teddyv

I would say it has mostly been for gold (+silver) but I have also worked on copper and vanadium projects. Currently employed by a.company trying to put a small.gold-silver mine back into production. I tend to do a lot of background reviews of projects of various kinds as well. I also personally have a couple properties I'm hoping.to explore for rare earths and lithium.

I admire that some hold fast to their commitment to literalism. That said, the language is clearly metaphor.

Graduated with a B.Sc. Geology. Been working fairly steady in mineral exploration since the mid-90's but being a boom and bust industry, there have been down times. During a lull in the industry I was a stay-at-home Dad, then worked as classroom aide for a number of years in my kid's school. Back during university I paid my way as a warehouseman during the summer.

"Jim Browning" on YouTube is probably one of the best anti-scammer channels. He really takes the time to explain the scam but also goes way out of his way to attempt to help those being scammed.

I'll never understand the "blame the schools" thing. They have kids for 6 hours at most for half a year. Blame the parents - they have the most direct impact on their kids.

When a zircon crystallizes, lead atoms cannot be incorporated into the crystal structure, but uranium can. Therefore, any lead in a zircon is the result of decay of the uranium contained. Since there are many additional methods which reproduce the estimated ages (within certain error bars, I'll grant), it seems that these "foibles" are just the imagination of whomever told you this. Certainly care in sample selection is important, but all these factors can be accounted form Radiometric dating has been in use for some 60+ years and has been a powerful tool in establishing the geological history of the earth. It's also a critical element in oil exploration and has been reliably used for decades as well. Wow, canopy theory. I did not know there were still adherents to that. I think most YEC organizations have abandoned that one. Outside of the Hebrew word used for dome (which I don't recall), that is the limit of any Scriptural support for that wild hypothesis. Everything else you posted is conjecture or speculation. Unless you can present some evidence to support it. I cannot believe that people continue to perpetuate the lie of circular reasoning in geological dating. You are smarter than that. A cursory understanding of relative and absolute dating explains this. You LAO appear to be invoking a quote mine from a letter sent to a journal in 1976. Biological evolution is not the reason geologists say the earth is old. The earth as being very old predates the formalization of evolutionary theory. Sorry, I find you unserious, misled, and are repeating falsehoods with these posts.

You would be very, very wrong in thinking that I agree with that statement. That's an opinion, but is it an informed opinion?

No. We had terrible fire seasons in 2017 and 2018, then more normal ones in 2019-2022.

You are doing it again. Out here in BC, I looked out my window and literally saw a fire start from a lightning strike. Also, Canada's legislative body is called Parliament.

We have been going through a stretch of cool weather and some rain which is greatly appreciated. For much of the northern forests here, they do need to burn. Lodgepole pine requires fire to open it's cones to spread seeds. Also, because of the extensive logging industry in BC, there has been long term fire suppression to preserve the trees. Eventually that leads to worse conditions for fires with increased dry litter on the forest floor.

Source? It seems a natural conclusion from making an unqualified statement that since a scientific paper did not mention God therefore it's satanic. But you can't be consistent, can you? You love posting on a computer, driving a car, living in a modern technological society built upon scientific discovery. But most of those papers on electromagnetic theory or gravity or what have you, don't mention God. Why are biology papers beholden to acknowledge God? You are asserting claims that are false. Further, I also know who made the universe and earth. We just disagree on the mechanics of it, not the agent. Source? And again you demonstrate that you don't understand evolution. Theory of biological evolution is only about how the diversity of life occurred. It says nothing about the origin of the universe. Big Bang theory deals with the origin of the universe. The other point is that they do not concern themselves with the matter of a Creator. Anything supernatural is not testable by scientific method. That is the limits. If people are making philosophical or religious claims on those theories, those people are in error, not the theories.

Even if it was the age of the earth - that is not based on the fossil record, but on radiometric dating, but not C14, but U-Pb. Fossil record only goes back the Archaean, about 3.5 Gy.

