ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political Science,
JacobSmith
Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
------------------
Many people are in doubt concerning the age
of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
from carbon dating and geologic formations.
Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
decay has been constant over the ages and if,
and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
constant over time. However, according to Holy
Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
decay.
The whole purpose of the life of the Messiah
Jesus Christ, His subsequent death on the
cross and resurrection shortly thereafter, was
to bring to pass the immortality and eternal
life of man. This was done to reverse the death
process brought upon all the descendants of
Adam and Eve and all life in, above and on the
earth. Additionally, the Holy Scripture states
that the atmosphere was at the time of the
profiled patriarchs, different in composition from
what it is today. All indications are that there
was no rainbow in the heavens prior to the flood
that covered the whole earth. Thus, as shown
by the Holy Scripture, the process of decay and
degeneration was slower, accepting the age
and longevity recorded for the early Patriarchs
from Adam to Noah.
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/tingeo.htm
"Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are reactive
molecules that contain the oxygen atom." Also,
"during times of environmental stress (e.g. UV
or heat exposure) ROS levels can increase
dramatically, which can result in significant
damage to cell structures." "ROS are also
generated by exogenous sources such as
ionizing radiation." "In biology and agriculture,
radiation is used to induce mutations to produce
new or improved species. Another use in insect
control is the sterile insect technique, where male
insects are sterilized by radiation and released,
so they have no offspring, to reduce the population."
"Natural background radiation comes from four
primary sources: cosmic radiation, solar radiation,
external terrestrial sources, and radon."
"The cosmic-radiation dose rate on airplanes
is so high that, according to the United Nations
UNSCEAR 2000 Report . . ., airline flight crew
workers receive more dose on average than any
other worker, including those in nuclear power plants."
"Radiation intensity decreases sharply with distance,
according to an inverse square law", suggesting that
the earth may have gone through an orbital adjustment.
"The biological effects of radiation are thought
of in terms of their effects on living cells."
Biblical statements concerning the earth being
corrupt, with all flesh upon the earth being corrupted,
are mentioned from the time of Enoch to the time
of the Patriarch Noah, 2944 to 1994 B.C. There
were giants on the earth in those days that attempted
to take away the life of Noah, indicating from Holy
Scripture, the time frame for the worldwide culmination
of the development and mutation of dinosaurs, plants
and other distorted, abnormally deformed creatures.
CBS SCI-TECH online News, 31 May 2006, includes:
"Imagine a world where there are dense sequoia trees
and cypress trees like in Florida that ring the Arctic
Ocean . . . Researchers are not sure what caused
the sudden boost of carbon dioxide that set the
greenhouse effect on broil. Possible culprits could
be huge releases of methane from the ocean, gigantic
continent-sized burning of trees, or lots of volcanic
eruptions." "In the six hundredth year of Noah�s life,
. . . all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and
the windows of heaven were opened. "
#1 Current News:
"There is still a hole in the Earth, crude oil is still
spewing from it and there is still, excruciatingly,
no end in sight." Is there anyone out there in the
scientific world of today, who cannot comprehend
what would happen to this earth we live upon, if all
the "fountains of the great deep" were broken up?
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/ancientandmoderngenealogies.htm
Michael Young
MANY radioisotope dating methods, and by doing research, turns out
that all the evidence obtained from all the different isotopes agree
with each other.
Michael Young
of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
from carbon dating and geologic formations. "
If by "many people" you mean "many people who are not geologists or
even scientists" then that statement is believable. While no, we don't
know the exact age of the Earth, geologists the world over agree with
few exceptions that the planet is in the neighborhood of about 4
billion years.
Also, fun fact: the bible never said anything about how old the Earth
is. Nothing from the actual text itself ever says anything about its
age. Some people claim it says 5 or 6 thousand years, but this is only
derived from original research that a priest wrote into the margin of
a bible, which was then reprinted and spread and thereafter "taken as
gospel." He just looked at the genealogy listed in the bible and
estimated how long it would have taken for the generations to descend.
I'm just making the assumption that this has something to do with the
point you seem to be trying to make.
bobsyo...@yahoo.com
"JacobSmith" <tins...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8611d1a3-a49c-4f05...@t14g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
> Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> ------------------
> Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> from carbon dating and geologic formations.
> Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
> the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
> decay has been constant over the ages and if,
> and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
> constant over time. However, according to Holy
> Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
> the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
> of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
> of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
> decay.
So, the bible is nothing more than bull shit.
Nothing new in that.
There is no such thing as "holy scripture".
Adam and Eve didn't exist.
There was no forbidden fruit.
It's all a FABLE for uneducated morons who can't even conceive a single
thought on their own.
raven1
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Many people are in doubt concerning the age
>of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
>from carbon dating
No one uses carbon dating to determine the age of the Earth. Try
again.
cassandra
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>
> >Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> >of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> >from carbon dating
>
> No one uses carbon dating to determine the age of the Earth. Try
> again.
He would get the same results by writing a big "L" on his forehead
with permanent marker.
JacobSmith
> "Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> from carbon dating and geologic formations. "
>
> If by "many people" you mean "many people who are not geologists or
> even scientists" then that statement is believable. While no, we don't
> know the exact age of the Earth, geologists the world over agree with
> few exceptions that the planet is in the neighborhood of about 4
> billion years.
REPLY 1a: For Further Consideration
Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
decay has been constant over the ages and if,
and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
constant over time. There is no absolute proof.
"Radiation intensity decreases sharply with distance,
according to an inverse square law", suggesting that
the earth may have gone through an orbital adjustment.
"The biological effects of radiation are thought
of in terms of their effects on living cells."
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/36108
"It is well-known that a radioactive substance follows
a fixed exponential decay, no matter what you do to it.
The fact has been set in stone since 1930 when the
'father' of nuclear physics Ernest Rutherford, together
with James Chadwick and Charles Ellis, concluded
in their definitive Radiations from Radioactive
Substances that �the rate of transformation
is a constant under all conditions.�
But this is no longer the view of a pair of physicists
in the US. Ephraim Fischbach and Jere Jenkins of
Purdue University in Indiana are claiming that, far
from being fixed, certain decay �constants� are
influenced by the Sun. It is a claim that is drawing
mixed reactions from others in the physics community,
not least because it implies that decades of established
science is flawed. "
---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Also, fun fact: the bible never said anything about how old the Earth
> is. Nothing from the actual text itself ever says anything about its
> age. Some people claim it says 5 or 6 thousand years, but this is only
> derived from original research that a priest wrote into the margin of
> a bible, which was then reprinted and spread and thereafter "taken as
> gospel." He just looked at the genealogy listed in the bible and
> estimated how long it would have taken for the generations to descend.
> I'm just making the assumption that this has something to do with the
> point you seem to be trying to make.
-------------------------------------------------------
REPLY 1b: Real Fun Facts
Psalm 90 A prayer of Moses the man of God.
Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all
generations. Before the mountains were brought
forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the
world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou
art God. Thou turnest man to destruction; and
sayest, Return, ye children of men. For a thousand
years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past,
and as a watch in the night. Here we have the man
Moses making the Day of God = 1000 years.
