50 Years Of Deafening Silence Confirms Radioisotope Halos Have Destroyed Evolution - It's Time For A Proper Burial

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,301
2,572
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
**** Note ****
(If you wish to skip the boring science lesson and head down to the bottom
to find out about the "50 years of deafening silence" - be my guest)

Dr. Robert Gentry, a Seventh-day Adventist scientist, made an extremely important discovery many years ago. After much research, in 1976 he published his findings in the prestigious, elite, peer-reviewed journal "Science" and turned the atheistic scientific world upside down: parent primordial Polonium-218 radioisotope halos contained in the Earth's basement granite rock layers. What does this have to do with disproving the evolutionary time table, which claims these layers of granite were formed by the slow cooling of molten rock over millions and millions of years? We must first understand what radioisotope halos are before we can understand why Dr. Gentry's discovery is so detrimental to the evolutionary time table and, ultimately, the theory of evolution which rests upon it:

All radioactive elements go through a continuing process of decay until they reach the end of the process and turn into lead. At the beginning of the process, a "parent" isotope, such as Uranium-238, decays into a "daughter" isotope, and after a time that daughter isotope decays into another daughter isotope and so on until the end of the decay chain is reached and the radioactive element finally becomes inert lead.

It's what happens during the decay process that is so important to Dr. Gentry's discovery.

When a radioactive isotope undergoes decay, either alpha or beta particles eject from atomic center of the isotope and shoot outward concentrically in all directions. If the particles are alpha, the high energy release causes visible damage to the surrounding crystalline structure of the rock in which the radioactive element is embedded - beta particles are too low energy to cause any damage. The distance the alpha particles travel outward from the isotope's atomic center varies from isotope to isotope, thereby producing varying distances of damage, seen as rings or "halos"; hence the name "radioisotope halos".

This visible damage by alpha particles proves the Bible, not evolution, is true.

When scientists take thin slices of rock and place them under a microscope, they can view a cross section of these damage zone "halo" rings much like if one slices a boiled egg in half and a cross section view shows the center yellow yolk, the white area further out, and finally the outer shell. It is by examining the distance of each halo ring from the atomic center of the isotope that scientists determine which isotope is responsible for the formation of each ring. Below is a picture of a parent Uranium-238 isotope halo and its associated daughter isotope halos on the decay chain:

F6630F0C-63F5-4617-849C-37719B38E4E6.png


Scientists with almost unfathomable precision have measured the "half life" of each radioactive isotope, so they can make a pretty good guess about how long each will exist before it fully decays into the next daughter isotope on the chain.

Still here? We're almost done!

One of these isotopes on the decay chain, Polonium-218 (Po-218) has a half life of only 3.1 minutes - which means it will fully decay into its daughter isotope in the chain in less than 30 minutes. The shocking discovery made by Dr. Gentry is that he found parent, primordial Polonium-218 halos, which means the Polonium-218 isotope that caused them was not the result of isotope decay from Uranium-238, but began its existence as parent primordial Polonium-218!

D7D57B9B-65A3-41BE-B093-1E20873EA39F_4_5005_c.jpeg


This is something that we do not observe today and which defies the "Uniformitarian Principle" of evolutionary science - and means something very different was operating in the past - Genesis 1:1 KJV and Genesis 6:17 KJV!

Because of the fleeting existence of Polonium-218, the only explanation for how parent primordial Polonium-218 halos could possibly form is that a parent Polonium-218 radioactive isotope suddenly sprang forth into existence within molten rock, immediately followed by the instantaneous hardening of that molten rock into solid granite whereby trapping the isotope inside, followed by alpha particle "radiohalo" damage to the newly hardened granite by the decay of this parent primordial Polonium-218 isotope over the next few minutes until it finished decaying into its daughter isotope - a process that must be completed in MERE MINUTES, NEVER IN MILLIONS OF YEARS!


"By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made,
and all the hosts of them by the breath of His mouth...
For He spake, and it was done,
He commanded, and it stood fast."


