In response to:

Monday Fun: I am a Gay American Who Eats Chick-Fil-A

NewAgeOfReason Wrote: Aug 07, 2012 1:41 AM
Your "equilibrium" argument has been invalidated. This argument was popularized by Henry Morris (1974, p.164), who used some calculations done in 1968 by Melvin Cook to get the 10,000-year figure. In 1968 another creationist, Robert L. Whitelaw, using a greater ratio of carbon-14 production to decay, concluded that only 5000 years passed since carbon-14 started forming in the atmosphere!. The argument may be compared to filling a barrel which has numerous small holes in its sides. We stick the garden hose in and turn it on full blast. The water coming out of the hose is analogous to the continuous production of carbon-14 atoms in the upper atmosphere. The barrel represents the earth's atmosphere in which the carbon-14 accumulates.
Blowtorch of Reason Wrote: Aug 07, 2012 10:41 AM
You have proven time and time again that you don't understand the science. I have quoted several other scientists that are masters in the field yet you still want to toss their findings in the trash. Your opinion is carved in stone and no other facts will change your mind.
Joseph64 Wrote: Aug 07, 2012 8:49 AM
If you had a clock that ran at normal speed half the time and half speed the rest of the time, would you ever really know what time it is?
Joseph64 Wrote: Aug 07, 2012 8:46 AM
Radioactive isotopes decay at a fixed rate. If they didn't, they wouldn't be useful for measuring the age of anything. Your argument that they decay quickly at some times, and slowly at others basically proves I'm right.
NewAgeOfReason Wrote: Aug 07, 2012 1:43 AM
Morris concluded that the barrel was still in the process of being filled up and that, given the present rate of water coming in and leaking out, the filling process began only 10,000 years ago.

It's a great argument except for one, little thing. The water is not coming out of the hose at a steady rate as our model assumed! Sometimes it slows down to a trickle so that much more water is leaking out the barrel than is coming in; sometimes it goes full blast so that a lot more water is coming into the barrel than is leaking out. Thus, the mere fact that the present rate of water coming in exceeds that of the water leaking out cannot be extrapolated back to a starting time. And, that destroys the entire argument!
NewAgeOfReason Wrote: Aug 07, 2012 1:42 AM
Henry Morris argued that if we started filling up our empty barrel it would take 30,000 years to reach the equilibrium point. Thus, he concluded, if our Earth were older than 30,000 years the incoming water should just equal the water leaking out. That is, the equilibrium point should have long since been reached given the present rate of carbon-14 production and the old age of the earth. The next step in Henry Morris' argument was to show that the water level in our barrel analogy was not in equilibrium, that considerably more water was coming in than leaking out.
NewAgeOfReason Wrote: Aug 07, 2012 1:42 AM
The water leaking out the sides of the barrel represents the loss of the atmosphere's supply of carbon-14. Now, the fuller that barrel gets the more water is going to leak out the thoroughly perforated sides, just as more carbon-14 will decay if you have more of it around. Finally, when the water reaches a certain level in the barrel, the amount of water going into the barrel is equal to the amount leaking out the perforated sides. We say that the input and output of water is in equilibrium. The water level just sits there even though the hose is going full blast

This is what happens when a gay conservative gets together with a conservative video editor. Happy Monday everybody.