He Moses, is speaking of the creation period of which
he wrote and declared most clearly and precisely. And,
to top it off, he gives an approximation of a man's age then,
by saying, "The days of our years are threescore years
and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore
years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is
soon cut off, and we fly away." Showing, that the Bible
record of longevity is very accurate for pre Flood man,
with gradual decreases within the record, as time flies.
. . .
Louis Bourguet (1678-1742), listed in Dictionary of
Scientific Biography, Vol. XV, published by the American
Council of Learned Societies, made a philological investigation
of the Etruscan alphabet (ancient pre-Roman Italy), and was
convinced it derived from ancient Hebrew. He studied Hebrew
and the Mishnah with a Rabbi. Louis Bourguet believed in the
common origin of all peoples and languages and questioned
the presumed great age and isolation of the people of China.
He declared that the great world wide Flood was but the
amplification of normal processes and the "exceptional
convergence, ordained by God, of ordinary causes."
Louis Bourguet explored fossil sites throughout Europe,
suggesting they were from animal and vegetable origins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_Scientific_Biography
The Testimony of Archaeology notes: "Both the Hebrew,
the Samaritan, the Greek writings current in Palestine
during the two centuries before Christ, and the old
Babylonian traditions, assert a transmission of writings
about creation down from the beginning of time to Enoch
and Noah." The kept genealogical pedigrees therefore
suggest language origination and later distortions of a
pure universal language that began to fragment with
population movements and family group isolation,
in the time period of circa 2944 B.C. to 1994 B.C.
and later. This is what credible written evidence
suggests, within the created and preserved
ancient genealogies.
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/launchingpad/chapter07.html
. . .
[That ye may be mindful of the words which were
spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the
commandment of us the apostles of the Lord
and Saviour:]
. . .
2 Peter 3:8
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing,
that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years,
and a thousand years as one day."
. . .
Rev. 20:6
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first
resurrection: on such the second death hath no
power, but they shall be priests of God and of
Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
JacobSmith
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>
> >Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> >of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> >from carbon dating
>
> No one uses carbon dating to determine the age of the Earth. Try
> again.
-------------------------------
REPLY:
"Radiocarbon dating, or carbon dating,
is a radiometric dating method that uses
the naturally occurring radioisotope carbon-14
(14C) to determine the age of carbonaceous
materials up to about 58,000 to 62,000 years."
Accurate carbon dating, relating the the period
of this earth during the time written records were
kept, or circa 6,000 years, has serious errors due
to worldwide Pangaea, Pang�a, or Pangea, with
actual date for continental drift during the time of
Peleg or Phaleg. Time period: 2253 B.C. to 2014 B.C.
Eber was 34 when Peleg was born, in whose days
the earth was divided (Gen. 11:16). Peleg was 30
when Reu was born (Gen. 11:18). Peleg lived after
he begat Reu 209 years (Gen. 11:19). This added
to 30 years, which was his age when Reu was born,
makes him 239 years old when he died. This time
period had vast transitional changes in magnetic fields,
gravitational and other solar forces affecting the earth.
Accurate carbon dating, relating the the period
of this earth during the time written records were
kept, or circa 6,000 years, has serious errors due
to the worldwide Flood [2344 B.C.] Archbishop
James Ussher calculated the Flood date: 2349 B.C.
"The Cornish Tynners hold a strong imagination,
that in the withdrawing of Noahs floud to the Sea,
the same took his course from East to West,
violently breaking vp, and forcibly carrying with it,
the earth, trees, and Rocks, which lay any thing
loosely, neere the vpper face of the ground.
To confirme the likelihood of which supposed
truth, they doe many times digge vp whole and
huge Timber trees which they conceiue at that
deluge to haue beene ouerturned and whelmed:"
This time period also had vast transitional changes
in magnetic fields, gravitational and other solar
forces affecting the earth.
cassandra
<snip for relevance>
> Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
> the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
> decay has been constant over the ages and if,
> and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
> constant over time. �There is no absolute proof.
You expect absolute proof for carbon dating but offer no kind of proof
for your scriptural cherry-picking. Such a double-standard speaks
poorly of your objectivity. FWIW varying atmospheric "bombardments"
are accounted for by calibrating results against non-radioisotope
dating methods. Carbon dating is an excellent tool, but not for
finding the age of the Earth.
Sapient Fridge
<1435597e-a85b-4545...@a39g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
JacobSmith <tins...@yahoo.com> writes
>On May 30, 7:56�pm, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>>
>> <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >Many people are in doubt concerning the age
>> >of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
>> >from carbon dating
>>
>> No one uses carbon dating to determine the age of the Earth. Try
>> again.
>
>-------------------------------
>REPLY:
>"Radiocarbon dating, or carbon dating,
>is a radiometric dating method that uses
>the naturally occurring radioisotope carbon-14
>(14C) to determine the age of carbonaceous
>materials up to about 58,000 to 62,000 years."
But since the earth is known to be around 4,540,000,000 years old (using
multiple dating methods that all agree with each other) it makes carbon
dating *utterly* useless in measuring that age.
Please feel welcome to try again, but I would advise reading this first:
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/RESOURCES/WIENS.html
>Accurate carbon dating, relating the the period
>of this earth during the time written records were
>kept, or circa 6,000 years, has serious errors due
>to worldwide Pangaea, Pang�a, or Pangea, with
>actual date for continental drift during the time of
>Peleg or Phaleg. Time period: 2253 B.C. to 2014 B.C.
Since the maximum speed of continental drift is around 10cm per year, in
4000 years the most they could have moved is about 400 meters. If you
look carefully you will notice that the continents are further apart
than that.
<snip>
--
sapient_...@spamsights.org ICQ #17887309 * Save the net *
Grok: http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org * nuke a spammer *
Find: http://www.samspade.org http://www.netdemon.net * today *
Kill: http://mail-abuse.com http://au.sorbs.net http://spamhaus.org
Stuart
> ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
> Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> ------------------
> Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> from carbon dating and geologic formations.
C-14 isn't used to date the Earth,
Guess again.
Stuart
richardal...@googlemail.com
> ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
> Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> ------------------
> Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> of this earth,
Nobody with any education in science ir.
> due to incorrect assumptions
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION #1
What "incorrect assumptions"?
> from carbon dating
FALSEHOOD #1
Carbon dating is not used to establish the age of the earth.
> and geologic formations.
FALSEHOOD #2
"Geologic formations" are not used to date the earth.
> Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
> the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
> decay has been constant over the ages
FALSEHOOD #3
Radiocarbon dating is calibrated against tree-ring records to
compensate for the variation in cosmic ray bombardment.
>and if,
> and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
> constant over time.
Seems a pretty good assumption, bearing in mind that there is no
evidence whatsoever for variation, and that if the rate of radioactive
decay were high enough to give the ages for the earth creationists
require the earth would be vaporised.
