RICHPLANET.NET FORUM : WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.  THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.<br>
There is still no decision on whether new members will be added.  This can only happen when suitable moderators are in place, who are not easy to find for obvious reasons. www.richplanet.net community built on miniBB / RICHPLANET.NET FORUM : WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.
There is still no decision on whether new members will be added. This can only happen when suitable moderators are in place, who are not easy to find for obvious reasons.
/

ORIGINS OF LIFE | EVOLUTION | INTELLIGENT DESIGN

 Page:  ««  1  2  3  4  5  ...  25  26  27  28  29  »» 
Starseed
Guest
#31 | Posted: 25 Oct 2010 18:31 | Edited by: Starseed
Reply 
+++*** THIS IS UNCANNY ***+++

IT IS ALMOST AS IF HE WERE READING THIS THREAD (?!) ;-)



GOD OR NOTHING

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ovg0eYjM64w

I AGREE WITH 99.99% OF IT. HOW ABOUT YOU?

LOL

+++http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ovg0eYjM64w+++
dark star
Member
#32 | Posted: 25 Oct 2010 19:41
Reply 
I wish that i could watch vids on the net,unfortunately i cant as i do not have broad band and my computer is far too slow.I can only respond to text and pictures.
Im sure the vids are very interesting.
dreamkatcher
Member
#33 | Posted: 25 Oct 2010 19:55
Reply 
I used to be able to but now told I need to upgrade Flash Player to 10.1. My system has 10.1 !!
My e-mails are being returned to me with stupid reasons. I cant send anything unless I send a copy to myself first. Maybe that saves "tptb" having to read everything ! Must have been listening to Camerson.

Maggie
Starseed
Guest
#34 | Posted: 25 Oct 2010 21:01 | Edited by: Starseed
Reply 
It was right on the mark for this thread!

Maybe one of the new 'religious' types will chip in?
Starseed
Guest
#35 | Posted: 25 Oct 2010 22:34
Reply 
leprechaun
Member
#36 | Posted: 18 Nov 2010 20:32
Reply 
Gobeki Tepe,about 11000 years old,the era of the hunter gather,the people who built these wer'nt really supposed to do so,as they were thought to be nomadic,it is a site that is largely ignored as it messes up conventional archaeological thinking, here are a few links to sites that you may find interesting,check the photos out at least,

http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/449/gobekli_tepe_paradise_regained.html

http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=14968

http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/turkeygobekli.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe
dreamkatcher
Member
#37 | Posted: 4 Jan 2011 08:11
Reply 
phil_anthropist
Member
#38 | Posted: 9 Jan 2011 17:48 | Edited by: phil_anthropist
Reply 
I just recieved this in a newsletter, I thought it was interesting reading.

SCIENTIST'S "DANGEROUS" DISCOVERY

One spring day in 1965, a young American scientist was peering through his microscope at some thin, translucent sections of granite type rocks.

Suddenly it struck him. Here was something that – dare he even think it? – had the potential to turn an established theory upside down!

And, as it turned out, that was precisely what happened. His discoveries raised an uproar in the scientific world! And he lost funding.

What are granite rocks? They are coarsely crystalline rocks composed primarily of the light-coloured minerals quartz and feldspar, and smaller amounts of biotite and homblende.

We should be careful when referring to granites because geologists often use this term to cover a variety of rocks, some of which are not at all similar to the "Precambrian" granite of which we are speaking.

These granite rocks are the original Genesis-of-our-planet rocks, because:

* they are the foundation rocks of the
continents
* they contain no fossils (as do
sedimentary rocks)
* they contain polonium halos.

And that's where the story gets interesting.

HOW LONG DID IT TAKE TO FORM THE SOLID ROCK?

Suppose you drop an Alka-Seltzer into a glass of water, what happens? Lots of tiny bubbles are released.

How long does each bubble last? Just an instant, right?

Did you know that in the granite rocks of the earth "bubbles" of polonium have been found?

A speck of polonium in molten rock is like an Alka-Seltzer dropped into a glass of water. It has a very short life.

The beginning of effervescence may be equated to the instant the polonium atoms began to decay and emit radioactive particles.

If the rock remained molten very long (as evolutionary geology theory says) the traces of those radioactive particles of polonium would disappear as quickly as the Alka-Seltzer bubbles in water.

But suppose that after you dropped your Alka-Seltzer into the water, then the water was instantly frozen.

What would happen to the bubbles? The bubbles would be preserved.

Likewise, polonium halos could be formed only if the "effervescing" specks of polonium had been instantly trapped in solid rock.