Psalms 33:6,9 KJV
************************************************************************************************************
Dr. Gentry's findings on radioisotope halos were published in the top, elite, most authoritative science journals in the world such as Science, Nature, Annual Review of Nuclear Science, Earth and Planetary Science, Geophysical Research Letters, and many more. After the journal Science published his findings in October of 1976, Dr. Gentry got a letter from a professor at LSU:

"Dear Dr. Gentry,​

I have been patiently scanning the 'Letters' section of Science since the publication by you and your colleagues on your findings of radiohalos. The silence has been deafening -- I think it can be interpreted as 'stunned silence'. Your results will not greatly trouble the engineer...but the impact on the science of geology, in possibly changing accepted views on geologic time, will be felt many years."​

Very truly yours,​
Raphael G. Kazmann, Professor​

"Stunned silence", brothers and sisters. The atheistic scientific community was blown away by Dr. Gentry's findings and for months sat in stunned silence with no way to conjure up an alternative explanation to defend their false evolutionary "millions of years" timeline. Almost 50 years later, not a single scientist has been able to publish an explanation in any of these top, authoritative, peer-reviewed, elite science journals.

Oh, there are a few shills among the atheistic scientific community like John Baillieul who climb onto the internet and throw a few stones at Dr. Gentry, but none of their articles have ever been published in any top, elite, peer-reviewed science journal. Their work has been characterized as "spurious" and attempts to "hoodwink the unwary". They know their bogus claims don't even begin to approach the level of a serious challenge to Dr. Gentry's legitimate scientific work, but they can't stand the embarrassment of nearly 5 decades of deafening silence, so better to cowardly post an article on an internet website that isn't peer reviewed, isn't fact checked, isn't regarded by anyone accept atheists and foolish theistic evolutionists who wouldn't know an isotope from an ice cream sundae, and pretend they've found a "chink in the armour" - even the complicit editors of these elite journals know that publishing their desperate claims on elite peer-reviewed journal platforms would do extreme harm to the entire atheistic pseudoscience agenda because these claims would be swiftly exposed as fallacious.

Dr. Gentry boldly challenged these cowards to public, peer-reviewed debates, but no one has ever stepped up to the challenge. The stunned silence continues. When this great man of God passed away in 2020, I'm sure there was much rejoicing among the atheistic pseudoscience community. His Wiki page is shamelessly biased against him and his extraordinary accomplishments, but in a time when a lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth is finished lacing up it's boots, that's to be expected. But, praise God that it's true today as it was when Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 13:8 KJV, "We can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth" and I pray what I've written here is to the glory of God and for the protection of those who would otherwise be seduced by the satanic lie of evolution.

Useful links:
Study Pages

Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation - Polonium Halos in Granite and Coal - Earth Science Associates

Fingerprints of Creation
 

BeyondET

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2022
1,494
392
83
56
Hampton Roads
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well man is from the dirt, little mini earth's walking ecosystems. Producing rocks in the ears, shed skin making dirt, 60% water, rivers and streams leading to an ocean like vanes arteries and heart, electrical field, Gives way to life and host them as well, to name a few. the human body host around 10,000 different living species in and on the body. amazing all the life forms on earth and its integration.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Phoneman777

BeyondET

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2022
1,494
392
83
56
Hampton Roads
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
One very rare element isn't a good candidate for age dating earth.


" Polonium is a very rare natural element. It is found in uranium ores but it is uneconomical to extract it. It is obtained by bombarding bismuth-209 with neutrons to give bismuth-210, which then decays to form polonium. All the commercially produced polonium in the world is made in Russia. "
 

BeyondET

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2022
1,494
392
83
56
Hampton Roads
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Polonium is a decay product of uranium, so as long as the uranium is aging the polonium bubbles will appear. That certainly isn't a gauge of age because its continuously releasing the decay product from the uranium.
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
8,510
6,377
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Gentry didn't use all the things needed to determine age, it was a theory that isn't correct.
"Polonium Haloes" Refuted
As the author of this thread stated, no-one has had their refutation published in peer reviewed science magazines, journals, articles, worth any significance. And the web site you refer to above is one of those insignificant vehicles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phoneman777

BeyondET

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2022
1,494
392
83
56
Hampton Roads
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
As the author of this thread stated, no-one has had their refutation published in peer reviewed science magazines, journals, articles, worth any significance. And the web site you refer to above is one of those insignificant vehicles.
Because it's a hypothesis.

Is it your opinion, if a post says there was no refutes published so the statement is rock solid huh...
 
Last edited:

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,301
2,572
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
One very rare element isn't a good candidate for age dating earth.