>�However, according to Holy
> Scripture,
Nothing to do with science then. Glad we're clear on that.
> prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
> the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
> of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
> of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
> decay.
A complete and utter non-seqitur. Radioactive decay is not death.
>
> The whole purpose of the life of the Messiah
> Jesus Christ, His subsequent death on the
> cross and resurrection shortly thereafter, was
> to bring to pass the immortality and eternal
> life of man. �This was done to reverse the death
> process brought upon all the descendants of
> Adam and Eve and all life in, above and on the
> earth. �Additionally, the Holy Scripture states
> that the atmosphere was at the time of the
> profiled patriarchs, different in composition from
> what it is today.
FALSEHOOD #4
>�All indications are that there
> was no rainbow in the heavens prior to the flood
> that covered the whole earth. �Thus, as shown
> by the Holy Scripture, the process of decay and
> degeneration was slower, accepting the age
> and longevity recorded for the early Patriarchs
> from Adam to Noah.http://www.academic-genealogy.com/tingeo.htm
>
> "Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are reactive
> molecules that contain the oxygen atom." Also,
> "during times of environmental stress (e.g. UV
> or heat exposure) ROS levels can increase
> dramatically, which can result in significant
> damage to cell structures." �"ROS are also
> generated by exogenous sources such as
> ionizing radiation." �"In biology �and agriculture,
> radiation is used to induce mutations to produce
> new or improved species. �Another use in insect
> control is the sterile insect technique, where male
> insects are sterilized by radiation and released,
> so they have no offspring, to reduce the population."
>
> "Natural background radiation comes from four
> primary sources: cosmic radiation, solar radiation,
> external terrestrial sources, and radon."
> "The cosmic-radiation dose rate on airplanes
> is so high that, according to the United Nations
> UNSCEAR 2000 Report . . ., airline flight crew
> workers receive more dose on average than any
> other worker, including those in nuclear power plants."
> "Radiation intensity decreases sharply with distance,
> according to an inverse square law", suggesting that
> the earth may have gone through an orbital adjustment.
> "The biological effects of radiation are thought
> of in terms of their effects on living cells."
>
> Biblical statements concerning the earth being
> corrupt, with all flesh upon the earth being corrupted,
> are mentioned from the time of Enoch to the time
> of the Patriarch Noah, 2944 to 1994 B.C. �There
> were giants on the earth in those days that attempted
> to take away the life of Noah, indicating from Holy
> Scripture, the time frame for the worldwide culmination
> of the development and mutation of dinosaurs, plants
> and other distorted, abnormally deformed creatures.
>
> CBS SCI-TECH online News, 31 May 2006, includes:
> "Imagine a world where there are dense sequoia trees
> and cypress trees like in Florida that ring the Arctic
> Ocean . . . Researchers are not sure what caused
> the sudden boost of carbon dioxide that set the
> greenhouse effect on broil. �Possible culprits could
> be huge releases of methane from the ocean, gigantic
> continent-sized burning of trees, or lots of volcanic
> eruptions." �"In the six hundredth year of Noah�s life,
> . . . all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and
> the windows of heaven were opened. "
>
> #1 Current News:
> "There is still a hole in the Earth, crude oil is still
> spewing from it and there is still, excruciatingly,
> no end in sight." �Is there anyone out there in the
richardal...@googlemail.com
> Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> ------------------
> Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> from carbon dating and geologic formations.
> Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
> the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
> decay has been constant over the ages and if,
> and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
> Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
> the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
> of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
> of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
> decay.
>
> The whole purpose of the life of the Messiah
> Jesus Christ, His subsequent death on the
> cross and resurrection shortly thereafter, was
> to bring to pass the immortality and eternal
> process brought upon all the descendants of
> Adam and Eve and all life in, above and on the
> that the atmosphere was at the time of the
> profiled patriarchs, different in composition from
> what it is today.
To continue...
The Bible says nothing about the composition of the atmosphere.
> �All indications are that there
> was no rainbow in the heavens prior to the flood
> that covered the whole earth.
FALSEHOOD #5
>�Thus, as shown
> by the Holy Scripture, the process of decay and
> degeneration was slower, accepting the age
> and longevity recorded for the early Patriarchs
> from Adam to Noah.http://www.academic-genealogy.com/tingeo.htm
>
> "Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are reactive
> molecules that contain the oxygen atom." Also,
> "during times of environmental stress (e.g. UV
> or heat exposure) ROS levels can increase
> dramatically, which can result in significant
> damage to cell structures." �"ROS are also
> generated by exogenous sources such as
> ionizing radiation." �"In biology �and agriculture,
> radiation is used to induce mutations to produce
> new or improved species. �Another use in insect
> control is the sterile insect technique, where male
> insects are sterilized by radiation and released,
> so they have no offspring, to reduce the population."
>
> "Natural background radiation comes from four
> primary sources: cosmic radiation, solar radiation,
> external terrestrial sources, and radon."
> "The cosmic-radiation dose rate on airplanes
> is so high that, according to the United Nations
> UNSCEAR 2000 Report . . ., airline flight crew
> workers receive more dose on average than any
> other worker, including those in nuclear power plants."
> "Radiation intensity decreases sharply with distance,
> according to an inverse square law", suggesting that
> the earth may have gone through an orbital adjustment.
> "The biological effects of radiation are thought
> of in terms of their effects on living cells."
>
> Biblical statements concerning the earth being
> corrupt, with all flesh upon the earth being corrupted,
> are mentioned from the time of Enoch to the time
> of the Patriarch Noah, 2944 to 1994 B.C. �There
> were giants on the earth in those days that attempted
> to take away the life of Noah, indicating from Holy
> Scripture, the time frame for the worldwide culmination
> of the development and mutation of dinosaurs, plants
> and other distorted, abnormally deformed creatures.
>
> CBS SCI-TECH online News, 31 May 2006, includes:
> "Imagine a world where there are dense sequoia trees
> and cypress trees like in Florida that ring the Arctic
> Ocean . . . Researchers are not sure what caused
> the sudden boost of carbon dioxide that set the
> greenhouse effect on broil. �Possible culprits could
> be huge releases of methane from the ocean, gigantic
> continent-sized burning of trees, or lots of volcanic
> eruptions." �"In the six hundredth year of Noah�s life,
> . . . all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and
> the windows of heaven were opened. "
>
> #1 Current News:
> "There is still a hole in the Earth, crude oil is still
> spewing from it and there is still, excruciatingly,
> no end in sight." �Is there anyone out there in the
richardal...@googlemail.com
> Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> ------------------
> Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> from carbon dating and geologic formations.
> Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
> the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
> decay has been constant over the ages and if,
> and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
> Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
> the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
> of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
> of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
> decay.
>
> The whole purpose of the life of the Messiah
> Jesus Christ, His subsequent death on the
> cross and resurrection shortly thereafter, was
> to bring to pass the immortality and eternal
> process brought upon all the descendants of
> Adam and Eve and all life in, above and on the
> that the atmosphere was at the time of the
> profiled patriarchs, different in composition from
> was no rainbow in the heavens prior to the flood
> that covered the whole earth.
