Page history

Aschlafly

no edit summary

Aschlafly

improved further, explaining the flaws in atheistic use of this model

DavidB4-bot

Spelling, grammar, and general cleanup, typos fixed: asumptions → assumptions, Quarternary → Quaternary

SamHB

→‎Third assumption: understanding of the rate of decay

SamHB

Label these things

SamHB

The old reference 4 was just a reference to reference 7.

SamHB

→‎Third assumption: understanding of the rate of decay: improve

SamHB

Put all the references on an equal footing.

SamHB

→‎See also: More references. We have articles that can help the reader understand the issues.

SamHB

categorize the assumptions

SamHB

The attempted explanation was redundant, rambling, and full of irrelevancies. There is a more incisive explanation on the other page.

SamHB

Move the John Ray remark to a separate "antiquated notions" section, similar to what was done for H. G. Wells on the radioactivity page.

SamHB

Try to explain why it's hard, and what one needs to be careful about.

SamHB

Remove the candle stuff. That analogy is not at all helpful, and its removal was recommended on the talk page 12 years ago. People can understand the principle quite well from the current radioactivity page.

SamHB

Decay rates are well understood, and have been observed in distant galaxies.

DavidB4-bot

→‎Rate of decay: HTTP --> HTTPS #3, replaced: http://www.icr.org → https://www.icr.org

DavidB4-bot

→‎Rate of decay: HTTP --> HTTPS [#1], replaced: http://books.google.com → https://books.google.com

SamHB

→‎Initial quantities: Parts of the essay were copied from this, obviously.

DavidB4-bot

Spelling, Grammar, and General Cleanup, typos fixed: Quarternary → Quaternary

SamHB

→‎See also: Refer to the new essay; put in more categories. It really is heavily involved with fundamental physics.

Aschlafly

improved, also correction to prior edit summary: Another assumption is that the rate of decay is constant over long periods of time, which is particularly implausible as energy levels changed enormously over time.

Aschlafly

→‎Rate of decay: noted how implausible it is that decay rates changed as energy levels changed

Aschlafly

Another assumption is that the rate of decay is constant over long periods of time, particularly as energy levels changed enormously. Also removed insertions that were rather one-sided and/or circular in reasoning.

SamHB

→‎Rate of decay: better bridge section

SamHB

→‎Rate of decay: Explain the variations.

SamHB

→‎Calibration

SamHB

→‎Rate of decay: It didn't say "pages".

SamHB

→‎Rate of decay: Original quote was from a page that had a misspelling; I think this is more authentic.

SamHB

Separate the difficulties of controlling the isotopic mix (hard) from the difficulties of knowing fundamental decay rates (easy). More to come.

Aschlafly

restored recent addition of multiple citations as references

Aschlafly

restored deleted material, but included new explanation of process

1990'sguy

no edit summary

1990'sguy

→‎Rate of decay

Seacs71

Expanded on the decay process and what is the basis for a decay rate

DavidB4-bot

Spelling/Grammar Check, typos fixed: Quarternary → Quaternary

DavidB4-bot

clean up & uniformity

Conservative

→‎Acceptance and reliability

Conservative

→‎Acceptance and reliability

Conservative

→‎Acceptance and reliability

Conservative

→‎Acceptance and reliability

Conservative

→‎Acceptance and reliability

AK

→‎Rate of decay: John Ray on different conditions during Earth's early period

RFayette

Correct for atheistic/old-Earth bias

Dataclarifier

added "See also" section with Literalist Bible chronology

Foon

balanced lead

Aschlafly

→‎Initial quantities: copy edit

Wschact

clarify

EJamesW

Undo revision 981744 by HoraceWeatherfield (talk)

HoraceWeatherfield

no edit summary

Aschlafly

See also Counterexamples to an Old Earth