ok, thanks for the info.

Hi Neil

Phil asked me to tell you that he didn't delete all his posts. He has been banned from Strange Notions and had his last months posts deleted. You can still interact with him over at Estranged Notions.

http://outshine-the-sun.blogspot.com

Thanks - Michael

WHY DID YOU DELETE ALL YOUR COMMENTS?

WHY DID YOU DELETE ALL YOUR COMMENTS?

have you ever seen a crumbled chalk? have you seen a medicine that is crumbled? a very very old chalk is easily crumbled when used, that's easy analysis.

so you're talking about scientific papers? yes, atheists publish that and yet never been proven experimentally thru observations and tests. how can you prove a rock to be billions of years old when the fact that the state of that rock was unknown? or the use of radiometric dating method is unknown?

my house was just built in 2006, and the cement and rocks that were used in it were quarried from mountains. if someone take samples of a rock from my house, will he date it million years old? one human artifact was discovered and dated million years old, then how come that humans only came hundreds of thousands of years ago only? the artifact came before a human created it!!

dating artifacts, paintings, ancient temples and churches are easily dated accurately because they are KNOWN.(scientists use scientific methods such as collecting records from ancient writings and testaments, government records, and so on) while dating a rock, a planet, stars are unknown, why, because nobody was there to observe them, and also we do not know what were the past conditions of them, the environment they share with.

the analogy of 'writing on the blackboard' is one way on how we really 'age' things. another example, a man has just finished drinking his water from a glass. the man asks a lady if she can guess the age of the water from a glass. so she took sample of a water and send it to a 'dating method' company lab, and the result was 'outstandingly high'.. the man just said to her that the water was just only 3 hours old. (one atheist would say that the water itself is billion years old)

the oldest rock said to be billion years old was discovered in canada and was dated 4.28 billion years old, while other rock was dated 4.03 billion years old. now, why there are almost 280 million years short of the oldest rock? did that mean that the formation of planet earth was gradually adding layers while it spin around the sun? what made these younger rocks 'stick' to older rocks? did they have adhesive materials? what are the methods used how they determine their ages? potassium dating or argon dating? why potassium dating yields conflicting results with argon dating? and vice versa? which one is to be believed?

of course, i need to know the truth. i don't need hoaxes and pseudosciences brought about by scientists who just made assumptions and conjectures.

i am like a child who wants my simple questions to be answered. scientists are like that.

so it seems that you are more 'bright' than me, i would admit that.. but just honestly answere my question/s on origin issues..

my professor during my college days, wrote on a blackboard. he asks us, one by one, if we can guess the 'age' of the writings on the blackboard. one student said, 'sir the first paragraph was just written 2 days ago because the chalk you used is 'eroding' now' , while me, i answered him: 'i agree also with him, sir' .. but the professor turned down all our answers. he said:'the writings on the board were just written 4 hours ago, i used chalk of inferior quality that's why you said the chalks are eroding now'
at this analogy, since nobody has witnessed the past, all the theories concerning the origins issues are questionable.

origins issues are hard to evaluate.. hard to determine how one element or the other is formed. we don't know the speed of light from the past if it's still the same speed that we observe today. all the datas, all the scientific guesses are not accurate parameters in knowing the true age of a something, so they are all wild assumptions and guesses.

i even made some case about the eruption of mt pinatubo that destroyed several towns in northern luzon and a lake was created. if this is not observed, maybe, geologists would say the process took millions of years!

that's why i keep on asking you this same old question: 'were you there when this thing happened? 'were you there to observe it?'

in the case of young earth's, there were ancient witnesses who directly observed the past. and today's scientists don't have any credible witnesses to back their theories, only wild assumptions, conjectures and guesses

i have shown a picture of 'buckled-up' mountain ranges recently, and the evidence that the process of building up 'buckled-up' mountains are very rapid and not very slow. even their tips are sharp and pointed upward. do some experiment for yourself: fill up several types of soil or little rocks in a large plastic container. then slowly add water until all the soil and rocks are covered with water. then wait for at least 30 minutes or until all the materials are settled down to the floor of the container. then prick the plastic container with several tiny holes, until all the waters receded. then you will see several layers of soil and rock beginning to form. since it created several layers, the materials are still 'soft'.. then because there are colliding land mass going on, some layers are uplifted and buckled up, and became mountains.

anyway, just give me proof that non-living matter becomes living matter! from 'no energy' to 'full of energy'

and why living matter becomes non-living matter. from 'full of energy' to 'no energy'

just prove that the earth and the universe is billion years old. tell wiki to do the same. anybody, like you, like wiki, like scientists will study the radiometric data of that, of this, and those rocks and elements.. and most often, the 'datings' are not that 'accurate'.. there are parts of a rock that dated, for example, 100 million years old, while the other parts, was 80 million years old.. this is non-sense. we don't know the 'original' state of the rock from the past, so nobody knows for sure if that rock of 2015 has still retain its original state from the past.

dinosaur fossils have still intact soft tissues, so it should not be hundreds of millions of years.