posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:49 PM
Originally posted by dragn
I came in 1/2 way through a discussion on TV last night and need some help in getting more information.
The general gist of the conversation was about a book (sorry, didn't get the title) that was offering money to anybody who could scientifically
dispute the claims it made. The main dialogue of the book was based on a radioactive isotope (may have been called P14 or something along those lines)
with a half life of 1/10,000 of a second (again, not 100% sure on this info, but it's close) that has been found trapped in granite. The theory that
this book offers is that trapping this isotope that expires almost as soon as it is formed is irrefutable evidence that the granite was formed in an
instant, hence lending credit to the creationist theory.
My intent of this is NOT to start another thread debating creationism vs. evolution. There are plenty of those out there already. Without accurate
info I can't even do any research on the subject. I'm just curious if anybody else has heard of this book and can fill in the blanks that I have
missed so I can actually do some research on the subject.
Most likely you are speaking about Gentry's work. Gentry is an vehement creationist. Gentry's website can be accessed
. Gentry's work, while intriguing, is very controversial. Possibly due to the nature of the material and his
extreme in your face personality. Obviously, the evolution camp doesn't support his theories, even members of the creation camp believe his work is
flawed. While Gentry is extremely knowledgable, has lots of peer-reviewed work published, and can obviously think on his feet, my personal opinion is
that his work, like all
radiometric dating techniques, relies on unfounded or unprovable assertions and assumptions.
Gentry's book is called "Creation's Tiny Mystery." It's an okay read. The first four chapters discuss Gentry's theory, how he arrived at this
conclusions, and covers much of his earlier work. Much of the remainder of the book seems to be centered around Gentry defending himself from his
numerous critics. Much of the info in the book can be gleaned from the website.
I don't recommend not reading this book, but of course it should be taken with a grain of salt. There actually exists much evidence that would stand
in opposition to Gentry's claims, though I've not kept up with this particular discipline for a bit of time now, so I am not sure if Gentry has made
any claims to counter those of his most recent detractors. IMO, even if Gentry can make logical arguments against his detractors, his theory is still
highly speculative, open to interpretation, and based on unknowable or unprovable assumptions.