Reply With Quote
Excellent response. I started reading thinking "Here we go again..." only to be pleasantly surprised.
I take it Will Ferrell dressed as Jesus visited you during a coke binge?
Excellent response. I started reading thinking "Here we go again..." only to be pleasantly surprised.
...and then I read the rest of the thread.
When your IQ cracks 3 digits come back and play.....
Otherwise get your weak takes out of here, this isn't the troll forum.
People can't stand the fact that I can simultaneously believe in Noah's flood and biological adaptation. As for the matter of whether or not the dinosaurs were around by then... who knows -- that's what's debatable. Again, am I not allowed a dissenting opinion?
Last edited by Phenomanul; 01-10-2007 at 10:07 AM.
I've been ridiculed for believing the same thing, which is why I try to stay out of these discussions.
The existence of humans and dinosaurs were seperated by at least 65 million years. This has been "proven" by various methods of radio-carbon dating of fossils. I guess I would have to understand what your understanding of Noah's flood was. That's another thing though...as I think a flood of global proportions is a physical imposssibility.
It can't be proven either way can it? So why are you so sure it's just a story? The flood has roots in Mesopotamia in the story of Gilgamesh, it also has roots in Australia in old Aboriginees' tales (well before 'white' man interefered with their history), and of course in the Moses account of Noah.
Funny how the Ararat mountain range where Noah's Ark is believed to have settled is considered the terracenter of the earth. Coincidence? I think not. The mean distance from said mountain range to dry land everywhere else on earth finds its minimum there. If the area of the region were defined as being bounded by a 100 mile square, or 10,000 square miles, the statistical probability of landing in that location would be roughly 1 out of 19,340 -- hardly a given. That GOD dispersed the animals from the most centralized location on the planet speaks volumes of His purpose. Furthermore, there was no way that Moses could have known that the Ararat mountains held this distinction.
I don't expect Noah's ark to be found, nor do I hinge my belief of this Biblical account on physical evidence of the ark's existence. For one, I know that GOD does not typically reveal Himself with physical proof. There is a great deal of faith involved. Could you imagine how easy it would be for GOD to show up and say, "Here I am, believe me now?" But that's not how He works. The subtleties of His handiwork are still present in our Universe. Sometimes we just choose not to see.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 01-10-2007 at 11:32 AM.
Most people don't realize that carbon dating only works for samples younger than 50,000 years... using Carbon dating to extrapolate the age of anything older than that figure is a scientific fraud...
But then again, most people don't really question the 'scientific community'.
What you say is true to a point. Carbon dating works for samples under 70,000 years. I probably shouldn't have stated radio-carbon dating in my original point. Older samples are identified by radiometric dating involving the use of isotope series such as rubidium/strontium, thorium/lead, potassium/argon, argon/argon, or uranium/lead, all of which have very long half-lives, ranging from 0.7 to 48.6 billion years.
I refer you to the following link.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton.html
Fair enough.... that is your opinion.
BTW Moses wrote down Ararat Mountains. 10,000 sqaure miles is an adequate concession.
Believing in The Deluge is no big deal, given that real scientists have discovered evidence of 100s of cataclysmic events, even within near-historical times.
Does anybody believe that The Deluge resulted in a Hollywoodian, Waterworld of a completely submerged planet?
Believing that Noah taking _his_ animals on his boat had any impact on species survival is Bible-thumping bull . He lived in a time where nearly everybody was a farmer (or maybe even before agriculture and husbandry were developed). His boat trip impacted his livelihood as a farmer, but had no impact on the entire planet's species survival.
Believing LITERALLY, without "interpretation", taking as HARD EVIDENCE, that "On God's instructions, Noah built an ark and took into it one male and one female of each of the world's animals" is ridiculous, hilarious Bible-thumping bull .
You and I reached an understanding quite some time ago. What I meant by the comment was more an indictment against the direction of the thread.
Club posters dont know you (and many others) have hunted, killed, skinned, gutted, butchered, cooked, eaten, digested and this conversation out 1000x before.
People of all religions use it to justify doing those things in the first place... my opinion is whether God exists or not... does it really hurt to try to follow the 10 commandments and try to be a better person?
i went to catholic sunday school for 14 years...and i still consider myself agnostic more than anything else.
religion != spirtuality
DR, please copy and paste the post you made in the political forum in regards to the discussions about religion.
Best post ever.
Why Does Nearly Every Culture Have a Tradition of a Global Flood?
by John Morris, Ph.D.
