls began eroding this 7 mile gorge.

You can scoll forward and back to pan out or zoom in to see this great river which connects Lake Ontario to the north and Lake Erie to the south.

Google movable searchable map of this area

 

[Tiberius]

So lets just say the earth is 40 million years old.

Okay 40,000,000 X 3 feet per year (rate Niagra has cut, per year, away from the canyon rim)

Which equals 120 million feet, divided by 5280 feet per mile, equals 22,727 miles.

Right now there is a 7 miles gorge cut into the earth/canyon rim, so where's the 23,000 mile long gorge?

There is no gorge even 2,300 miles long there or anywhere else in the world for that matter.

There is a definite starting point at which Niagra has cut into the outer canyon rim...

From that starting point, to the present position of Niagra Falls, only 7 miles of earth have been removed.. The falls have cut a 7 mile long gorge into the earth.

Let me guess some of you are thinking that these great rivers change their courses every 10,000 years or so due to great upheavals of earth, because of eartchquakes volcanos, etc...

Or these great rivers have frozen over every 10,000 years or so. If that were true then there would still be a great gorge cut out of the earth each time the earth came out of these fictional ice ages and then entered back into them again..

An oscillating ice age theory doesn't hold water here.

Show me the flaws in this theory....

Even if there were proof of an oscillating ice age it still would not account for the short 7 mile gorge cut into the canyon rim, unless that area of the world was frozen over from the beginning of the earth's creation, then suddenly decided to unthaw, just 12,500 years ago, there being no flow before then. Also there is no proof Niagra has ever changed it's course and even if it did there would be more gorges cut into the earth. Lets see that would be what 20 gorges divided by 20,000 miles so even if the river had changed it's course 20 times over millions of years there would still have to be at least a 1,000 mile gorge cut into the earth from any number of points along the canyon rim..

Niagra has existed only 12,500 years, according to this site, Niagra Parks, and so has the earth existed just beyond that.

I need to get an aerial view of this 7 mile gorge Niagra has cut into the earth to better illustrate my point...

And again, I will ask you, please provide evidence that the Earth CANNOT be significantly older than Niagara Falls! There's no reason to believe that the Earth was around for billions of years before Niagara falls came to be.

 

[FFH]

And again, I will ask you, please provide evidence that the Earth CANNOT be significantly older than Niagara Falls! There's no reason to believe that the Earth was around for billions of years before Niagara falls came to be.

Polonium Halos

An Overview
​

Etched within Earth's foundation rocks — the granites — are beautiful microspheres of coloration, halos, produced by the radioactive decay of primordial polonium, which is known to have only a fleeting existence.

The following simple analogy will show how these polonium microspheres — or halos — contradict the evolutionary belief that granites formed as hot magma slowly cooled over millions of years. To the contrary, this analogy demonstrates how these halos provide unambiguous evidence of both an almost instantaneous creation of granites and the young age of the earth.

A speck of polonium in molten rock can be compared to an Alka-Seltzer dropped into a glass of water. The beginning of effervescence is equated to the moment that polonium atoms began to emit radiactive particles. In molten rock the traces of those radioactive particles would disappear as quickly as the Alka-Seltzer bubbles in water. But if the water were instantly frozen, the bubbles would be preserved. Likewise, polonium halos could have formed only if the rapidly "effervescing" specks of polonium had been instantly encased in solid rock.

An exceedingly large number of polonium halos are embedded in granites around the world. Just as frozen Alka-Seltzer bubbles would be clear evidence of the quick-freezing of the water, so are these many polonium halos undeniable evidence that a sea of primordial matter quickly "froze" into solid granite. The occurrence of these polonium halos, then, distinctly implies that our earth was formed in a very short time, in complete harmony with the biblical record of creation.

Replies to Objections

Every question regarding the validity or implications of this polonium-halo evidence has been systematically dealt with, in our published reports and in various discussions with those holding differing views. We invite you to peruse the points we have raised in our exchanges, consider them, and decide for yourself the truth of the matter.

Of particular interest will be our recent discussion with the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) regarding the validity of our work.

Challenge to the National Academy of Sciences

The Academy has vehemently opposed creation science, even claiming that the evidence for creation has been scientifically invalidated. We have repeatedly challenged the Academy to publicly explain where the polonium-halo evidence for creation has ever been scientifically invalidated. For over 15 years, they have refused to even try, for they know that their statement is insupportable when it comes to the polonium-halo evidence.

We have posted here letters and other documents pertaining to our challenge to the National Academy of Science.

Reports

Our published reports date back to the 1960's. Twenty of these reports can be downloaded free of charge from this web site. A number of these also appear in the appendix to our book, Creation's Tiny Mystery.

Every question regarding the validity or implications of the polonium-halo evidence for creation has been systematically dealt with in our published reports. Every proposal for an evolutionary origin of polonium radiohalos has been systematically and experimentally falsified. No hypothetical, naturalistic scenario has yet been suggested that can account for Creation's "tiny mystery" of the polonium halo.

