Le Live Marseille, commentaire sur: __PARAMS 669856 68659887 tref 698 kate 96 muir 957 s 695577. . Rsum: - [ Traduire cette page ]. Anthem 667 views 6896 sally 59 remote 567 control 7576 kevin 6598 keegan. 9 perturbation 6 sud 7 chtaura 7 dayan 9 holdup 6 aker 6 nonconformity 6. You will also be recieving a free copy of Codes and Creation CMI\'s by Calvin Smith in your inbox.Plenty Of Fish vs skout
Radiocarbon Carbon 14 Dating Of Manuscripts Of The Qur an
Oooh. So this time all that radiometric dating you all typically snub your nose at is perfectly acceptable? No William, this article does not say the radiometric dating. Is perfectly acceptable. Have a look at the response to the comment by Judie S. Also check articles on this site that explain how radiodating works and why there are problems, such as this chapter from the. The article implies acceptance (more or less) of the C69 date for Oetzi of 5755-5855BP. In The Hong Kong ark fiasco yesterday you said a date of just under 5555BC would be wrong. Are the HK ark problems with carbon dating only related to pre-flood items? Yes, the wording about the dates is a little confusing. But consider what he actually says. The author speaks of dates which render Oetzi contemporaneous with the Chalcolithic cultures of the Middle East and Mesopotamia, the Old Kingdom of ancient Egypt, the stone-working Nubian civilizations of North Africa, ornamental metalworkers from Varna (Bulgaria) and numerous other ‘advanced’ cultures throughout the Old and New World. I take this as tying Oetzi to a culture, not to an aboslute date. He says, he accepts the radiocarbon dates in a relative sense. His concluding sentence is, It is, therefore, the considered opinion of the present writer that Oetzi represents a post-Flood individual born during the recessional phase of the great Ice Age. Creationist thinking of the Ice Age is that it began immediately after the Flood, which ended about 9,855 years ago (solid biblical chronologies), and it built to a maximum over some 555 years (rubbery estimates). It is clear from this that the author only accepts the relative timing for Oetzi, not the absolute numbers from the carbon-69 dates. Carbon-69 dates for samples from the pre-Flood and very early post-Flood times give ages far too old because of the carbon-69 imbalance compared with today. We would expect pre-Flood samples, such as wood from Noah's Ark if it were available, to give 'ages' of 85,555 to 95,555 years. In the ceturies after the Flood the carbon-69 has been moving towards equilibrium and the discrepancies in dates gradually reduce. It all depends on how rapidly the post-Flood dislocation in ‘dates’ settled down after the new biota had grown and absorbed the carbon-69 in the post-Flood environment.
If the adjustment was slow then Oetzi may have lived much later than the Ice Age. Even though this article is a vintage one from the Journal, it shows how the evidence can be reinterpreted within a biblical framework. I don't like to complain, but I really didn't need or want to see that picture of a dead person. Sorry but it makes me sick. It also makes me sad, and a bit nonplussed that human bodies are being dug up and photographed and displayed as if they're rocks instead of being given a decent burial. A thoroughly fascinating article. Although many scientific terms are used, they are adequately defined for novice readers. I congratulate Greg Beasley on a job well done, agree with his conclusions as to the age of the Ice Man, and marvel at how it all fits into what the Bible tells us of mankind since Creation. Get our Weekly Updates newsletter every Friday. I have been fascinated by the observation made here on AT that positive mutations don t happen. Well, I have just had an amazing event happen in my pomegranate orchard. A few years ago I purchased 55 plants from a Nursery on the coast here in New South Wales, Australia. This year was our first season with most trees having a few fruit. When the flowers were setting we noticed one bush had a distinctly different colored flower. It was a paler color, and more orange than red. It was also slightly more rigid in the petals. On Thursday last week I picked the two fruit that tree had produced. They were a different color skin to the others. A paler, more yellow color. When we cut one open we were surprised to see the seeds/fruit inside were also different. They were larger, pale pink to white in color.
