Thanks SoSick,

Quote
Where did I lie? 1+1 does not =2. That is exactly what you said and you just quoted it again above.
What I actually said was "[color:"blue"]see if you can show that 1+1=2 has validity in the world of objective reality[/color]" so it appears that either you are lying about what I said or you have a sever problem with comprehending what I said.

That 1+1=2 is an abstract mathematical assumption, essentially the definition of "2" (in any base above binary), is beside the point: the point is that this is an intellectual abstraction with no relationship to the objective world - there are no two identical objects (god being so clever), so it doesn't have validity in the world of objective reality. That's the point.

We count things only by assuming a sufficient similarity, making an abstract model of reality, not by any real objective identity. That assumption does not compel objects to become identical, which is what would have to happen if math could affect the world of objective reality.

Notice that you're complete, utter, and total inability to prove me wrong leaves you with either of two choices: continue to misrepresent what I said (hide from your objective created reality) or accept the validity of my statement that math is irrelevant to reality.
Quote
It gets hot as heck sometimes in summer at 3000 feet btw. Much better than 1500 feet but still hot, well into the 90's sometimes.
Note that one of the methodologies of distraction is to keep mentioning information already known to be irrelevant to the issue: we don't need to know what it is like at 3,000 feet in some places, we need to know what it is like in the area in question:
Quote
Weather here is cold and dry. The average max.-min. temperatures range from about 70°F (21°C) to 37°F (3°C) at the base, and [color:"red"]from 36°F (2°C) to -26° (-32°C) in the alpine zone[/color]. Precipitation averages 4 in. (10 cm) at its base to 20 in. (50 cm) mostly as snow, along the crest. Due to the varied topography, precipitation can and does differ greatly in localized areas. Winds blowing along the crest can blow most of the snow from some areas, leaving little for trees like the bristlecone at the treeline - 11,200' (3414m). Thunder and lightning storms occur frequently in the high country. Winds are strong at the crest, both summer and winter.
(bold and color for emPHAsis)

Not very "life-friendly" a place.

Now let's discuss your comment on message 248007:
Quote
Not neccesarily. trees do survive floods, they grow from the roots, so does grass, all sorts of stuff. you should try killing a tree sometime. It's very difficult. You really have to uproot it completely. or use poison of some sort. Right outside my door are thousands of trees with their roots underwater, they grow out of the edge of the river, strong and sturdy. massive as a matter of fact. They love the location, with their roots underwater.
Some trees yes (especially ones growing in flood prone zones that have adapted to frequent flooding - doesn't apply to Bristlecones), some trees no (especially ones in areas that have never been flooded). As far as I know Bristlecones have not been tested by flood conditions in recent years to see how flood resistant they are, but we can leave this for now, and discuss other issues related to floods and evidence.