FALSEHOOD #5
The only "indication" that there were no rainbows before the
"flood" (for which there is no evidence whatsoever) is a line of text
in the bible. For there *not* to have been rainbows at any time in the
past would require a fundamental revision of most of physics.
> �Thus, as shown
> by the Holy Scripture, the process of decay and
> degeneration was slower,
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION #2
> accepting the age
> and longevity recorded for the early Patriarchs
> from Adam to Noah.http://www.academic-genealogy.com/tingeo.htm
>
> "Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are reactive
> molecules that contain the oxygen atom." Also,
> "during times of environmental stress (e.g. UV
> or heat exposure) ROS levels can increase
> dramatically, which can result in significant
> damage to cell structures." �"ROS are also
> generated by exogenous sources such as
> ionizing radiation." �"In biology �and agriculture,
> radiation is used to induce mutations to produce
> new or improved species. �Another use in insect
> control is the sterile insect technique, where male
> insects are sterilized by radiation and released,
> so they have no offspring, to reduce the population."
None of which provides any support whatsoever for any argument you
think you might be making.
>
> "Natural background radiation comes from four
> primary sources: cosmic radiation, solar radiation,
> external terrestrial sources, and radon."
> "The cosmic-radiation dose rate on airplanes
> is so high that, according to the United Nations
> UNSCEAR 2000 Report . . ., airline flight crew
> workers receive more dose on average than any
> other worker, including those in nuclear power plants."
> "Radiation intensity decreases sharply with distance,
> according to an inverse square law", suggesting that
> the earth may have gone through an orbital adjustment.
> "The biological effects of radiation are thought
> of in terms of their effects on living cells."
>
> Biblical statements concerning the earth being
> corrupt, with all flesh upon the earth being corrupted,
> are mentioned from the time of Enoch to the time
> of the Patriarch Noah, 2944 to 1994 B.C.
Complete non-sequitur. What on earth has this to do with radiometric
decay?
>�There
> were giants on the earth in those days
UNFOUNDED ASSERTION #3
There is no evidence whatsoever to support this assertion.
> that attempted
> to take away the life of Noah, indicating from Holy
> Scripture, the time frame for the worldwide culmination
> of the development and mutation of dinosaurs, plants
> and other distorted, abnormally deformed creatures.
FALSEHOOD #6
Dinosaurs and other extinct organisms were not "distorted, abnormally
deformed creatures".
RF
>
> CBS SCI-TECH online News, 31 May 2006, includes:
> "Imagine a world where there are dense sequoia trees
> and cypress trees like in Florida that ring the Arctic
> Ocean . . . Researchers are not sure what caused
> the sudden boost of carbon dioxide that set the
> greenhouse effect on broil. �Possible culprits could
> be huge releases of methane from the ocean, gigantic
> continent-sized burning of trees, or lots of volcanic
> eruptions." �"In the six hundredth year of Noah�s life,
> . . . all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and
> the windows of heaven were opened. "
>
> #1 Current News:
> "There is still a hole in the Earth, crude oil is still
> spewing from it and there is still, excruciatingly,
> no end in sight." �Is there anyone out there in the
Mike Dworetsky
> is a constant under all conditions.�
>
> But this is no longer the view of a pair of physicists
> in the US. Ephraim Fischbach and Jere Jenkins of
> Purdue University in Indiana are claiming that, far
> influenced by the Sun. It is a claim that is drawing
> mixed reactions from others in the physics community,
> not least because it implies that decades of established
> science is flawed. "
My skepticism antennae are quivering madly. I have read about these claims
before; they are of the order of a fraction of 1%; and there could be
explanations including subtle temperature effects (summer vs winter),
equipment calibration effects, etc. No one has yet performed the
experiments in the southern hemisphere, for example, to see if the effect is
thermal or possibly due to varying Earth-Sun distance.
Continue reading the article. Such effects are of order 0.1%. So if you
are willing to accept that the age of the Earth may be out by 0.1% then I'd
go along with that claim, but no other claim you make. Given that the rates
(as claimed) vary cyclically over a year, the long term average would be
unaffected. It is still the case that no physical mechanism has been
proposed, except mechanisms that might involve measuring equipment
systematic errors rather than fundamental physics.
It's your weird mixture of fringe physics and biblical quoting that also
raises doubts in my mind. Are you by chance a sock puppet of Adman/ASI?
Nullius in Verba.
--
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)
TomS
<1b1f5190-8322-47a6...@u7g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>,
richardal...@googlemail.com stated..."
>
>On May 31, 1:52�am, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
>> Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
>> ------------------
>> Many people are in doubt concerning the age
>> of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
>> from carbon dating and geologic formations.
>> Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
>> the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
>> decay has been constant over the ages and if,
>> and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
>> Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
>> the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
>> of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
>> of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
>> decay.
>>
>> The whole purpose of the life of the Messiah
>> Jesus Christ, His subsequent death on the
>> cross and resurrection shortly thereafter, was
>> to bring to pass the immortality and eternal
>> process brought upon all the descendants of
>> Adam and Eve and all life in, above and on the
>> that the atmosphere was at the time of the
>> profiled patriarchs, different in composition from
>> was no rainbow in the heavens prior to the flood
>> that covered the whole earth.
>
>FALSEHOOD #5
>The only "indication" that there were no rainbows before the
>"flood" (for which there is no evidence whatsoever) is a line of text
>in the bible. For there *not* to have been rainbows at any time in the
>past would require a fundamental revision of most of physics.
I am not aware of a text in the Bible which says that there were no
rainbows before the Flood. The Bible does say:
1) God put a rainbow in the sky after the Flood, but it does not
explicity say that this was the first rainbow ever.
2) In the description of Eden, it says that there was no rain, so
there would be no rainbows. Although that does not exclude the
colored arcs forming in waterfalls or other rainbow-like phenomena.
BTW, it is an optical illusion that there are rainbows in the heavens.
--
---Tom S.
Surely, God could have caused birds to fly with their bones made of solid gold,
with their veins full of quicksilver, with their flesh heavier than lead
The Crime of Galileo (1976) by Giorgio De Santillana, p. 167
Michael Young
> years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past,
> and as a watch in the night. �Here we have the man
> Moses making the Day of God = 1000 years.
I know I'm somewhat playing right into your hands just by responding
to this, but whatever. The gospel is absolutely impossible to take
literally at every word. If we agree on this, we can move on. If you
disagree, then I label you as an insanely irrational person and this
conversation is over. Now, assuming you're not five and believe
everything you read or hear, this "thousand year" thing is an example,
if that's not obvious enough in the context of that quoted passage.
The dude is God after all, right? A day could be a million years to
him or a split second. So don't even bother with using Moses' saying
1000 years as an actual measurement for the passage of time. Also,
Moses' mentioning of man's age is not an absolute either, just an
average (if we assume it to be correct).