One of the strongest evidences for the global flood which annihilated all people on Earth except for Noah and his family, has been the ubiquitous presence of flood legends in the folklore of people groups from around the world. And the stories are all so similar. Local geography and cultural aspects may be present but they all seem to be telling the same story.
Over the years I have collected more than 200 of these stories, originally reported by various missionaries, anthropologists, and ethnologists.
While the differences are not always trivial, the common essence of the stories is instructive as compiled below:
Is there a favored family? 88%
Were they forewarned? 66%
Is flood due to wickedness of man? 66%
Is catastrophe only a flood? 95%
Was flood global? 95%
Is survival due to a boat? 70%
Were animals also saved? 67%
Did animals play any part? 73%
Did survivors land on a mountain? 57%
Was the geography local? 82%
Were birds sent out? 35%
Was the rainbow mentioned? 7%
Did survivors offer a sacrifice? 13%
Were specifically eight persons saved? 9%
Putting them all back together, the story would read something like this:
Once there was a worldwide flood, sent by God to judge the wickedness of man. But there was one righteous family which was forewarned of the coming flood. They built a boat on which they survived the flood along with the animals. As the flood ended, their boat landed on a high mountain from which they descended and repopulated the whole earth.
Of course the story sounds much like the Biblical story of the great flood of Noah's day. The most similar accounts are typically from middle eastern cultures, but surprisingly similar legends are found in South America and the Pacific Islands and elsewhere. None of these stories contains the beauty, clarity, and believable detail given in the Bible, but each is meaningful to their own culture.
Anthropologists will tell you that a myth is often the faded memory of a real event. Details may have been added, lost, or obscured in the telling and retelling, but the kernel of truth remains. When two separate cultures have the same "myth" in their body of folklore, their ancestors must have either experienced the same event, or they both descended from a common ancestral source which itself experienced the event.
The only credible way to understand the widespread, similar flood legends is to recognize that all people living today, even though separated geographically, linguistically, and culturally, have descended from the few real people who survived a real global flood, on a real boat which eventually landed on a real mountain. Their descendants now fill the globe, never to forget the real event.
But, of course, this is not the view of most modern scholars. They prefer to believe that something in our commonly evolved psyche forces each culture to invent the same imaginary flood legend with no basis in real history. Instead of scholarship, this is "willful ignorance" of the fact that "the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished" (II Peter 3:5,6).
"John Morris, Ph.D"
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...tion=type&ID=3
... quit ing up kids with your Bible-thumper bull and rather, go yourself.
purple monkey dishwasher after centuries of oral tradition and various translations.
How many of those isotopes do you ingest in your diet? Or what parent isotope do we ingest that would decay into the others???
The reason carbon dating works on flora and fauna is because most organisms share a relatively constant Carbon 14 intake rate, or a relatively constant C14/C12 ratio. Assuming no more Carbon 14 is ac ulated after an organism dies, this rate/ratio serves as a reference point that then allows for the starting amount of said isotope in any given organism to be calculated. From the starting amount, and the readily available Carbon 14 decay rate, the age of organisms can then be estimated. If it only works for organisms 50-90K years old, how is it we can use the method to approximate the age of animals far older than that figure? And by orders of magnitude greater than the tolerance provided by the isotope? The fact of the matter is that fossils are not dated with Carbon 14... as your correctly suggested.
However, all the other isotopes you mentioned only work for calculating the age of rocks and shouldn't even be used to estimate the age of organisms. Why then would a fossil even be subjected to tests with these other isotopes? There is no reference rate available for the starting quan y of strontium, rubidium, lead, thorium etc... in organisms. Especially one that would be considered constant, such as the one that is available for Carbon 14.
In fact, paleontologists can rarely use these other isotopes as a way of measuring the age of the fossils themselves and are instead relegated to measuring the age of the rocks that surround the fossils. This age is then used as a subs utionary representation the age of the fossilized organism. What is telling is the fact that the age of the fossil as dictated by Carbon 14 decay vastly differs from the age of the rock as determined by these other isotopes. In fact, all fossils can all be dated as being within the range provided by Carbon 14. As in: all the fossils are younger than let on by the scientific community.
So yes, results are routinely published as determined by this mixed bag of other isotopes, even though the fossils themselves were not directly aged by the isotope in question. How is that even ethically correct; how is that not a fraudulent conclusion?
Again most people don't realize what they are looking at when others interpret all the data to suit their own agendas. Paleontologists who dare voice their disagreement with the prevailing fossil dating method are branded as traitors to their field and their credibility quickly dismissed. Some objectivity... huh?