" Polonium is a very rare natural element. It is found in uranium ores but it is uneconomical to extract it. It is obtained by bombarding bismuth-209 with neutrons to give bismuth-210, which then decays to form polonium. All the commercially produced polonium in the world is made in Russia. "
The reason you don't agree that parent Po218 radioisotope halos disprove evolution and prove instantaneous formation of the Earth's granite rocks is that you don't fully understand the topic.

It's OK. It's a very heavy subject and only those with both a willingness to remain objective and the discipline to learn will understand.

I'm happy to help you grasp it. We can start by clarifying what it means for a radioisotope to "decay" and go from there. God bless, friend.
 

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,301
2,572
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Polonium is a decay product of uranium, so as long as the uranium is aging the polonium bubbles will appear. That certainly isn't a gauge of age because its continuously releasing the decay product from the uranium.
I think you missed something in the OP - please re-read the part about Dr. Gentry discovered.
 

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,301
2,572
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gentry didn't use all the things needed to determine age, it was a theory that isn't correct.
"Polonium Haloes" Refuted
Gentry published his findings on many top tier, elite, peer-reviewed science journals and challenged all scientists of the world to a top tier, elite, peer-reviewed, science journal open debate before the entire world.

Baillieul published his "Polonium Haloes Refuted" article on the internet. That's right -- the internet.

None of Gentry's critics have ever published their criticism in any of these top tier, elite, peer-reviewed science journals or accepted Gentry's challenge. They cowardly publish them on internet websites where no such peer-review standard exists. Cowards. Atheist, impotent cowards. And, why do these cowards not publish them on top tier, elite, peer-reviewed science journals?

Because the editors of these top tier, elite, peer-reviewed science journals know that if there's one thing atheist scientists love more than advancing their God-hating agenda, it's flexing on a fellow atheist scientist's erroneous conclusions whenever the opportunity presents itself - they have massive egos - and these editors know the criticism is bulldookey, and publishing them on their platforms would immediately expose them as fraudulent.

Therefore, the criticism of these pathetic cowards is kept safe from peer-review by being limited to the internet or teaching journals. They're nothing more than "spurious" arguments intended to "hoodwink the unwary", just as you've been hoodwinked, friend.
 
Last edited:

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,301
2,572
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Polonium is a decay product of uranium, so as long as the uranium is aging the polonium bubbles will appear. That certainly isn't a gauge of age because its continuously releasing the decay product from the uranium.
The issue isn't identifying an age gauge, but whether granite instantly formed according to the Bible or took millions of years, according to evolution.
 

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,301
2,572
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Because it's a hypothesis.

Is it your opinion, if a post says there was no refutes published so the statement is rock solid huh...
Sorry, but it's because the editors know the criticism doesn't amount to anything, else they'd have published it.

Can I ask you two things?

Why do you believe data anyone can publish on the internet that's not peer-reviewed is superior to Gentry's data that's published on top-tier, peer-reviewed science platforms?

Let's say things were reversed: if Dr. Gentry's claims were merely internet claims, and if Baillieul's ("Polonium Halos Refuted") claims were published on these top tier, peer-reviewed platforms, would still regard Gentry's internet claims as superior to those of Bailieul?
 
Last edited:

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,265
571
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
I think you missed something in the OP - please re-read the part about Dr. Gentry discovered.
This is off-topic but meant well, please correct the typo in here: <"Hereby we do know that we know Him if we keep His commandments. He that saith, I know Him, and keepeth not His commandments is a LIAR and the truth is not in Him. But whoso keepeth His word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in Him. ">
 

BeyondET

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2022
1,494
392
83
56
Hampton Roads
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Sorry, but it's because the editors know the criticism doesn't amount to anything, else they'd have published it.

Can I ask you two things?

Why do you believe data anyone can publish on the internet that's not peer-reviewed is superior to Gentry's data that's published on top-tier, peer-reviewed science platforms?

Let's say things were reversed: if Dr. Gentry's claims were merely internet claims, and if Baillieul's ("Polonium Halos Refuted") claims were published on these top tier, peer-reviewed platforms, would still regard Gentry's internet claims as superior to those of Bailieul?
For me it's just common sense, it's a very rare occasion in nature. So many other processes involved the sum of it all probably is very hard to comprehend.