As a disclaimer to all that anyway, you cannot counter science with
scripture. Scripture was written from between a hell of a long time
ago up to about 200 years after Jesus died. Modern science has only
been around since about the time of Galileo, which were its very early
beginnings. There is a huge time gap in between. There is no science
in the bible and while anyone holding a scientific background on here
already knows this I feel obligated to point it out for the, er, less
scientific of us.
Desertphile
> ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
> Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
Appears Mental.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>Accurate carbon dating, relating the the period
>of this earth during the time written records were
>kept, or circa 6,000 years, has serious errors due
>to worldwide Pangaea, Pang�a, or Pangea, with
>actual date for continental drift during the time of
>Peleg or Phaleg.
which has nothing to do with radiocarbon dating, which is limited to
time periods much shorter than continental drift
mormon bulshit cliipped...
>Accurate carbon dating, relating the the period
>of this earth during the time written records were
>kept, or circa 6,000 years, has serious errors due
>to the worldwide Flood [2344 B.C.]
there was no worldwide flood...there is no evidence for this at all.
none.
take your moron bullshit and go back to salt lake city
Mark Isaak
> ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political Science,
> Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes ------------------
> Many people are in doubt concerning the age of this earth, due to
> incorrect assumptions from carbon dating and geologic formations.
> Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if the atmospheric
> bombardment by radioactive decay has been constant over the ages and
> if, and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a constant over time.
> However, according to Holy Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking
> of the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds of mortal death into
> their bodies in the Garden of Eden), there was no death; thus, no
> radioactive decay.
Why can't *I* change the laws of physics by eating an apple?
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"It is certain, from experience, that the smallest grain of natural
honesty and benevolence has more effect on men's conduct, than the most
pompous views suggested by theological theories and systems." - D. Hume
Anthrax Mailer
>On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700, JacobSmith wrote:
>> However, according to Holy Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking
>> of the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds of mortal death into
>> their bodies in the Garden of Eden), there was no death; thus, no
>> radioactive decay.
> Why can't *I* change the laws of physics by eating an apple?
Try praying *harder*.
---
Does belief in astrology cause insanity? http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
raven1
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On May 30, 7:56�pm, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>>
>> <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >Many people are in doubt concerning the age
>> >of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
>> >from carbon dating
>>
>> No one uses carbon dating to determine the age of the Earth. Try
>> again.
>
>-------------------------------
>REPLY:
>"Radiocarbon dating, or carbon dating,
>is a radiometric dating method that uses
>the naturally occurring radioisotope carbon-14
>(14C) to determine the age of carbonaceous
>materials up to about 58,000 to 62,000 years."
Which is why no one uses it to determine the age of the Earth.
marks...@yahoo.com
> "On Mon, 31 May 2010 01:50:30 -0700 (PDT), in article
> richardalanforr...@googlemail.com stated..."
So, I suppose Leprechauns are mythical too, and the pots of gold
simply a lie ?
Desertphile
<eci...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700, JacobSmith wrote:
>
> > ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political Science,
> > Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes ------------------
> > Many people are in doubt concerning the age of this earth, due to
> > incorrect assumptions from carbon dating and geologic formations.
> > Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if the atmospheric
> > bombardment by radioactive decay has been constant over the ages and
> > if, and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a constant over time.
> > However, according to Holy Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking
> > of the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds of mortal death into
> > their bodies in the Garden of Eden), there was no death; thus, no
> > radioactive decay.
> Why can't *I* change the laws of physics by eating an apple?
Have you tried? Maybe you can.
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
would be equivalent to atoms dying, can't it also be assumed that
there were no chemical reactions, either, since those consist of decay
of atoms from the perfect state ordained by God? And thus, no breath,
since to breathe is to consume and convert oxygen into carbon dioxide
as a natural process in the body. Therefore, it cannot be true that
God put his breath, the breath of life, into living things. Nor was
there light, since light acts by causing chemical reactions in
pigments in living eyes. So "Let there be light" is wrong.
Creation isn't coming out of this well, is it?
Michael Young
orig...@moderators.isc.org" <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> If there was no radioactive decay in the Garden of Eden, because that
I'd rather argue that there WAS radioactive decay, because the atom
doesn't die, it just changes slightly (loses a neutron or two). If
Adam or Eve ever lost or gained weight (neutrons) that'd be along the
same line.
But no, Creation seems to be getting a bloody face.
JacobSmith
-----------------------------------------------------------
REPLY:
Well, let us try a little honesty. USGS says,
last updated July 9, 2007: "So far scientists
have not found a way to determine the exact
age of the Earth directly from Earth rocks
because Earth's oldest rocks have been recycled
and destroyed by the process of plate tectonics.
If there are any of Earth's primordial rocks left
in their original state, they have not yet been found.
Nevertheless, scientists have been able to determine
the PROBABLE age of the Solar System and to calculate
an age for the Earth by ASSUMING that the Earth and
the rest of the solid bodies in the Solar System formed
at the same time and are, therefore, of the same age."
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html
Probable assumptions are not the laws of physics.
For example: Using the King James version of the
Holy Bible, Genesis records that God said: Let there
be light; and there was light . . . And God called the
light Day and the darkness he called Night . . . And
the evening and the morning were the first day.
Nevertheless, in order of days, it is so stated that:
Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven
to divide the day from the night . . . And the evening
and the morning were the fourth day.
From modern scientific knowledge, it is apparent,
that in current intelligent language of the scientific
world, what is said by God is equivalent to the
process by which, on the fourth day, the regional
solar system was set in motion, to move about
the Sun in the sky, along with the other bodies
in the heavens, within the backdrop of the more
distant star systems.
. . .
Prior to this series of events, the earth was without
form and void; and darkness was upon the face of
the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters. This clearly suggests that the
earth was formed out of a portion of the Universe,
of unorganized gaseous matter and fluid element,
which was permeated by light from God, condensed
into a liquid gravitation field, and further defined with
more rigid land mass, which was then set into
rotational spin.
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/science.htm#THEOLOGY_and_SCIENCE:_THE_BIBLE_IS_SCIENTIFIC
So, when we speak of the Earth and its creation,
there appears to be two light sources, one coming
from "And the evening and the morning were the
first day", as well as "the process by which, on
the fourth day, the regional solar system was set
in motion, to move about the Sun in the sky, along
with the other bodies in the heavens, within the
backdrop of the more distant star systems."
Local Fluff is the Local Interstellar Cloud through
which the Solar System is currently moving. The
Local Interstellar Cloud's potential effects on Earth
are now prevented by the solar wind and the Sun's
magnetic field. The cloud has a temperature of about
6000 degrees C, which is about the same temperature
as the surface of our Sun, and thus astronomically,
does seem to be the first of two light sources, i.e.,
"And the evening and the morning were the first day."
In relation to your remarks about chemical reactions,
the man Adam was created from the "dust" of the earth.
Since the 1970s, scientists have speculated that
molecules could form on the microscopic dust grains
in interstellar clouds. Charles Blue (October 2001).
"Scientists Toast the Discovery of
Vinyl Alcohol in Interstellar Space".
