Carbon 14 is not that complex really. When cosmic rays bombard earth's atmosphere, they produce neutrons. These neutrons then collide with nitrogen atoms in the atmosphere, changing them into radioactive carbon-14 atoms. The carbon-14 is then absorbed by plants during photosynthesis. When the animals eat the plants the carbon-14 is then absorbed into there bodies, and when other animals eat that animal it is absorbed into them also. All of us have the same amount of carbon-14 in us currently and the carbon-14 slowly leaks out by turning into nitogen-14 and escaping but we, by eating, continually re-absorb it at the same rate. When an animal or plant dies the carbon still leaks out in this way but it is no longer being brought back into the body and me can measure the rate at which it leaves (the basis for carbon-14 dating) the problem with this is that all the carbon will leave any dead organism in about 11,460 years. So if we are finding this carbon in dinosaur ones and fossils these fossils can be no older than about 11,460 or else they would no longer contain carbon-14! This is why I believe that it is impossible for the millions of years necessary for the evolutionary process.
Your sources are not credible. Allow me to give you a video to help disprove your falwed reasoning of a young earth.
what do you mean that my sources aren't credible. I never gave sources for my belief in a young earth and also I never gave my reasoning for believing in it so how do you already know that my reasoning is flawed.
And to asherlee I believe that the earth is somewhere around 10,000 years old, so yes aprox. 6,000
the oldest known human civilizations date back about his far. So unless we were created with an entire thriving civilization right off the bat with a previous nomadic heritage this wouldn't be possible.
I see where your coming from but why would the few bugs have ever developed the trait in the first place. as you said there would have been know use for it. so thus the animal would never have been forced to develop it.
Like I said It's an educated guess. I couldn't give you a better response without knowing more about the insect. It's possible it produced another similar enzyme used in another way. From time to time a mutation could cause some of the population to produce a useless antifreeze like enzyme. When the temperature changed those few with the previously useless enzyme who likely would have died then found themselves in a new environment where having an anti freeze like enzyme was useful an what ever the enzyme was before was useless. There are other ways this process could have taken place, It could have been more gradual, with the environment slowly changing.
Maybe you will luck out and Walker will know what insect your talking about and will be able to give you a better response.
I am sorry that I cant remember its name this is research that I did a couple of years ago, but my point was that evolution can not explain many animal species that ID can explain, in fact ID can explain them all so why don't you at leased see it as a possible explanation for the start of the universe/planet/humans.
anyway the term does not matter call it what you would like it does not tell us where matter came from.
This is a common fallacy from people who don't understand what science is and how it works. The "Big Bang" theory doesn't even attempt to discuss where matter came from. That's why it doesn't.
In a simplified version the 'big bang' only says that at the beginning of our universe it was very dense and very hot. Due to (most likely) quantum fluctuations, reactions occurred which caused the universe to expand. Now our universe is expansive and cold, and is continuing to expand and cool. That's all the 'big bang' says.
You are trying to attribute positions which theories don't even attempt to address as proof of their ineffectiveness. This is blatant straw-man fallacy at work and it only displays your lack of information on the fields of science.
As to your other issue brought up, how could this 'not have worked on a millions of years scale'? And how do you know that this even started millions of years ago? Your argument there, aside from not making any sense, doesn't even address and issue which can be debated. If you would like to present some facts, and some sources, I'll be more than happy to explain how the evolution of things like this work.
However when your only argument is that you don't think it could work on a timescale you don't even know is accurate, then you obviously haven't done any research and I'm not going to educate someone who has no desire to be educated.
I'm done presenting to you fact after fact of everything which you object to, only to have you fallaciously dodge the evidence or straw-man every proven scientific theory with your AnswersInGenesis-esque blatantly dishonest, willfully ignorant, and completely fallacious rhetoric.
I have tried multiple times to be cordial and assist you in understanding these things but you have made it painfully obvious you have no desire to know the truth or learn the facts, you are just grasping in the dark hoping to find someone you can stump with your fallacious reasoning so you can go "Aha! You don't know! So ID and Creationism are right!".
Well firstly you're not going to fool anyone, and secondly I'm tired of watching you make yourself look like an uneducated fool. When you actually want to learn the facts let me know, but I'm done wasting my time on your BS.
Haven't read all of it but this will lay out why I personely believe in a young earth.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1991
You do know that these have already been debunked, right? If you'd like, when I have time later tonight, I'll explain each one of them to you and show you why they are wrong and give you the proof. Or you can just go on believing in the young earth. That's fine too. Wrong, but fine so long as you don't try to convince anyone else of this.
Furthermore we really only need one thing to prove YEC is wrong. Fossils. We know the half-lives of numerous isotopes present in organic fossils. We use multiple measurement techniques to accurately date fossils. We know as a fact that dinosaur fossils age as much as 100 million years ago.
This alone disproves YEC, and before you try to come up with some explanation, there is no disproving these dating techniques or fossil ages. They are fact. Just as you are sitting in your chair breathing air these fossils range from 65 million - 100 million years in age.
