You have a valid point, and I believe you are correct in which I have to say that the earth is as old as the history of Adam and Eve and their geological children, so I wouldn't know that, but I've been told many times it's around 6000 years
I was told that too. But the proof of it as a matter of scientific fact doesn't really work. Everything I've read from creation scientists has more assumptions and conclusions than real science. Really, there is about as much scientific proof for God as there are for the existence of giant purple bunnies from outer space somewhere.
However, I found the evidence to support the resurrection of Jesus compelling. You've got four greco-roman biographies that give a 3 dimensional picture of Jesus, and independent sources like the 1st Century historian Josephus -- all point to the resurrection as a fact, not a mass delusion or something like that.
Because I accept the ressurection, I work backwards from there. And the further back you go in the Bible, the less 'evidence' there is for 'proving' whether something 'happened as told', or whether there was some mythological borrowing from the surrounding cultures in order to make theological or philosophical points. This includes the story of the flood and other unbelievable tales. Although, it's interesting that the flood story is echoed in other Mesopotamian cultures, but in a much different way that it is treated in the Bible. It's really interested to study the difference, especially in how the divine is conceived. Anwyay, when you get back as far as Genesis, which was written something like 3000 years ago there simply isn't any corroborative evidence to support it's claims. So to read it as some sort of ancient science textbook or natural history book is really a matter of personal choice. And I'm ok with anyone who makes that choice. But I don't agree with that choice.
I've been a Pearl Jam fan since I was 13 and first heard Ament's opening to Jeremy on the radio. To this day, Pearl Jam continues to inspire and challenge me to not just be better, but to be great.
Genesis 1;21 talks of sea monsters swarming swarming fourth then in genesis 7:21 it talks about all things swarming the earth made it clear from the wild beasts and domestic animals and the birds aside
Genesis 1;21 talks of sea monsters swarming swarming fourth then in genesis 7:21 it talks about all things swarming the earth made it clear from the wild beasts and domestic animals and the birds aside
It is fruitless arguing with someone who willfully ignores the processes of science....but it sure as hell can be entertaining. JW will never realize that the very chemistry used to create the medicines she? hypocritically takes disprove her? pseudo-scientific creationist worldview because he? doesn't want to.
So if Earth is only 6000 or so years old, then I guess that means the pyramids were built by hippies in the 60's for a secure place to smoke their dope? And that would mean the Great Sphinx's nose was shot off by a misguided drone attack last May. Got it.
its not vast to the extent that lifeform like humans are evolving, complete nonsense )
Everything is still evolving, it hasn't stopped.
Ironic it's gods favorite creature, man that is causing the most change, extinction due to overpopulation. Gods favorite is stripping the planet clean. Have more babies and be fruitful. We're so special.
1, God does not answer all prayers, if you are not pleasing him or are doing wrong? 2.Some things happen for a reason so what you praying for may not be what God has planned for you because his thoughts are higher than ours and you dont know whats best for you in his eyes not your own? 3.Are you praying to the right God? 4. We live in the devils world, even Gods son died on a cross, what did you do? 5.Do you love God enough to be noticed? 6.Is what your asking for a sin ?
im leaving this thread that should be enough you can, go study monkeys,apes and their desire of spirituality,
Wow pretty tough to please your god and have him do favors for you.
No, I'm comfortable with an evolving cosmos. I actually have a hard time seeing the problem between creation and evolution, aside from the debate itself being a problem. I think things like survival of the fittest are self-evident in nature. Foxes can kill and eat rabbits because foxes are stronger, more cunning etc. It would be futile to argue against a thing that happens.
Interestingly, foxes do kill rabbits precisely because they can. People also hunt animals because we have the ability to do so. If we physically couldn't, we would still be eating tree nuts or whatever. There's nothing wrong with any of this, but I think it brings up the controversy of where to draw the lines ... or more importantly, why to draw the lines. I think there are several layers of assumptions we need to peel back before we can really answer a 'why' question like that.
We assume that hunting people for sport is wrong. Why? Because we assume that it's wrong to kill someone who is innocent. why? Because our justice system frowns on .... why? Because ....