National Radio Astronomy Observatory.
http://www.nrao.edu/pr/2001/vinylalco/
"Until recently the rates of reactions in interstellar
clouds were expected to be very slow, with minimal
products being produced due to the low temperature
and density of the clouds. However, organic molecules
were observed in the spectra that scientists would
not have expected to find under these conditions,
such as formaldehyde, methanol, and vinyl alcohol.
The reactions needed to create such substances
are familiar to scientists only at the much higher
temperatures and pressures of earth and earth-
based laboratories. The fact that they were found
indicates that these chemical reactions in
interstellar clouds take place faster than suspected,
likely in gas-phase reactions unfamiliar to organic
chemistry as observed on earth."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_cloud
raven1
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Well, let us try a little honesty. USGS says,
>last updated July 9, 2007: "So far scientists
>have not found a way to determine the exact
>age of the Earth directly from Earth rocks
>because Earth's oldest rocks have been recycled
>and destroyed by the process of plate tectonics.
>If there are any of Earth's primordial rocks left
>in their original state, they have not yet been found.
True. Question: how old do you think the oldest datable rocks we have
are?
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>--
>REPLY:
>Well, let us try a little honesty. USGS says,
>last updated July 9, 2007: "So far scientists
>have not found a way to determine the exact
>age of the Earth directly from Earth rocks
>because Earth's oldest rocks have been recycled
>and destroyed by the process of plate tectonics.
>If there are any of Earth's primordial rocks left
>in their original state, they have not yet been found.
that's why the age of the earth is not determined this way.
>
>Nevertheless, scientists have been able to determine
>the PROBABLE age of the Solar System and to calculate
>an age for the Earth by ASSUMING that the Earth and
>the rest of the solid bodies in the Solar System formed
>at the same time and are, therefore, of the same age."
>http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html
>
>Probable assumptions are not the laws of physics.
they are conclusions FROM the laws of physics. we know the oldest
earth rocks ARE about 3.8B years old. we can measure that. and by
applying the laws of physics to meteorites we can determine the age of
the solar system
something creationism thought was only 6000 years old. so creationism
was wrong
>For example: Using the King James version of the
>Holy Bible, Genesis records that God said: Let there
>be light; and there was light . . . And God called the
>light Day and the darkness he called Night .
pretty neat to have this dictated to someone who wasnt around to see
it. that's a contradiction. a statement of fact by someone who has no
way to test his statement and yet asserts it's true.
>From modern scientific knowledge, it is apparent,
>that in current intelligent language of the scientific
>world, what is said by God is equivalent to the
>process by which, on the fourth day
you mean if you take that language and massage the living hell out of
it to make it conform to science?
relkgious lanaguage is infinitely plastic. you can make it say
anything you want.
, the regional
>solar system was set in motion, to move about
>the Sun in the sky, along with the other bodies
>in the heavens, within the backdrop of the more
>distant star systems.
too bad the creationists didn't even know what the 'sun' was. guess
god kinda forgot to include that in his dictation.
>
>Local Fluff is the Local Interstellar Cloud through
>which the Solar System is currently moving. The
>Local Interstellar Cloud's potential effects on Earth
>are now prevented by the solar wind and the Sun's
>magnetic field. The cloud has a temperature of about
>6000 degrees C, which is about the same temperature
>as the surface of our Sun, and thus astronomically,
>does seem to be the first of two light sources, i.e.,
>"And the evening and the morning were the first day."
except that the density of this gas is so thin, there is no light
observable to the human eye. so it would not have been visible
guess god forgot that, too.
cassandra
<snip to point>
> Well, let us try a little honesty. �
Sounds like a great idea. You go first.
JacobSmith
>
> Sounds like a great idea. �You go first.
--------------------------------------------------
OK! REPEAT REPLY:
[t is well-known that a radioactive substance
follows a fixed exponential decay, no matter
what you do to it. The fact has been set in stone
since 1930 when the �father� of nuclear physics
Ernest Rutherford, together with James Chadwick
and Charles Ellis, concluded in their definitive
Radiations from Radioactive Substances that
�the rate of transformation�is a constant under
all conditions.
But this is no longer the view of a pair of physicists
in the US. Ephraim Fischbach and Jere Jenkins of
Purdue University in Indiana are claiming that, far
from being fixed, certain decay �constants� are
influenced by the Sun.] I said this before.
Honestly, the greater light rules the day, even
the sun, and the lesser light rules the night,
even the moon. And the stars, well the sun
that rules the day is also called a star today.
This creates variables throughout the universe,
since certain decay �constants� are influenced
by the sun, and the sun is one of many stars;
some mega larger and some mini smaller "suns".
So, honestly, no matter how variable the sizes
and effects of the "suns" on decay, �the rate of
transformation�is a constant under all conditions."
no longer holds throughout the universe, since
the sun is like most stars, a main sequence star.
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>But this is no longer the view of a pair of physicists
>in the US. Ephraim Fischbach and Jere Jenkins of
>Purdue University in Indiana are claiming that, far
>from being fixed, certain decay �constants� are
>influenced by the Sun.] I said this before.
where's the evidence? and got any proof it affects all decay?
no....i thought not.
>
>Honestly, the greater light rules the day, even
>the sun, and the lesser light rules the night,
>even the moon.
too bad all this crap is meaningless
And the stars, well the sun
>that rules the day is also called a star today.
>This creates variables throughout the universe,
>since certain decay �constants� are influenced
>by the sun, and the sun is one of many stars;
>some mega larger and some mini smaller "suns".
>
>So, honestly, no matter how variable the sizes
>and effects of the "suns" on decay, �the rate of
>transformation�is a constant under all conditions."
>no longer holds throughout the universe, since
>the sun is like most stars, a main sequence star.
too bad creationism was unable to tell us the sun is a star, let alone
that it's a main sequence star.
creationism is useless.
cassandra
> On May 31, 7:37�pm, cassandra <cassandra99...@gmail.com> wrote:> > > Well, let us try a little honesty. �
>
> > Sounds like a great idea. �You go first.
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> OK! �REPEAT REPLY:
You answer was dishonest the first time. Repeating it is just stupid
or insane. Which are you?
Desertphile
<cassand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 1, 12:51�am, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On May 31, 7:37�pm, cassandra <cassandra99...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On May 31, 8:06�pm, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > <snip to point>
> >
> > > > Well, let us try a little honesty. �
> >
> > > Sounds like a great idea. �You go first.
> > OK! �REPEAT REPLY:
> You answer was dishonest the first time. Repeating it is just stupid
> or insane. Which are you?
Are we going to vote on this? If so, my ballot is "Stupid AND
insane."
cassandra
wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 08:37:29 -0700 (PDT), cassandra
>
> > On Jun 1, 12:51�am, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On May 31, 7:37�pm, cassandra <cassandra99...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On May 31, 8:06�pm, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > <snip to point>
>
> > > > > Well, let us try a little honesty. �
>
> > > > Sounds like a great idea. �You go first.