That is, we could find polonium halos in rock, ONLY IF the molten rock had become suddenly solid.

Now, as we are told by the evolution theory, the earth's foundation granite rocks formed as hot magma slowly cooled from liquid to solid over millions of years.

A RUDE SHOCK

I was taught this at school. Very likely, you were,
too.

But now there comes an unsettling discovery. And you can blame it on world renowned nuclear physicist, Dr Robert Gentry.

He has found something that has shaken the scientific world.

Dr Gentry was teaching and working toward a doctorate in physics at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. He was using a microscope on some thin, translucent sections of granite-type rocks.

That spring day in 1965, as he looked closely, he noticed that there were beautiful microspheres of colouration etched within the rocks - halos.

These tiny halos were series of concentric rings around a radioactive center.

A halo is created when a grain of radioactive material in the centre decays. As it decays, it
throws off alpha particles.

A polonium halo could be produced from two sources:

(a) from the radioactive decay of uranium
as a parent element, or
(b) from the decay of original polonium
(that is, with no uranium involved)

What Robert Gentry was looking at in these rocks were special types of halos. They had been produced by the radioactive decay of original polonium, which is known to have only a fleeting existence.

More exhaustive experimentation failed to reveal a secondary origin of these halos.

This confirmed that the polonium that produced these halos was an original, natural element. It was present since the beginning.

This Polonium-218 is so short lived, its half-life is a mere 3 minutes.

This means that at the beginning of the world it had to appear in the granite while the granite was in a liquid state.

Then it had to be "frozen" into solidified granite within a matter of minutes in order to produce a halo – before it totally disappeared.

And now it turns out that an exceedingly large number of polonium halos are embedded in granite rock all around the world.

Just as frozen Alka-Seltzer bubbles would be clear evidence of the quick-freezing of the water, so are these many polonium halos undeniable evidence that a sea of original matter quickly "froze" into solid granite.

Please understand that this is a physical fact that can be tested.

EVIDENCE OF INSTANT APPEARANCE?

As a result of Dr Gentry's experiments the question now arose, could it be that the basement rocks of the earth were actually created within the few minutes it takes for polonium to decay?

Could the polonium halos actually be evidence of an instantaneous creation of our planet?

You see, if the earth's crust was created suddenly, then the rock would immediately be solid enough to hold the tracks produced by decaying polonium.

Dr Gentry submitted to the scientific establishment that these halos, then, provided unambiguous evidence of both an almost instantaneous creation of granites, and the young age of the earth.

To put this another way, the existence of these polonium halos distinctly implied that our earth was formed in a very short time.

These halos from original polonium invalidated the assumption of uniform decay over endless time.

This pulled the rug from under the radiometrically derived 4.5 billion-year age of the earth.

CHALLENGE TO NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

Over 20 years, Dr Gentry tried to wake up the scientific diehards concerning the implications of this discovery.

He published unrefuted scientific evidence for an instant creation in premier scientific journals, including Nature, Science. Applied Physics Letters, and others.

The evolutionist controlled National Academy of Sciences vehemently opposed the horrifying idea of creation, even claiming that the evidence for creation had been scientifically invalidated.

Dr Gentry repeatedly challenged the Academy to "publicly explain where the polonium-halo evidence for creation has ever been scientifically invalidated."

It was embarrassing. They were unable to prove their claim.

On his website http://www.halos.com Dr Gentry has
since posted letters and other documents pertaining to his challenge to the National Academy of Science.

Every question regarding the validity or implications of the polonium-halo evidence for creation was systematically dealt with in his published reports.

The result was that every proposal for an evolutionary origin of polonium radio-halos has
been systematically and experimentally falsified.

And since then, no hypothetical, naturalistic scenario has yet been suggested that can account for the mystery of the polonium halo.

Of course, you can find claims to the contrary on the Internet and elsewhere. But if these claims had any real substance, they would have passed peer review and been published in the open scientific literature.

The fact that they have not been, or have themselves been experimentally falsified, demonstrates the fact that this unique evidence still stands unrefuted.

The trillions of tiny polonium halos embedded in basement rocks all over this planet, calls into
question the entire radiometric dating system.

ORIGINAL POLONIUM, OR FROM A LATER SLOW DECAY OF URANIUM?

Radioactive atoms can spontaneously change, or decay, to atoms of a different type. Uranium can change into lead, or for that matter, into polonium, over a period of time. So the following question has been raised:

QUESTION: How do you know that these polonium halos in granite rock are primordial(original) polonium – and were not produced from the later slow decay of
uranium?

