Saturday, July 4, 2015
Initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome
First thing to not is that the paper did not deal with similarities but differences. The reporting by evolutionists reversed percent difference to percent similarity, most likely because 99% similar has greater propaganda value than 1% percent different. The number actual figure on which the 98-99% similarity is based on substitutions and is actually a 1.23% difference.
Example of a substitution
Now there is another type of difference the paper described that exceed the percentage of differences from substitutions and they are called insertions and deletions adding an additional 3% difference to the two genomes.
Example of an insertion and deletion
From here it only takes a little math to see the true result. 3% + 1.23% = 4.23%. This means that base on the original paper on which the 98-99% similarity is based, the actual figure is a 4.23% difference which produces a 95.77% similarity from the vary paper that is used to claim a 98-99% similarity.
Now while is still quite close it represents a 2-4 X increase in differences purported by the 98-99% similarity claim. It also needs to be remembered that this study did not include a significant portion the two genomes that can not be matched, meaning that these portions of have a much larger difference than the areas used in this study. The Result is that 98-99% similarity is proven to be a myth by the same paper claimed to have discovered the similarity.
Saturday, November 15, 2014
The Bible tells the fall of mankind in the Garden of Eden and about God's plan to bring about the redemption for mankind by the death, burial and resurrection Jesus Christ. Romans 3:23 says that all men have sinned and deserve the penalty for their sin of spiritual death in hell. As a result every one of us needs redemption and Jesus has payment of the penalty for all our sins by of His death on cross means that God can offer us eternal life with Him as a the free gift. (Romans 6:23) Accepting God's free gift of salvation is by believing on Jesus and His redemptive work of dying on the cross and raising from the dead (Romans 10:9,10) and repenting of your sins. (Acts 20:21) After this, it is simply a matter of asking the Lord to come into your heart and save you. (Romans 10:13) Accept God's gift of salvation by believing the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour.
Thursday, November 6, 2014
As stated before rocks are not dated by plugging them in to an ACME dating machine. Dating labs do not measure time but measure isotopes ratios. Are these ratios the result of radioactive decay over time or other processes that have taken place in the rock?
Ages of Rocks in Millions of Years
|K-Ar||Rb-Sr||Rb-Sr Isochron||Pb-Pb Isochron|
|0.01||1230 - 1310||1300 - 1380||2390 - 2810|
|1.0 - 1.4||1260 - 1380|
|2.63||1310 - 1370|
|3.6||1320 - 1440|
|3.67||1360 - 1420|
Some times different methods used on the same rock, produce different ages. Further more the same method can produce different ages on different parts of the same rock. Some times these are close but other times they are vary different.
Some times radiometric dating produces impossible results.
Ages in Billions of Years
|Apollo Sample #||Low||High||Age Inconsistencies |
extremes in billions
Some soil from the Moon has been dated as more than a billion older than the uniformitarian age for the Moon. It was explained by processes of heating and cooling soil had been through.
Some rocks dated older than the
4.5 billion year evolutionary age for Earth.
|Description||Method||"Date" in |
|Diamonds from magma||K-Ar Isochron||6.0 +- 0.3|
Recent or young volcanic rocks producing excessively old K-Ar "ages":
|Name||Location||Real Date||K-Ar date|
|Kilauea Iki basalt||Hawaii||AD 1959||8.5±6.8 Ma|
|Mt. Etna basalt||Sicily||May 1964||0.7±0.01 Ma|
|Medicine Lake |
|Glass Mountains, |
|<500 years||12.6±4.5 Ma|
|Hualalai basalt||Hawaii||AD 1800-1801||22.8±16.5 Ma|
|East Pacific Rise basalt||Pacific Ocean||<1 Ma||690±7 Ma|
|Olivine basalt||Nathan Hills,Victoria |
|<0.3 Ma||18.0±0.7 Ma|
|Anorthoclase in |
|Mt Erebus, |
|Kilauea basalt||Hawaii||<200 years||21±8 Ma|
|Kilauea basalt,||Hawaii||<1,000 years||42.9±4.2 Ma; |
|Sea mount basalt||Near East Pacific Rise||<2.5 Ma||580±10 Ma; |
|East Pacific Rise basalt||Pacific Ocean||<0.6 Ma||24.2±1.0 Ma|
Examples of negative ages
|Glass Mountain||AD 1579 - 1839||-130,000 |
|Mt. Mihara||AD 1961||- 70,000 years|
|Sakurajima||AD 1946||-200,000 years|
G.B. Dalrymple, "40Ar/36Ar Analyses of Historic Lava Flows," Earth and Planetary Science Letters,6 (1969): pp. 47-55.