My opinion is that while I am comfortable and supportive of old earth science, I don't think evolution provides a good enough basis for something like morality. I think Evolution does have a bearing on how morality gets worked out in our day-to-day lives, but I don't think it's the root cause of morality or even a good reason to have a moral position.
Religion doesn't hold the patent in morality.
There is morality without god.
Now have watched some nature programs and been blown away and have questioned how this all started and some design???? But I know the Bible is not the answer or any other religious texts..........wait maybe Joseph's Smiths book?
If you want to challenge yourself watch Your Inner Fish.
So if Earth is only 6000 or so years old, then I guess that means the pyramids were built by hippies in the 60's for a secure place to smoke their dope? And that would mean the Great Sphinx's nose was shot off by a misguided drone attack last May. Got it.
NOW we're getting somewhere with this discussion! I'm surprised it took this long for someone to figure out what we were doing back in the "Summer of Pyramid Love" )
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
And dinosaurs existed and we're destroyed in the flood because the bible talks of sea monsters even dying
Do you not believe in the process known as carbon dating?
I don't think carbon dating is 100% or even 80% accurate is it ? seems I recall some carbon dating being off by at least 10,000 years pluse but I'm not real sure .
"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
And dinosaurs existed and we're destroyed in the flood because the bible talks of sea monsters even dying
Do you not believe in the process known as carbon dating?
I don't think carbon dating is 100% or even 80% accurate is it ? seems I recall some carbon dating being off by at least 10,000 years pluse but I'm not real sure .
Godfather.
When your trying to figure out if something is 5 million or 6 million years old, I'll take a +/- 10,000 years.
"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
And dinosaurs existed and we're destroyed in the flood because the bible talks of sea monsters even dying
Do you not believe in the process known as carbon dating?
I don't think carbon dating is 100% or even 80% accurate is it ? seems I recall some carbon dating being off by at least 10,000 years pluse but I'm not real sure .
Godfather.
Carbon dating is only used for samples that were once alive and are less than approximately 50 to 60 thousand years old, as after that amount of time the half life of carbon14 is spent and there will be none left to measure, it will all ha e converted back to nitrogen. Other datings, in the millions or billions of years, are done with various forms of radiometric dating, which deal still with the predictable radioactive decay of isotopes of elements like Argon and Uranium. There are many factors which contribute to inaccuracies in the dating process of specific samples, but the overall picture is overwhelmingly accurate. This site is hilarious/appalling in that it uses very specific scientific processes and facts as evidence to come to extremely ridiculous conclusions that are disproved by the very evidence it accepts. That was a bad sentence. Nonetheless this is the bullshit that one has to watch out for in pseudosciences. http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c007.html
"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
And dinosaurs existed and we're destroyed in the flood because the bible talks of sea monsters even dying
Do you not believe in the process known as carbon dating?
I don't think carbon dating is 100% or even 80% accurate is it ? seems I recall some carbon dating being off by at least 10,000 years pluse but I'm not real sure .
Godfather.
Quoting random celebrities does not equate to wisdom nor truth. It's pretty much worthless, to be perfectly honest.
So, carbon dating can be off by up to 10,000 years? That means, according to JW's theory of creation, it can be wrong up to 4,000 years before the earth was created! How does that work again? Lol, yes, carbon dating is, as someone else said, used in relatively recent discoveries. Fossils are dated using radio dating. Which has a very large window, probably what you were thinking of. But in relative terms, 10,000 is nothing when dealing in millions of years.
And dinosaurs existed and we're destroyed in the flood because the bible talks of sea monsters even dying
Do you not believe in the process known as carbon dating?
Nice question Paulonious. (I do)
To the rest of us on the board - I know I put links to share that may be long but I have taken the time to feel comfortable enough about posting such links as sometimes they can sum up what I can't. I don't just randomly google you tube and post whatever I found. I try to post links that I myself have read, come across because of my quest for truth and want to share with others that may accept my opinion.
I just can not fathom how some peoples beliefs push evidence so far away that it absolves them from answering a simple question.