Of course, you can find claims to the contrary on the internet and elsewhere. But if these claims had any real substance, they would have passed peer review and been published in the open scientific literature. The fact that they have not been, or have themselves been experimentally falsified, demonstrates the fact that this unique evidence for Creation still stands unrefuted.

Some of our newest research concerns astronomy and cosmology. Our findings provide a radically new model of the cosmos while also showing why the Big Bang Theory is fatally flawed. For more on this topic, please see our sister site, www.OrionFdn.org.

Source

 

[Tiberius]

Um, you do remember those big posts I had a while back? They dealt with radiohalos. Please do not provide evidence which has already been shown to be flawed.

In any case, I shall provide some links for you to show you once again that radiohalos do not indicate a young Earth.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/lorence_collins/polonium.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/violences.html
http://jessica.netcraft.com.au/pipermail/linuxsa-talk/2005-February/000756.html
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00053.htm

Please read these. If you mention radiohalos as evidence for a young Earth again, you'll get these again. Of course, if you don't like this, feel free to go through these articles and refute their points.

In any case, I asked you to provide evidence that the Earth cannot be significantly older than Niagara Falls. Your cut and paste has not done the job (unless you can refute the rebuttals I have presented), thus my question remains unanswered.

Also, cut and paste is not a very good way of holding a debate. It indicates that you don't comprehend that which you are debating.

 

[McBell]

Also, cut and paste is not a very good way of holding a debate. It indicates that you don't comprehend that which you are debating.

Indicates?

 

[Tiberius]

Indicate: To show, or to provide evidence of something.

 

[McBell]

Indicate: To show, or to provide evidence of something.

:faint:
I know what indicates means.
I was just wondering if your were merely being polite by using it.

 

[FFH]

Radiohalos do not indicate a young earth

When they are encased in granite they do...

Replies to Objections

Every question regarding the validity or implications of this polonium-halo evidence has been systematically dealt with, in our published reports and in various discussions with those holding differing views. We invite you to persue the points we have raised in our exchanges, consider them, and decide for yourself the truth of the matter.

 

[Tiberius]

And that cut and paste is no doubt relying on the technical nature of some of those reports (I didn't look at all of them). And the ones I looked at said NOTHING about how they applied to the age of the Earth.

Very well, I'll tell you what. Pick out one of those reports that you feel adequately refutes the points I have linked you to, and I'll respond to that.

See the difference in the way we do things? The links I provide are directly to the points I am trying to make. The links you provide are just to lists of articles, and you say, "It's in there somewhere."

Do some actual research, FFH. Stop spouting what others have said. Examine it for yourself.

 

[painted wolf]

Sadly there are those who don't actually want to understand. As long as people say its what God wants then they are happy with that.

No ammoount of genuine evidence will convince people who don't want to upset thier worldview.
No matter how tennuous and misdirecting the evidence they hold on to is, they will defend it tooth and nail because it makes them comfortable.

Polonium hailos have been discredited as "YEC" evidence time and time again and it is still being spouted. It is a shame that this misdirection is still given any credance by "creation scientists" as it reflects so badly on them.
They misdirect the uneducated by refusing to mention the problems with thier 'evidence' and fail to mention how Polonium is known to form: not only from Uranium 235 but also Uranium 238 and Thorium 232. They completly forget to mention Radon of any kind.
The only reasons they don't mention these things is that it contradicts what they want to find. If they mention the whole truth then thier information is less convincing.

It is easier for them to plead with thier readers to trust them and thier 'science' and have faith in thier view of the scripure. Thier excanges are with a nonScientificly accredited organization. The whole Idea of insisting on finding fossils in granite is rediculous at best, Granite being an Igneious rock not a Sedimentary one.

wa:do

 

[FFH]

And that cut and paste is no doubt relying on the technical nature of some of those reports (I didn't look at all of them). And the ones I looked at said NOTHING about how they applied to the age of the Earth.

Very well, I'll tell you what. Pick out one of those reports that you feel adequately refutes the points I have linked you to, and I'll respond to that.

See the difference in the way we do things? The links I provide are directly to the points I am trying to make. The links you provide are just to lists of articles, and you say, "It's in there somewhere."

Do some actual research, FFH. Stop spouting what others have said. Examine it for yourself.

The links I have provided thus far were just to get things started...

I can be as specific as you like...

I agree, each evidence brought forth must be broken down into tiny bits of manageable information..

One thing at a time...

Moses 2
Genesis restored

1 And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto Moses, saying: Behold, I reveal unto you concerning this heaven, and this earth; write the words which I speak. I am the Beginning and the End, the Almighty God; by mine Only Begotten I created these things; yea, in the beginning I created the heaven, and the earth upon which thou standest.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and I caused darkness to come up upon the face of the deep; and my Spirit moved upon the face of the water; for I am God.