ANSWER: Why does this question arise? Because if the polonium halos in the granites were primordial (existing from the beginning), it logically follows that the granites must also be primordial - they must be earth's original Genesis rocks.

And they solidified almost instantly – fast enough to preserve the short-lived polonium bubbles.

But evolution theory cannot allow that possibility. Well, can we know for sure? Indeed, we can.

It is true that secondary polonium halos, derived from the decay of uranium, have been discovered for example, in coalified wood). However, these are found to be intrinsically different from the polonium halos in granite.

There is now much published evidence showing that polonium halos in granite have originated independently of uranium.

More exhaustive experimentation has failed to reveal any secondary origin of the halos in granite.

This means that these halos have to be original, Genesis halos in original, primary Genesis granite rocks.

In brief, the laboratory of nature has provided:

1. positive, unambiguous evidence for a primordial
origin of polonium halos in granites, as well as

2. decisive, independent evidence against their
secondary origin.

THE CHALLENGE

If evolutionary theory were correct, it should be possible to reproduce both granite and polonium halos in granite, since this process is supposed to have happened countless times over millions of years.

And what is the reality? It is a fact that no one has produced granite, much less granite with
polonium halos.

Their collective failure to do this – coupled with the fact that granite melted in the earth cools to form rhyolite, not granite

continued....................................................
phil_anthropist
Member
#39 | Posted: 9 Jan 2011 18:00 | Edited by: phil_anthropist
Reply 
THE CHALLENGE

If evolutionary theory were correct, it should be possible to reproduce both granite and polonium halos in granite, since this process is supposed to have happened countless times over millions of years.

And what is the reality? It is a fact that no one has produced granite, much less granite with
polonium halos.

Their collective failure to do this – coupled with the fact that granite melted in the earth cools to form rhyolite, not granite –indicates strongly the earth into existence suddenly.

Now, isn't this exactly what the "mythical" book of Genesis has been telling us all along?

FURTHER STARTLING FINDS

So, would you like to check out some more "dangerous discoveries?

Here's where to get them... in my special e-book The Weapon the Globalists Fear:

http://www.beforeus.com/weapon-ebook.html

Well, [firstname], may this upcoming week be a good one for you.

Best regards,

Jonathan Gray

info@archaeologyanswers.com
Starseed
Guest
#40 | Posted: 9 Jan 2011 18:25 | Edited by: Starseed
Reply 
Yes - I thought so. As I read the whole post it became ever more clear that Gentry was one of the 'Creationists'. And i just looked him up and guess what? Yep.

Anyway - these people are only ever trying to prove a fairy story, here`s just one site:

For your information Robert Gentry does not have a Ph.D. degree in physics, only a master's degree. But he is a competent physicist, and his laboratory experiments dealing with the amounts of radiation necessary to produce halos in mica and fluorite are accurate and acceptable to the referees for major journals. Hence, he has been able to publish in Major Journals and outside the creationists' sponsored journals. His science (at least the experimental part relating to radiation) is not at fault. It is his interpretations and applications of his results that err. As just one example of the problems with his interpretation, in some places polonium halos occur in granite that underlies some fossil-bearing sedimentary rocks and is older than the sedimentary rocks, but in other places polonium halos are found in granites that penetrate sedimentary rocks and are younger than the fossil-bearing sediments, impossible on Gentry's view.

I suspect that Robert Gentry likely claims that he has refuted me. Generally, it has been my experience that no logic exists that will change the minds of the die-hard creationists that instantaneous creation during the Genesis Week is the real truth. There are five articles on my website on Creationism that provide direct or indirect evidence that the Gentry model is wrong. Two of particular note:


The Rest here: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/lorence_collins/polonium.html

'no logic exists that will change the minds of the die-hard creationists that instantaneous creation during the Genesis Week is the real truth.'

I don`t know enough about the science to argue, but I do know that fucking creationists are the scum of the earth. There is enough brainwashing out there already.

In a nutshell:

STATEMENT: Physicist Robert Gentry has reported isolated radio halos of polonuim-214 in crystalline granite. The half-life of this element is 0.000164 seconds! To record the existence of this element in such short time span, the granite must be in crystalline state instantaneously. This runs counter to evolutionary estimates of 300 million years for granite to form.