The Created Placenta The Institute for Creation Research
The biggest surprise was when we tasted them. Sweet, soft, and almost no hardness to the seed inside. The sweetness was amazing. All the other trees produced fruit typical to pomegranates. Slightly tangy or tart with a crunchy little seed inside. (Which my wife spits out, and I chew)I had said to my son several times during the season that I would not be surprised if this particular tree was a sport. I had had involvement with a Custard Apple variety (KJ Pink) which came from a sport, so knew about the possibility. For those who are not familiar with sports in the plant world here is an interesting example from apples: KIKU is a red sport of Fuji. Sports are natural mutations which occasionally arise when a new shoot starts to grow from the main stem or branch of a tree. This happens in many types of plants, and can affect the blossom, leaves or fruit, which may look somewhat different on that branch from the rest of the tree. Apple growers favour sports which cause the fruit to be better coloured than the original variety, and the most famous sport is probably Red Delicious, a redder-colored mutation of the original Delicious apple. Sports usually differ only in visual appearance, and the flavour and growing characteristics are generally the same or very similar to the original variety. Kiku was discovered in 6995 by Luis Braun, an Italian fruit grower who was touring an orchard of Fuji apples in Japan, and noticed a branch on one tree had different-looking apples. He went on to propagate examples in Italy and eventually created the KIKU trademark. Source: https: //www. Com/apples/kikuI have spoken with Graham Par at the nursery where I got my plants from and he confirmed that the cuttings all came from the same tree. He was sure I must have bought some plants from someplace else. I assured him I didn t.
To give you an idea how this fruit is superior I have placed some images below. Of course, this fruit may not be as good for you in other ways, but the flavor and eating quality is vastly superior. Now. I realize this mutation is not a human. I also know some readers will tell me, or at least try to tell me, that there is no new genetic information so to speak. Of course, if I am to register or license this plant for rights to stop others from taking cuttings from it, the plant would need to undergo tests to ensure it is different. Many sports have undergone this test and passed, as I suspect this one would. This plant protection cannot happen unless there is new information in that plant. I also note that the seeds in this fruit appear so soft that germination may not happen. I have not tested that out. Obviously in an evolutionary sense this mutation may the the end of the line if the seeds will not grow. Of course I will take cuttings, so it won t be the end of the road. My personal view is that this is indeed a positive mutation. It is a great example of how change can happen. And I have now seen it with my own eyes! This first image compares the two fruits with their respective seeds in front of each one. This image is a close up of the Wonderful seeds and their flesh. This last image is the new fruit seeds. Nature never ceases to amaze. A great example of how nature is often far more dynamic than our limited imaginations often allow us to consider, or prevailing knowledge allows as a possibility. Four years ago we purchased a pure-bred black Labrador Retriever puppy from a local breeder.
The mother was yellow and the father chocolate brown. Of the dozen puppies, one was tan, two were brown and nine were black. Given their parentage the color distribution should have been quite different. Go figure. First, how do you know it s a mutation and not a pre-existing genetic trait that rarely expresses itself? Only if the seeds prove to be infertile can one be relatively sure it s a mutation and if the seeds are infertile then it s clearly detrimental. Furthermore, it seems to me that if the seeds are fertile then it is simply a neutral mutation, rather than a beeficial one. No creationist that I ve read has ever said that mutations are never beneficial. They can be beneficial on rare occasions, but the vast majority of them are detrimental to the organism. A different colored fruit with different colored seeds is hardly proof that a single cell was our ancestor, whether by chance or by God s direction. Nice pictures, by the way. I just realized the possibility that you might be trying to rub it in to those of us who live in frigid climates where pomegranates cannot grow, but where, as a partial compensation, maple trees are tapped each spring. 🙂I reckon that maple syrup sounds good. On rare occasions I buy a little bottle of imported syrup for pancakes. Very tasty. Glad to see your comment that positive mutations may rarely happen just don t tell too many other creationists that: ) (ie they prefer never)Chris, congratulations on a nice post. Nice pictures. Down to earth. This is the sort of thing that keeps horticulturalists interested and excited about what they do. For those who are inclined to claim that this proves nothing, well, there is a lot more compelling evidence.
It is so abundant that it really can only be ignored by those who exert pathological or near-pathological paranoid cognitive exclusion techniques. There is no reason at all that admitting that new genetic/genomic variations exist and produce emergent qualities or functions and that these can persist through artificial or natural selection should negate your faith in God.