Darwin's book was a scientific report, not that dissimilar to a modern research paper. But it's somehow different because... ? By your own statement, not acknowledging God is satanic. Perhaps your language requires more precision. No, actually it has not. This is an assertion demonstrating that you are not up to date on origin of life research. The concept of irreducible complexity is a construct of the ID'ers (at least within the biological systems). And just because a satisfactory answer may not yet be known, does not mean it won't be. I am contesting your language. You have not demonstrated any understanding here (or elsewhere) why evolution is a "stupid theory". It always just a throwaway assertion that you have refused to ever back up. Threads bend and twist as issues arise. I have addressed the topic in previous posts within this thread.

That is an interesting position. I don't credit or mention God in my geological reports I write for the exploration programs I work on. Therefore satanic? Almost all YEC literature will focus on Darwin, calling their opponents Darwinists, even though evolutionary theory is well beyond Darwin's work. You continuing to complain about his "stupid theory" is not particularly useful because you are arguing against something that is has been expanded and built upon into the leading theory on the diversity of life. Also, the modern definition of evolution is "change of alleles in a population over time" is not really anything Darwin knew about.

Since Darwin pretty much the theory based on natural selection, which more creationists accept as legitimate, how could that be satanic? Also, I don't understand the fixation on Darwin. Sure he postulated it, but it has developed well beyond his early formulation since he did not have access to the modern knowledge of genetics.

I was specifying the Romans since that is the most direct context to the book of Revelation.

Slave trade in the Roman Empire was a very normal issue. The entire Roman world was built upon the back of the slave.

This ends up a No True Scotsmen fallacy. It's probably a better view that many Christians still struggle with their old nature, some more than others. Growth and discipline within the church body is needed, but you can imagine how people feel about that in our individualistic societies. It's been suggested that Western Cristianity is very dualistic with religion being pushed to the personal and private realm on Sunday, then just doing whatever you do the rest of the time.

There were some tribes in BC that used copper in art, but I am not aware of any metalwork for tools.

That's fine if you disagree - I appreciate that you recognize that there are similarities. I know it is not a perfect accounting, but I think it is compelling, at least worthy of some consideration.

The seven churches were real churches in real cities - these were the intended audience of John's revelation. They were going to be facing persecution by the Empire. One of the early issues facing the church was during Emperor Decius wherein a sacrifice was to be made to the genius of Caesar - burn some incense or splash some wine. If you did that, you were fine. If not, you were jailed or worse. Sounds a bit like a mark perhaps? The test even mentions the beast (most likely the Roman emperor) right after that. Many Christians performed the ritual. Others did not - some killed, others went into hiding. After Decius died, along with the edict, there was dispute over whether those who sacrificed could rejoin the congregations again.

Sorry. I'm not sure of this response. The mark comes before the 1000 years. Also, I would be hesitant to read Revelations as a "literal written out process of how events would take place". This is apocalyptic literature borrowing heavily on OT prophetic imagery. Also, John was writing this for the contemporary Christians of the Roman Empire. It had to be imminent to those people, because events taking place 1000's of years into the future would have been pointless. Just to be clear, I don't advocate for full preterism - I would fall into the partial preterist category. Obviously the second coming and final judgment have yet to happen.

Out of interest's sake, the earliest hard-rock mining is found in Swaziland, dating some 41,000 to 43,000 years ago for various forms of hematite (iron ore). Evidence of placer mining would be harder to uncover. Egyptians were apparently recovering gold, silver and copper as early as 3700BC.

It would likely take some digging to see what is all going on here, but the lawsuit has been going on for a while (since 1996). I checked an article and it stated: "White test-takers passed the tests 83.7% of the time while Black test takers passed at 43.9% and Latino test takers passed at 40.3% of the time, according to the complaint." That seems like an unusually wide spread for teachers with generally the same level of education. The tests determined advancement opportunities and pay increases. Failing them did not necessarily disqualify people from teaching, just kept them in lower pay brackets or teacher-on-call positions (which I think did not qualify for benefits). From another article '“Lawyers for the plaintiffs brought in experts who testified that much of the discrepancy in scores could be attributed to some of the questions being culturally biased in favor of whites,” the Post reported.' "Specific judgements have been calculated based on what the former and prospective educators would have earned if they had passed the test or had not been required to take it as a condition of employment." I could not find the test itself. The New York Post in an article from 2018 mentioned that a version of the test included such a question as: "­explain the meaning of a painting by pop artist Andy Warhol".

There seems to be an abundance of Bud Light.