(no subject)
Hello everyone,
I'm bored out of my face! I'm at work and there's nothing for me to do. I feel bad too because I'm being paid to do nothing. I've already cleaned everything, I've made new punch cards to replace the old ones that are so faded you can't see them, plus I made more space for people to write what they did during the day on them. I added up last weeks hours to prepare for making paycheques, I've filled in the log book where we keep track of how much time was spent doing what on the job sites. i've done the cheque details, I've entered bills, I've done everything there is to do. I should go home, but unfortunately the one part of the job I can't get ahead on is answering phones. I have to be here if the phone rings because people prefer to be told they can't speak to the boss by a person rather than by a machine. Apparently it's better for business to have a person answer the phones, even when that person is serving the exact purpose of a machine. I guess people are less likely to hang up without a message when they have a person.
I will be leaving early though. My girlfriend will be coming to pick me up from work at about 4 pm so I'll get off half an hour ealier. Of course, I'm in an hour earlier tomorrow so I'll make up for it. That's okay though, I could use the money.
I was reading on the Answers In Genesis website (www.answersingenesis.org) today that a scientist from John Moores University in Liverpool, England had reported on some 269 footprints found in the Valsequillo region of central Mexico which her and her team had dated using optically stimulated luminescence to be 40,000 years old. Among the various footprints were footprints displaying various traits found only in human footprints. The woman who found and dated these prints, Dr. Sylvia Gonzales, has had the findings of her dating methods to be highly contested among other evolutionists.
Obviously among creationists the date is far too large. But we expect nothing else from dating methods that have been repeatedly shown to be so flawed. However, the date is even a problem for most evolutionists who believe that that humans came to the Americas via the Bering land bridge about 12,000 years ago. To fix this problem Dr. Paul Renne and coworkers at the Berkeley Geochronology Center in Berkeley, California have redated the footprints using 40Ar/39Ar radiometric dating and come up with an age of 1.3 million years (give or take .3 million years.) This of course dates the footprints prior to the advent of homosapiens by evolutionary belief allowing the good doctor at Berkeley to dismiss the prints as nothing more than odd "markings". He makes mo effort to refute the evidence provided that they are human footprints, nor does he give suggestions about what they could be. But this doesn't sit well with Gonzales who has decided to redate the fossils herself using more than four seperate dating methods.
While I'm quite sure that the various dating methods are only going to cause more confusion by giving more dates that disagree with each other, the outcome is irrelevant. These footprints are not 40,000 years old, nore are they 1.3 million years old. These footprints which were "apparently made shortly after the deposition of the volcanic ash and were preserved as trace fossils by the fast deposition of fine-grained, water-deposited sediment" fit quite harmoniously within the Biblical framework that would have them dated at shortly before the flood, or maybe even made during the beginning days of the flood. The volcanic activity during the flood and the water would have provided means for the fossilization of the footprints, and even evolutionsists agree that there were people in that area 4000 years ago. So why the evolutionists have a battle of worldviews and presuppositions, creationsists can smile and thank God for more evidence of the flood.
I'm bored out of my face! I'm at work and there's nothing for me to do. I feel bad too because I'm being paid to do nothing. I've already cleaned everything, I've made new punch cards to replace the old ones that are so faded you can't see them, plus I made more space for people to write what they did during the day on them. I added up last weeks hours to prepare for making paycheques, I've filled in the log book where we keep track of how much time was spent doing what on the job sites. i've done the cheque details, I've entered bills, I've done everything there is to do. I should go home, but unfortunately the one part of the job I can't get ahead on is answering phones. I have to be here if the phone rings because people prefer to be told they can't speak to the boss by a person rather than by a machine. Apparently it's better for business to have a person answer the phones, even when that person is serving the exact purpose of a machine. I guess people are less likely to hang up without a message when they have a person.
I will be leaving early though. My girlfriend will be coming to pick me up from work at about 4 pm so I'll get off half an hour ealier. Of course, I'm in an hour earlier tomorrow so I'll make up for it. That's okay though, I could use the money.
I was reading on the Answers In Genesis website (www.answersingenesis.org) today that a scientist from John Moores University in Liverpool, England had reported on some 269 footprints found in the Valsequillo region of central Mexico which her and her team had dated using optically stimulated luminescence to be 40,000 years old. Among the various footprints were footprints displaying various traits found only in human footprints. The woman who found and dated these prints, Dr. Sylvia Gonzales, has had the findings of her dating methods to be highly contested among other evolutionists.
Obviously among creationists the date is far too large. But we expect nothing else from dating methods that have been repeatedly shown to be so flawed. However, the date is even a problem for most evolutionists who believe that that humans came to the Americas via the Bering land bridge about 12,000 years ago. To fix this problem Dr. Paul Renne and coworkers at the Berkeley Geochronology Center in Berkeley, California have redated the footprints using 40Ar/39Ar radiometric dating and come up with an age of 1.3 million years (give or take .3 million years.) This of course dates the footprints prior to the advent of homosapiens by evolutionary belief allowing the good doctor at Berkeley to dismiss the prints as nothing more than odd "markings". He makes mo effort to refute the evidence provided that they are human footprints, nor does he give suggestions about what they could be. But this doesn't sit well with Gonzales who has decided to redate the fossils herself using more than four seperate dating methods.
While I'm quite sure that the various dating methods are only going to cause more confusion by giving more dates that disagree with each other, the outcome is irrelevant. These footprints are not 40,000 years old, nore are they 1.3 million years old. These footprints which were "apparently made shortly after the deposition of the volcanic ash and were preserved as trace fossils by the fast deposition of fine-grained, water-deposited sediment" fit quite harmoniously within the Biblical framework that would have them dated at shortly before the flood, or maybe even made during the beginning days of the flood. The volcanic activity during the flood and the water would have provided means for the fossilization of the footprints, and even evolutionsists agree that there were people in that area 4000 years ago. So why the evolutionists have a battle of worldviews and presuppositions, creationsists can smile and thank God for more evidence of the flood.