> > > OK! �REPEAT REPLY:
> > You answer was dishonest the first time. �Repeating it is just stupid
> > or insane. �Which are you?
>
> Are we going to vote on this? If so, my ballot is "Stupid AND
> insane."
My suggestions certainly aren't cumulatively exhaustive or mutually
exclusive. Write-ins are encouraged.
Steven L.
news:pan.2010.05.31....@earthlink.net:
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700, JacobSmith wrote:
>
> > ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political Science,
> > Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes ------------------
> > Many people are in doubt concerning the age of this earth, due to
> > incorrect assumptions from carbon dating and geologic formations.
> > Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if the atmospheric
> > bombardment by radioactive decay has been constant over the ages and
> > if, and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a constant over time.
> > However, according to Holy Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking
> > of the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds of mortal death into
> > their bodies in the Garden of Eden), there was no death; thus, no
> > radioactive decay.
>
> Why can't *I* change the laws of physics by eating an apple?
Because God doesn't care about which women *you* laid.
Some things haven't changed much, though.
A micro-bikini is just a glorified fig leaf.
-- Steven L.
chris thompson
wrote:
> In message
> <1435597e-a85b-4545-9340-2e385f4e6...@a39g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
> JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> writes
>
>
>
> >On May 30, 7:56�pm, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>
> >> <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> >> >from carbon dating
>
> >> again.
>
> >-------------------------------
> >REPLY:
> >"Radiocarbon dating, or carbon dating,
> >is a radiometric dating method that uses
> >the naturally occurring radioisotope carbon-14
> >(14C) to determine the age of carbonaceous
> >materials up to about 58,000 to 62,000 years."
>
> multiple dating methods that all agree with each other) it makes carbon
> dating *utterly* useless in measuring that age.
>
> Please feel welcome to try again, but I would advise reading this first:
>
> http://www.asa3.org/ASA/RESOURCES/WIENS.html
>
> >Accurate carbon dating, relating the the period
> >of this earth during the time written records were
> >kept, or circa 6,000 years, has serious errors due
> >to worldwide Pangaea, Pang�a, or Pangea, with
> >actual date for continental drift during the time of
>
> Since the maximum speed of continental drift is around 10cm per year, in
> 4000 years the most they could have moved is about 400 meters. �If you
> look carefully you will notice that the continents are further apart
> than that.
I had my dogs on the beach yesterday, and while it was getting a
little dark you'd have thought I would have noticed Portugal sitting
there.
Chris
>
> <snip>
> --
> sapient_usene...@spamsights.org �ICQ #17887309 � � �* �Save the net �*
> Grok:http://spam.abuse.net�http://www.cauce.org* nuke a spammer �*
> Find:http://www.samspade.orghttp://www.netdemon.net�* � �today � �*
> Kill:http://mail-abuse.com�http://au.sorbs.net�http://spamhaus.org
Michael Young
I love how you pick and choose what you want to copy from a scientific
source as long as you think you can use it to prove science is wrong
all the time. Going to your source and reading the *next paragraph*,
it says this:
"The ages of Earth and Moon rocks and of meteorites are measured by
the decay of long-lived radioactive isotopes of elements that occur
naturally in rocks and minerals and that decay with half lives of 700
million to more than 100 billion years to stable isotopes of other
elements. These dating techniques, which are firmly grounded in
physics and are known collectively as radiometric dating, are used to
measure the last time that the rock being dated was either melted or
disturbed sufficiently to rehomogenize its radioactive elements.
Ancient rocks exceeding 3.5 billion years in age are found on all of
Earth's continents."
They don't know the EXACT age of the Earth, but we DO know for a fact
that the youngest the planet could possibly be is over 3.5 billion
years old. No one ever said radiometric dating is totally exact, and
it doesn't need to be, because the margin of error relative to the
amount of total time the isotopes are measuring is practically
negligible.
But let's go ahead and assume that radiometric dating is extremely
flawed anyway, even if it isn't, and has an inherent margin of error
of 50%. That means the planet is still, at minimum, 1.75 billion years
old. It's an ancient planet, period, and comes nowhere close to the
"6000 years" lots of Christians claim (an age never expressed in the
Bible). Anything else you want to copy and paste from science that
disproves itself?
Ray Martinez
<richardalanforr...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On May 31, 1:52�am, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
> > Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> > ------------------
> > of this earth,
>
>
> > due to incorrect assumptions
>
> UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION #1
> What "incorrect assumptions"?
>
> > from carbon dating
>
> FALSEHOOD #1
> Carbon dating is not used to establish the age of the earth.
>
> > and geologic formations.
>
> FALSEHOOD #2
> "Geologic formations" are not used to date the earth.
>
But you readily accept genealogies to be used in determining the age
of the Earth according to the Bible? (And geologic formations are used
to conclude that the Earth is very old.)
You accept a false method because you want the Bible to look stupid.
You need to obtain some honesty, Richard. Oh wait, you're an Atheist
(= naturally dishonest).
Ray
> > Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
> > the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
> > decay has been constant over the ages
>
> FALSEHOOD #3
> Radiocarbon dating is calibrated against tree-ring records to
> compensate for the variation in cosmic ray bombardment.
>
> >and if,
> > and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
> > constant over time.
>
> Seems a pretty good assumption, bearing in mind that there is no
> evidence whatsoever for variation, and that if the rate of radioactive
> decay were high enough to give the ages for the earth creationists
> require the earth would be vaporised.
>
> >�However, according to Holy
> > Scripture,
>
> Nothing to do with science then. Glad we're clear on that.
>
> > prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
> > the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
> > of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
> > of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
> > decay.
>
> A complete and utter non-seqitur. Radioactive decay is not death.
>
>
>
> > The whole purpose of the life of the Messiah
> > Jesus Christ, His subsequent death on the
> > cross and resurrection shortly thereafter, was
> > to bring to pass the immortality and eternal
> > life of man. �This was done to reverse the death
> > process brought upon all the descendants of
> > Adam and Eve and all life in, above and on the
> > earth. �Additionally, the Holy Scripture states
> > that the atmosphere was at the time of the
> > profiled patriarchs, different in composition from
> > what it is today.
>
> FALSEHOOD #4
>
>
>
> >�All indications are that there
> > was no rainbow in the heavens prior to the flood
> > that covered the whole earth. �Thus, as shown
> > by the Holy Scripture, the process of decay and
> > degeneration was slower, accepting the age
> > and longevity recorded for the early Patriarchs
> > from Adam to Noah.http://www.academic-genealogy.com/tingeo.htm
>
> > "Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are reactive
> > molecules that contain the oxygen atom." Also,
> > "during times of environmental stress (e.g. UV
> > or heat exposure) ROS levels can increase
> > dramatically, which can result in significant
> > damage to cell structures." �"ROS are also
> > generated by exogenous sources such as
> > ionizing radiation." �"In biology �and agriculture,
> > radiation is used to induce mutations to produce
> > new or improved species. �Another use in insect
> > control is the sterile insect technique, where male
> > insects are sterilized by radiation and released,
> > so they have no offspring, to reduce the population."
