• ICR's Research

    From Mark Isaak@21:1/5 to All on Mon Oct 9 22:04:32 2023
    ICR's latest _Acts & Facts_ publication is a special issue giving
    one-page summaries of the various research projects they are or have
    been engaged in. Their projects concern the Genesis Flood,
    radioactivity and the age of the earth, human-ape DNA similarity,
    cosmology in a young universe, planetary magnetism, ice ages,
    Milankovich cycles, organic tissues in fossils, and "continuous
    environmental tracking" as a replacement for evolutionary adaptation.

    "Research" is their word; some of what they describe is mere
    speculation, but other projects really do involve research. Even there, though, it is not hard to spot programs designed to attack strawmen or
    to achieve success by ignoring contrary data. Some of the projects are
    decades old (and have gone nowhere); others are new.

    If you want an idea of what creationists think creation science looks
    like, it's a good summary.
    https://www.icr.org/aaf (probably for a limited time), or https://www.icr.org/article/14303/

    --
    Mark Isaak
    "Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
    doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kerr-Mudd, John@21:1/5 to Mark Isaak on Tue Oct 10 08:51:00 2023
    On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 22:04:32 -0700
    Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> wrote:

    ICR's latest _Acts & Facts_ publication is a special issue giving
    one-page summaries of the various research projects they are or have
    been engaged in. Their projects concern the Genesis Flood,
    radioactivity and the age of the earth, human-ape DNA similarity,
    cosmology in a young universe, planetary magnetism, ice ages,
    Milankovich cycles, organic tissues in fossils, and "continuous
    environmental tracking" as a replacement for evolutionary adaptation.

    "Research" is their word; some of what they describe is mere
    speculation, but other projects really do involve research. Even there, though, it is not hard to spot programs designed to attack strawmen or
    to achieve success by ignoring contrary data. Some of the projects are decades old (and have gone nowhere); others are new.

    If you want an idea of what creationists think creation science looks
    like, it's a good summary.
    https://www.icr.org/aaf (probably for a limited time), or https://www.icr.org/article/14303/

    It must be hard to hold two contradictory views in your head at the same
    time; they really are struggling to find The (one) Flood in the geological record.


    --
    Bah, and indeed Humbug.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RonO@21:1/5 to Mark Isaak on Tue Oct 10 06:27:05 2023
    On 10/10/2023 12:04 AM, Mark Isaak wrote:
    ICR's latest _Acts & Facts_ publication is a special issue giving
    one-page summaries of the various research projects they are or have
    been engaged in.  Their projects concern the Genesis Flood,
    radioactivity and the age of the earth, human-ape DNA similarity,
    cosmology in a young universe, planetary magnetism, ice ages,
    Milankovich cycles, organic tissues in fossils, and "continuous
    environmental tracking" as a replacement for evolutionary adaptation.

    "Research" is their word; some of what they describe is mere
    speculation, but other projects really do involve research.  Even there, though, it is not hard to spot programs designed to attack strawmen or
    to achieve success by ignoring contrary data.  Some of the projects are decades old (and have gone nowhere); others are new.

    If you want an idea of what creationists think creation science looks
    like, it's a good summary.
    https://www.icr.org/aaf (probably for a limited time), or https://www.icr.org/article/14303/


    The RATE project pretty much destroyed the ICR creation science. I
    recall the initial reports for the project, and those involved had to
    admit that the theory of radioactive dating was sound. If the rocks
    were as old as believed they would have accumulated the decay products
    that were found in them. Their solution was that their god made the
    decay products when the rocks were created, but this would have
    obviously had to keep occurring as volcanic activity since the creation
    would have to have just the right combination of decay products to fit
    in with when that volcanic activity occurred with respect to other such activity. It looks like they have decided on some cut off of 500
    million years worth of radioactive decay that could have happened since creation, and they have some model where radioactive decay was occurring
    at a much faster rate. My guess is that they have the half billion year
    limit because if they sped up all the radioactive decay for the last 4.5 billion years to within a 10,090 year time period they would have cooked
    the creation. Just think of how many half lives for all the isotopes
    have occurred in the last 4.5 billion years. Half of the U238 that
    existed 4.5 billion years ago would have had to decay within the last
    10,000 years, and that is just one radio isotope. Many others have
    shorter half lives.

    Ron Okimoto

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)