And dinosaurs existed and we're destroyed in the flood because the bible talks of sea monsters even dying
Do you not believe in the process known as carbon dating?
Nice question Paulonious. (I do)
To the rest of us on the board - I know I put links to share that may be long but I have taken the time to feel comfortable enough about posting such links as sometimes they can sum up what I can't. I don't just randomly google you tube and post whatever I found. I try to post links that I myself have read, come across because of my quest for truth and want to share with others that may accept my opinion.
I just can not fathom how some peoples beliefs push evidence so far away that it absolves them from answering a simple question.
Oh, oww! I couldn't get past the first 4 or 5 minutes. I'm a bit surprised Dawkins found or took time to interview Wright. I guess like anyone she has a right to her opinions but, wow, just wow.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Comments
If you could expound on this, would be appreciated.
If not - actually, either way - no big deal.
Energy to be better spent elsewhere.
Elsewho.
However, I found the evidence to support the resurrection of Jesus compelling. You've got four greco-roman biographies that give a 3 dimensional picture of Jesus, and independent sources like the 1st Century historian Josephus -- all point to the resurrection as a fact, not a mass delusion or something like that.
Because I accept the ressurection, I work backwards from there. And the further back you go in the Bible, the less 'evidence' there is for 'proving' whether something 'happened as told', or whether there was some mythological borrowing from the surrounding cultures in order to make theological or philosophical points. This includes the story of the flood and other unbelievable tales. Although, it's interesting that the flood story is echoed in other Mesopotamian cultures, but in a much different way that it is treated in the Bible. It's really interested to study the difference, especially in how the divine is conceived. Anwyay, when you get back as far as Genesis, which was written something like 3000 years ago there simply isn't any corroborative evidence to support it's claims. So to read it as some sort of ancient science textbook or natural history book is really a matter of personal choice. And I'm ok with anyone who makes that choice. But I don't agree with that choice.
JW will never realize that the very chemistry used to create the medicines she? hypocritically takes disprove her? pseudo-scientific creationist worldview because he? doesn't want to.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
Ironic it's gods favorite creature, man that is causing the most change, extinction due to overpopulation. Gods favorite is stripping the planet clean. Have more babies and be fruitful. We're so special.
There is morality without god.
Now have watched some nature programs and been blown away and have questioned how this all started and some design???? But I know the Bible is not the answer or any other religious texts..........wait maybe Joseph's Smiths book?
If you want to challenge yourself watch Your Inner Fish.
www.headstonesband.com
"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
Godfather. I don't think carbon dating is 100% or even 80% accurate is it ? seems I recall some carbon dating being off by at least 10,000 years pluse but I'm not real sure .
Godfather.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/30/tech/earth-force-field-star-trek/index.html?hpt=hp_t4
Godfather.
There are many factors which contribute to inaccuracies in the dating process of specific samples, but the overall picture is overwhelmingly accurate.
This site is hilarious/appalling in that it uses very specific scientific processes and facts as evidence to come to extremely ridiculous conclusions that are disproved by the very evidence it accepts. That was a bad sentence. Nonetheless this is the bullshit that one has to watch out for in pseudosciences.
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c007.html
So, carbon dating can be off by up to 10,000 years? That means, according to JW's theory of creation, it can be wrong up to 4,000 years before the earth was created! How does that work again? Lol, yes, carbon dating is, as someone else said, used in relatively recent discoveries. Fossils are dated using radio dating. Which has a very large window, probably what you were thinking of. But in relative terms, 10,000 is nothing when dealing in millions of years.
www.headstonesband.com
To the rest of us on the board - I know I put links to share that may be long but I have taken the time to feel comfortable enough about posting such links as sometimes they can sum up what I can't. I don't just randomly google you tube and post whatever I found. I try to post links that I myself have read, come across because of my quest for truth and want to share with others that may accept my opinion.
I just can not fathom how some peoples beliefs push evidence so far away that it absolves them from answering a simple question.
Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty weird.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Why not (V) (°,,,,°) (V) ?