3 And I, God, said: Let there be light; and there was light.

4 And I, God, saw the light; and that light was good. And I, God, divided the light from the darkness.

5 And I, God, called the light Day; and the darkness, I called Night; and this I did by the word of my power, and it was done as I spake; and the evening and the morning were the first day.


Evidence of an instantaneous creation of granite by God...

Polonium halos found imbedded in granite

RADIOISOTOPE ~~~~ HALF LIFE
Polonium-210 ~~~~~~ 138.4 days
Polonium-218 ~~~~~~ 3.05 minutes
Polonium-214 ~~~~~~ 164 microseconds

 

[FFH]

Polonium is known to form: not only from Uranium 235 but also Uranium 238 and Thorium 232. They completely forget to mention Radon of any kind.

if the original matter were Uranium-238, you would see eight concentric halos:

Note: Polonium-210 and Radon-222 are so close together they form one halo, likewise with Radium-226, Thorium-230 and Uranium-234.

RADIOISOTOPE ~~~~~ HALF LIFE
Polonium-214 ~~~~~~~ 164 microseconds

Polonium-218 ~~~~~~~ 3.05 minutes

Radon-222 ~~~~~~~~~~~ 3.8 days
Polonium-210 ~~~~~~~~ 138 days

Radium-226 ~~~~~~~~~~ 1,600 years
Thorium-230 ~~~~~~~~~ 80,000 years
Uranium-234 ~~~~~~~~~ 250,000 years

Uranium-238 ~~~~~~~~~ 4,500,000,000 years

 

[FFH]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times New Roman, Times]Polonium 210, 214 and 218 halos have all been found in imbedded in granite, as early as the early 1800's, under microscopic observation.......[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times New Roman, Times]Polonium 210 halo[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times New Roman, Times]

[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times New Roman, Times]Polonium 214 halo[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times New Roman, Times]

[/FONT]​

Polonium 218 halo
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times New Roman, Times]

[/FONT]

/

 

[des]

One shouldn't attempt to do nuclear physics with 2000 year old science. I don't think the Hebrew scripture writers ever meant to do that either.



--des

 

[FFH]

One shouldn't attempt to do nuclear physics with 2000 year old science. I don't think the Hebrew scripture writers ever meant to do that either.

I'm only comparing biblical dates/time frames with modern day tangible evidences of the instant, or relatively instant, creation of granite, and the length of time Niagra Falls has been eroding, starting from the rim of Lake Erie...

The theory...

!) Instant, or relatively quick, bedrock creation/formation, as evidenced with the microscopic observation of Polonium, Radon and Radium halos imbedded in primordial granite...

2) An approximate 12,500 year Niagra Falls erosion time piece of evidence, explaned earlier...

I have a good case, and it's not a cut and paste theory from some website....

Most believe the earth is either 6,000 years old or million or billions of years old, both theories being incorrect, according to scripture and modern day evidences.....

 

[anders]

Real geologists seem to disagree. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/
'Polonium' halos are readily explainable as radon halos produced by migration of the naturally-occuring gas into mica via surface fractures.

 

[FFH]

'Polonium' halos are readily explainable as radon halos produced by migration of the naturally-occuring gas into mica via surface fractures

Even if there were 5, as observed with Radium halos, it would still fit within my theory of a 13,000 year old earth, with 6,000 years of creation, 1,000 years of rest and 6,000 years of mortal human history...

In this way Gentry and I disagree, since he believes in a literal 6 days of creation, adding 6,000 years of mortal human existence, that being the time of the fall of Adam and Eve until now.

My theory allows 6,000 years for creation and a 1,000 years of rest, then adds, of course, 6,000 years from the time of the fall of Adam and Eve until now...

Radium-226, with a half-life of 1.300 years, still fits into my theory, but not Gentry's...

These halos (see figure below) appear to have 5 halos, which goes against the Polonium halo theory, which allows for only 4 concentric halos...

So you are right anders, we need to take into consideration that these may be, and probably are, Radium concentric dacay halos, consisting of 5 halos...

But I don't see enough rings to constitute these being Uranium-238 halos, which should have at least 6 visible halo...

Concentric halos in biotite mica, considered by Gentry
to be caused by polonium isotope decay (Gentry, 1992).

 

[FFH]

Okay, I've edited post number 213 to include Radon and Radium halos as a possible and probable evidence to support my theory...

No cut and paste theory here, s2a, Tiberius, DeepShadow, Mestemia, etc...

 

[FFH]

in the late 1800s scientists found small mocroscopic halos in granite.​

I

When you cut through the granite, through the middle of the halo spheres, there exists small grains/particles, in the center of each radio-halo or sphere.​

These mocroscopic halos or spheres are etched/imbedded in priomordial granite rock, centering around a microscopic radio-halo particle, which emits a certain number of concentric radio partical decay rings.​

 

[McBell]

How about you directly refute that which was already presented to you , not only once, but twice, that directly refute all this halo business?

You are starting to sound like a Microsoft commercial for the video game.