Some rocks have been measured with negative radiometric ages, in some case in terms of millions of years. Isochron dating can also produce negative ages, by producing a negative slope. K-Ar and Ar-Ar can result in negative ages when atmospheric argon is considered. So if these are real dates then you can hold a rock in your hand that wont form for hundreds of thousands or even millions of years yet.
Now in all fairness Ar-Ar dating can get the right age for a sample of known age, but it can also date samples as way too old, but without a known date there is no way of knowing when it is too old. One key factor is the fact that Ar-Ar dating need a standard of "known" age. If standard is of historically known age, such as would likely be used for testing Ar-Ar dating on sample of known age, then one would be more likely to get the correct age. For allegedly older samples K-Ar is used to "date" the standard and as such it still has the same problems as K-Ar dating.
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
Saturday, October 11, 2014
Some of the basic Dating Methods are as follows:
- Samarium - Neodymium. (Sm-Nd)
- Rhenium - Osmium (Re-Os)
- Uranium / Thorium - Lead. ( U/Th-Pb)
- Ribidium - Strontium (Rb-Sr)
- Potassium - Argon (K-Ar)
- Argon - Argon (Ar-Ar)
- Lutetium - Hafnium (Lu-Hf)
- Constant decay rate.
- No gain or loss of parent or daughter isotope.
- Known amounts of daughter isotope at start.
A shift from contamination can take place in all of the data points, but such contamination does not affect all data points equally, so it can cause the data points to shift off the true Isochron completely. Given this when one looks at an Isochron plot how can one really tell where the true Isochron line should be. Sufficient contamination can produce any Isochron pattern regardless of the true Isochron. It is even possible to get a negative slope, this would be equivalent to a negative or future date.
When you look at actual isochron plots such as the ones at above link, there seems to be room for subjectivity. Some are better than others but there is often room for multiple plot lines. Even uniformitarian geologists recognize the existence of false isochron. So how do they distinguish good data from bad? The answer is where the sample fits in the Geologic Column.
The unique key assumption of Isochron dating is that the affect of contamination does on the Isochron can be determined. However the quality of an Isochron is still judged by where the sample fits in the Geologic Column. Also like all forms of radiometric dating it assumes that nuclear decay rates are constant, an assumption which will later be shown false.
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
The theory behind radiometric dating is actually quite simple. Every Atom of a given element has the same number of protons, but there are varieties in the number if neutrons. These varieties are called isotopes. Some of these isotopes decay (parent isotope) into other isotopes of other elements (daughter isotope). The time is takes for half of a sample of a given isotope to decay is called its half life. The half life of a given isotope can be as small a fractions of a second to billions of years. Some as far as we know are stable and do not decay.
Measurements of the half lives show that in general they are constant though there have been some reports of small variations. It is these half lives that form the theoretical bases of radiometric dating. The basic idea is that if you have x amount of the parent isotope and y amount of the daughter isotope that given a constant half life you can calculate how much time parent isotope would have to decay to produce the measured amount of the daughter isotope.
Next the assumptions of Radiometric dating
Monday, September 8, 2014
The claim of a forming planet is nothing more than the hypothesis that the emission is a result of a circumplanetary disk of gas orbiting a gas giant about three time the size of Jupiter. A similar claim had been made before form around this star in the form of a faint blob of gas at about the distance of Pluto from the sun. Even with this large star are according to planet formation theory, a planet should not be forming that far out however this could simply be a Jupiter size planet with some gas and dust around it.
The star have a disk of dust and gas orbiting it, but the logic behind the claim of forming planets is the assumption that planets and stat actually form from dust and gas in space. The theory generally referred to as the Nebula Hypothesis is a purely atheistic theory of the origin of stars and planets, that was specifically designed to explain the existence of stars and planets apart from God. The theory that has problems requiring repeated patching to protect it from reality. The reasoning behind this claim is that planets form discs of dust and gas around star, so finding evidence for planets inside a disc of dust and gas around a star gets interpreted as forming planets.
Saturday, September 6, 2014