How reliable is science? new carbon dating problems (The limitations of science)

by David Turell , Tuesday, July 28, 2015, 00:36 (3405 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained


> Tony: No one ever claimed that the earth does not add layers as it ages, but there are limitations to that. That being said, here are some counter questions:
> 
> 1)Is age the ONLY way that layers are formed in the earth?
> 2)How is that soil being tranferred into these layers? How is it being accumulated?
> #Are layers uniform enough to be a reliable indicator of age? (like counting tree rings)
> 4) How do you explain horizontal layers around vertical objects?-I'm no expert but did have a 10 days course on the Grand Canyon by as geology department head professor, who had about 40 papers on the Canyon. The lowest visible layer I saw and touched was the Vishnu Shist, 2.2 billion years old.-1) No, there are sudden lava flows, erosion (see below). Continental subduction can disrupt the layers. I've seen this on another river.-2) Erosion by wind, water; earthquakes, ocean silting and volcanic ash eruptions are some of the things I can think of.-3) The layers are uniform enough to use as aging once ages are established at different levels. The Great Unconformity (750 million years not in the canyon) are elsewhere on the Earth, so the Earth in like an onion. The loss of the GU is thought to be due to erosion.-4) The layers I've seen are much thicker than the height of a tree, and some layers have sub-layers. Certainly a tree could be fossilized in upright state. I looked at the website you referred to, and I know there are refuting articles, but I'm not educated enough to fully comment. -I think it is hard to suggest the Earth in not 4.5 billion years old. And there is good evidence of biologic activity at 3.5 billion years and before with fossils in many layers all the way down.