RESPONSE: The work that is the basis for this argument is Creation's Tiny Mystery by Robert Gentry. Gentry's overall scientific process was done well, but his interpretations of his data were faulty. Geologist Lorence Collins notes: "The geology of the sites at which Po halos are found clearly shows that Gentry's proof of instantaneous creation and a young Earth is nothing of the sort. Gentry's Po halos simply do not occur in primordial granites, but instead were formed in relatively young dikes that demonstrably crosscut older sedimentary and igneous rocks. Gentry claims to be an objective scientist but he has, in fact, ignored the very extensive published evidence that disproves his hypothesis. In addition, when confronted with this evidence he simply denies its existence. Such behavior is not characteristic of scientists, but of pseudoscientists."

Of course - each to their own - believe whatever you like.
Starseed
Guest
#41 | Posted: 9 Jan 2011 18:35 | Edited by: Starseed
Reply 
Fancy a laugh? Here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUviEnkMZ5Y

Robert V. Gentry explains with proof, facts and experimentation why the earth is not 4 billion years but simply a mere 6000 plus years. He also shows how his flood model fits into the formation of the current physical earth.

LOL Fucking creationists, all the same... Oh dear, I won`t be going to heaven. Again...zzzz
dark star
Member
#42 | Posted: 9 Jan 2011 18:36
Reply 
Very interesting phil.....the truth has been buried deep,but will out in the end.
Starseed
Guest
#43 | Posted: 9 Jan 2011 18:44 | Edited by: Starseed
Reply 
dark star:
Very interesting phil.....the truth has been buried deep,but will out in the end.

So fanciful debunked nonsense is 'the truth' and from a 'creationist' (spit) to boot? The sad thing is that the internet is responsible for spreading all sorts of nonsense that some gullible types then pass off as fact. While at the same time the www also provides instantly searchable knowledge in seconds. I mean, up until a few minutes ago I had never heard of Gentry. But I read that post thinking " fuck me that sounds interesting, who is trying to hide this info, must find out more" Then, within seconds all became clear. He is just another creationist pseudo-science fraudster. A shame, but there you have it... (at the very least there are massive questions)

Just because it sounds like a nice idea - that doesn`t make it true.

Does anybody else on this forum ever dig ? Even just a little bit and scratch beneath the surface of any of these peoples claims? Or am I the only one interested in the real truth?
Starseed
Guest
#44 | Posted: 9 Jan 2011 18:48 | Edited by: Starseed
Reply 
Just out of interest Phil - where did that news letter come from? I mean it turns out to not be 'news' as such. What was the source? Always good to have all the info. Was it archaeologyanswers.com ?

just found this:

Jonathan Grey is a psudoscientist. He never does any true reaserch for himself. He bends and manipulates the current evidence to suit his belief, and tries to convince other people to believe what he believes, that sums it up. He uses people's lack of understanding in the subject to get the better of them. My recommendation is not to pick up what he says, people like him prey on gullable people. He even charges thousands for people to tag along on his excursions. He is a liar like all the other psudoscientists out there, he's not doing it for the sake of science, he's doing it for the money.

And that site looks well dodgy? Check it out:

http://www.beforeus.com/
ImOverHere
Member
#45 | Posted: 9 Jan 2011 18:50 | Edited by: ImOverHere
Reply 
phil_anthropist:
http://www.beforeus.com/weapon-ebook.html

Scroll to the bottom - its a book advert

The whole premise relies on the interpretation of these halos and an understanding of their origination or cause in other words you havr got to be sure what you are looking at is what you think it is. My understanding is that granite is an igneous rock ie originates from molten lava therefore anything could be trapped/produced to produce this halo effect. If the premise is to be accepted it must also be accepted that the whole planet as a body cooled within 10 minutes, where did the energy go and how ? As for the claim that the New World Order are scared if this so called genises info was to become public knowledge - dont think so. If this was the case surely there is enough god squad unquestioning bible acceptance to stop the NWO in its tracks today.

looks like contrived bollocks to sell the book

As time goes on the creation movement grasp at smaller and smaller straws. Its interesting what they come up with when they dont have ignorance to rely on.
 Page:  ««  1  2  3  4  5  ...  25  26  27  28  29  »» 
Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Image Link  URL Link 

   
» Username  » Password 
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please enter your login/password details upon posting a message, or sign up first
TO JOIN THIS FORUM: WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.
We may be considering adding new members on a "block basis". We will collect new member requests and then introduce a new batch. The new memebrs will be identifiable by a prefix in their username as a "new member". Anyone considered to be trolling or causing trouble will be immedialtey removed. To be put on the list please email richard@richplanet.net AND GIVE YOUR US NAME, A USERNAME, PASSWORD. I would imagine a new batch of new members will be added in January 2012.
 

Forums are powered by miniBB®