Here's some more information about the Bristlecone pines:
Quote
...Dr. Schulman and his assistant C.W. Ferguson. They found the oldest trees at elevations of 10,000 to 11,000 feet (3048 to 3354m), often growing in seemingly impossible locations. These trees showed large areas of die back (deadwood) and thin strips of living bark. The trees growing in the most extreme conditions, with scant soil and moisture, seemed to be the oldest! Several trees in the 3,000 to 4,000+ year range were discovered. All but one were found in the White-Inyo Range, so Schulman devoted his attention to this area. The first tree proven over four thousand years old he aptly named "Pine Alpha". Later in 1957 "Methuselah" was found to be 4,723 years old and remains today the world's oldest known living tree.
So there are several living trees over 4,000 years old. Then we have the problem of all the dead wood lying around. From Botanical and Ecological Characteri...S Forest Service, Howard, Janet L. 2004):
Quote
Great Basin bristlecone pine has the longest life span of any nonclonal species in the world. The oldest known living Great Basin bristlecone pine had 4,862 countable annual rings when it was cut on Wheeler Peak in 1974 [33,79,104]. A few downed trees in the White Mountains lived over 5,000 years before they fell [41,42,76,77]. Schulman [115] suggested that longevity of bristlecone pines is directly related to site adversity.
So now we have a bit of a minor conundrum for the recent mountaintop flood hypothesis crowd, as either
  • the old dead trees lying around are from before the flood and were carried here and deposited by receding waters (is spite of the evidence not bearing any relationship to that kind of effect), and thus the earth must be at least 5,000+ before flood years + 2,880 BCE + 2007 = 9,887+ years old minimum, OR
  • they have fallen post flood (or the water would have carried the wood away) and there must be substantial overlap between the dead and fallen trees and the still living trees, with a total age well over 5,000 years.
If this second conclusion is the case, then we can build a dendrochronology from the trees by finding the evidence of overlapped growth in the rings. This is what dendrochronology does:
Quote
Simply put, dendrochronology is the dating of past events (climatic changes) through study of tree ring growth. ... Discovered by A.E. Douglass from the University of Arizona, who noted that the wide rings of certain species of trees were produced during wet years and, inversely, narrow rings during dry seasons.
<img src="http://www.sonic.net/bristlecone/images/cells2.gif">
Each year a tree adds a layer of wood to its trunk and branches thus creating the pict of cells annual rings we see when viewing a cross section. New wood grows from the cambium layer between the old wood and the bark. In the spring, when moisture is plentiful, the tree devotes its energy to producing new growth cells. These first new cells are large, but as the summer progresses their size decreases until, in the fall, growth stops and cells die, with no new growth appearing until the next spring. The contrast between these smaller old cells and next year's larger new cells is enough to establish a ring, thus making counting possible.
Thus we have a record annual tree rings due to the difference in seasons, and a record of climate differences from year to year in the different thicknesses of complete annual rings.

This is where those correlations start to come into play. Summary to date:
  • we have several living trees 3,000 years to 4,000+ years old,
  • we have two living, or cut down while living, trees over 2007 + 2,832 BCE (the younger one of the two) = 4,839 years old,
  • we have several dead trees over 5,000 years old,
  • we have many specimens\samples that logically overlap in ages (or that add up to much older age),
  • trees produce annual rings in response to the changes in seasons,
  • trees produce different thickness rings in response to differences in climate from year to year,
  • methods of matching climate patterns between different trees can be tested with the two living, or cut down while living, trees over 4,839 years old, to gage the amount of error likely in the process,
  • sometimes conditions are so sever that some Bristlecone pines do not produce a growth ring for the year, while other conditions (freezing for example) can produce something that looks something like an annual ring (a "false" ring) in some trees,
  • a volcano, Santorini, erupted during the summer of 1627 BCE and led to the destruction the Minoan civilization (historical event),
  • the tree ring growth for that year was prematurely halted and the ring showes less growth than normal with damage from freezing,
  • this correlation validates the tree ring counting to 1627 BCE (an outside check on errors), and
  • we can look for other historically dated events that impact the rings to be able to judge the overall consistency of the method.
It will come as little surprise to you that this has already been done by people spending years on the study (sometimes devoting their lives to it - like Schulman), checking the data and looking for possible sources of errors.

Again, from the dendrochronology above:
Quote
The bristlecone pine chronology in the White Mountains currently extends back almost 9,000 years continuously. That's to 7,000 BC! Several pieces of wood have been collected that will extend this date back even further. The hope is to push the date back to at least 8,000 BC. This will be important as the last Ice Age ended about 10,000 years ago, and to have a record of this transition period would offer scientists a wealth of information.
So it looks like you have a minimum age of the earth of 9,000 years with the samples overlapping or 9,887+ years if they don't overlap.

And we have only begun to discuss the correlations with other data, but that's enough for now.

Enjoy.

[color:"green"]Note: my time is limited, so I only choose threads of particular interest to me and I cannot guarantee a reply to all responses (particularly if they do not discuss the issue/s), and I expect other people to do the same. Thank you for your consideration.[/color]