Furthermore, Argon-potassium and argon-argon dating is flawed in the sense that according to the assumptions foundational to potassium-argon (K-Ar) and argon-argon (Ar-Ar) dating of rocks, there should not be any daughter radiogenic argon (40Ar*) in rocks when they form. When measured, all 40Ar* in a rock is assumed to have been produced by in-situ radioactive decay of 40K within the rock since it formed. However, it is well established that volcanic rocks (e.g. basalt) contain excess 40Ar*, that is, 40Ar which cannot be attributed to either atmospheric contamination or in-situ radioactive decay of 40K. This excess 40Ar* represents primordial Ar carried from source areas in the earth's mantle by the parent magmas; it is inherited by the resultant volcanic rocks, and thus has no age significance.
However, are all other rocks in the earth's crust also susceptible to "contamination" by excess 40Ar* emanating from the mantle? If so, then the K-Ar and Ar-Ar "dating" of crustal rocks would be similarly questionable.
Here is an excerpt from a paper I found:
I could go on and on.... about the observed Helium quani ies in our crust; and how Helium's diffusivity rate would negate the existence of billion year old models of earth. Or perhaps by providing the following simple illustration:When muscovite (a common mineral in crustal rocks) is heated to 740°-860°C under high Ar pressures for periods of 3 to 10.5 hours it absorbs significant quan ies of Ar, producing K-Ar "ages" of up to 5 billion years, and the absorbed Ar is indistinguishable from radiogenic argon (40Ar*). In other experiments muscovite was synthesized from a colloidal gel under similar temperatures and Ar pressures, the resultant muscovite retaining up to 0.5 wt% Ar at 640°C and a vapor pressure of 4,000 atmospheres. This is approximately 2,500 times as much Ar as is found in natural muscovite. Thus under certain conditions Ar can be incorporated into minerals which are supposed to exclude Ar when they crystallize.
Noble gases from the mantle (and the atmosphere) migrate and circulate through the crust, so there should be evidence of excess 40Ar* in crustal rocks. Noble gases in CO2-rich natural gas wells confirm such migration and circulation—the isotopic signatures clearly indicate a mantle origin for the noble gases, including amounts of excess 40Ar* in some CO2-rich natural gas wells exceeding those in mantle-derived mid-ocean ridge basalts. In fact, the quan ies of excess 40Ar* in the continental crust can be as much as five times that found in such mantle-derived mid-ocean ridge basalts, strongly implying that excess 40Ar* in crustal rocks and their cons uent minerals could well be the norm rather than the exception.
The ratio of 14C atoms to 12C atoms decreases by a factor of 2 every 5730 years. After 20 half-lives or 114,700 years (assuming hypothetically that earth history goes back that far), the 14C/12C ratio is decreased by a factor of 2^20, or about 1,000,000. After 1.5 million years, the ratio is diminished by a factor of 2^(1,500,000/5730), or about 1079. This means that if one started with an amount of pure 14C equal to the mass of the entire observable universe, after 1.5 million years there should not be a single atom of 14C remaining! Routinely finding 14C/12C ratios on the order of 0.1-0.5% of the modern value—a hundred times or more above the AMS detection threshold—in samples supposedly tens to hundreds of millions of years old is therefore a huge anomaly for the old-age framework.
BTW the AMS method is the latest approved Carbon dating method. It's instrumentation improved the sensitivity of the raw measurement of the 14C/12C ratio from approximately 1% of the modern value to about 0.001%, extending the theoretical range of sensitivity from about 50,000 years to about 90,000 years.
Anyhow, I don't presume to know whether the earth is 1 billion, 4.5 billion, 10,000 or 6,000 years old. I just want others to understand that there is much we 'think' we know that is really much more vague than we are led on to believe.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 01-10-2007 at 06:42 PM.
Pheno, do you believe dinosaurs existed millions of years ago?
Do you believe in Jesus and God and the bible?
"John Morris, Ph.D"
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...tion=type&ID=3
... quit ing up kids with your Bible-thumper bull and rather, go yourself.Real mature there. Is that your cop-out argument?
I never said I endorsed ICR's complete spectrum of views. Your mistake if that was your assumption.
Whatever. By now I think most people here ignore your takes. You can't ever back them up without completely flipping out.
Easy. I believe dinosaurs existed. As to their age (you haven't been paying attention); read above.
And yes, I believe in GOD the Father... Ya Ha Va He (Yahweh), JESUS the Son and the HOLY SPIRIT.
Furthermore, I believe these truths as written in the Bible.
So how does all the carbon dating and isotope information explain to us how there was actually a flood?
As written by man and translated and edited numerous times.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions