UTCSTAFF Archives

February 2005

UTCSTAFF@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Stephen Nichols <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Stephen Nichols <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:40:42 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
Fritz's recent diatribe resorts to just the kind of stereotyping that
needs to be dispelled.  The idea that the Church, and therefore
creationists, ever accepted the idea that the earth was flat is a myth.
Jeffrey Burton Russell, Professor Emeritus of History at UC-Santa
Barbara, authored a book, /Inventing the Flat Earth/, in which he
documents the history of that myth and the motives behind its
continuation.  The following link is a short summary of his research:

http://id-www.ucsb.edu/fscf/library/RUSSELL/FlatEarth.html


Nick, Tim, and others vociferously object to my concerns with
radiometric dating.  However, recent efforts raise some questions about
the accuracy of the dendrochronology (ie. tree ring dating) that was
used to "calibrate" the C14 technique.   But you shouldn't take my word
for it since my degrees are in engineering and not in biology or
archaeology.  Why don't you visit the following link and read what he
has to say?

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp


Further, a recent effort raises some questions about the process of
dating objects.  Again, don't take my word for it.  Visit the following
links.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0225von_Zieten.asp
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/08/22/wnean22.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/08/22/ixworld.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2