>
> > "Natural background radiation comes from four
> > primary sources: cosmic radiation, solar radiation,
> > external terrestrial sources, and radon."
> > "The cosmic-radiation dose rate on airplanes
> > is so high that, according to the United Nations
> > UNSCEAR 2000 Report . . ., airline flight crew
> > workers receive more dose on average than any
> > other worker, including those in nuclear power plants."
> > "Radiation intensity decreases sharply with distance,
> > according to an inverse square law", suggesting that
> > the earth may have gone through an orbital adjustment.
> > "The biological effects of radiation are thought
> > of in terms of their effects on living cells."
>
> > Biblical statements concerning the earth being
> > corrupt, with all flesh upon the earth being corrupted,
> > are mentioned from the time of Enoch to the time
> > of the Patriarch Noah, 2944 to 1994 B.C. �There
> > were giants on the earth in those days that attempted
> > to take away the life of Noah, indicating from Holy
> > Scripture, the time frame for the worldwide culmination
> > of the development and mutation of dinosaurs, plants
> > and other distorted, abnormally deformed creatures.
>
> > CBS SCI-TECH online News, 31 May 2006, includes:
> > "Imagine a world where there are dense sequoia trees
> > and cypress trees like in Florida that ring the Arctic
> > Ocean . . . Researchers are not sure what caused
> > the sudden boost of carbon dioxide that set the
> > greenhouse effect on broil. �Possible culprits could
> > be huge releases of methane from the ocean, gigantic
> > continent-sized burning of trees, or lots of volcanic
> > eruptions." �"In the six hundredth year of Noah�s life,
> > . . . all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and
> > the windows of heaven were opened. "
>
> > #1 Current News:
> > "There is still a hole in the Earth, crude oil is still
> > spewing from it and there is still, excruciatingly,
> > no end in sight." �Is there anyone out there in the
> > scientific world of today, who cannot comprehend
> > what would happen to this earth we live upon, if all
> > the "fountains of the great deep" were broken up?http://www.academic-genealogy.com/ancientandmoderngenealogies.htm- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ray Martinez
<richardalanforr...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On May 31, 1:52�am, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
> > Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> > ------------------
> > Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> > Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
> > the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
> > and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
> > Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
> > the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
> > of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
> > of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
> > decay.
>
> > Jesus Christ, His subsequent death on the
> > cross and resurrection shortly thereafter, was
> > to bring to pass the immortality and eternal
> > process brought upon all the descendants of
> > Adam and Eve and all life in, above and on the
> > that the atmosphere was at the time of the
> > profiled patriarchs, different in composition from
> > what it is today.
>
> The Bible says nothing about the composition of the atmosphere.
>
Yes it does.
Before the Flood if you looked up you would see exactly what one would
see if they were standing on a bridge looking down at a river below.
Ray
raven1
OK, let me get this straight: you accept an old Earth, but believe in
a literal Noachian Flood? That's a very odd combination of positions
to take.
Ray Martinez
>
> - Show quoted text -
It appears odd to you because your Biblical view is the Fundamentalist
view. The Fundie view is a 20th century invent. Needless to say it is
as false as a four dollar bill.
Ray
aganunitsi
Holy crap, I don't think I've heard this outrageous Biblical
literalist claim before.
So how much water was suspended in the sky back then? And how did the
physics of that work, with the sun, moon and stars having to shine
through all that water? And why doesn't the Bible record a dramatic
shift in the appearance of the sky after The Flood?
You are taking a reasonable, rational assumption of people a long time
ago and assuming they were speaking based on "perfect knowledge",
which they were not. Because they were wrong. Although it was
perfectly reasonable for them to rationalize that the heavens
consisted of waters held up by a supernatural firmament, it was a
premise based on ignorance. Water falls from the sky, the sky is blue,
the seas are blue, therefore the sky is a suspended sea. They didn't
know about scattering of short wave light in the atmosphere, so they
have an excuse - what's yours?
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
earth is about the same age.
According to science, these bodies each were not "born" on some
particular day, but came into existence in their present form mostly
by a gradual and very lengthy process - the extraction of the moon
from the earth (!) , if that theory stands, being a reasonable
exception to that statement. It didn't result in a new moon straight
away, but a new earth, yeah.
raven1
Actually, it appears odd to me because one position is overwhelmingly
supported by evidence, and one is overwhelmingly contraindicated by
it. Would you care to explain the reason behind your positions?
JacobSmith
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 17:06:31 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>
> >--
> >REPLY:
> >Well, let us try a little honesty. �USGS says,
> >last updated July 9, 2007: "So far scientists
> >have not found a way to determine the exact
> >age of the Earth directly from Earth rocks
> >because Earth's oldest rocks have been recycled
> >and destroyed by the process of plate tectonics.
> >If there are any of Earth's primordial rocks left
> >in their original state, they have not yet been found.
>
> that's why the age of the earth is not determined this way.
>
>
>
> >Nevertheless, scientists have been able to determine
> >the PROBABLE age of the Solar System and to calculate
> >an age for the Earth by ASSUMING that the Earth and
> >the rest of the solid bodies in the Solar System formed
> >at the same time and are, therefore, of the same age."
> >http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html
>
> >Probable assumptions are not the laws of physics.
>
> earth rocks ARE about 3.8B years old. we can measure that. and by
> applying the laws of physics to meteorites we can determine the age of
> the solar system
>
> was wrong
>
> >For example: Using the King James version of the
> >Holy Bible, Genesis records that God said: Let there
> >be light; and there was light . . . And God called the
> >light Day and the darkness he called Night .
>
> pretty neat to have this dictated to someone who wasnt around to see
>
> guess god forgot that, too.
--------------------------------------------------------
REPLY: Hello? Hello? Are you there?
Are you up to date on your information?
[The IBEX satellite was launched with a Pegasus-XL
rocket on October 19, 2008, at 17:47:23 UTC. The
nominal mission baseline duration will be two years
to observe the entire solar system boundary.]
Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_Boundary_Explorer
. . .
[IBEX is collecting Energetic neutral atom (ENA)
emissions that are traveling through the solar
system to Earth that cannot be measured by
conventional telescopes. These ENAs are
created on the boundary of our Solar System
by the interactions between solar wind particles
and interstellar medium particles.]
. . .
[Initial data revealed a previously unpredicted
"very narrow ribbon that is two to three times
brighter than anything else in the sky." Initial
interpretations suggest that "the interstellar
environment has far more influence on structuring
the heliosphere than anyone previously believed"
"No one knows what is creating the ENA (energetic
neutral atoms) ribbon, but everyone agrees that it
means the textbook picture of the heliosphere�in
which the solar system's enveloping pocket filled
with the solar wind's charged particles is plowing
through the onrushing "galactic wind" of the
interstellar medium in the shape of a comet�
is wrong."
The Sun is currently traveling through the
Local Interstellar Cloud, and the heliosphere's
size and shape are key factors in determining
its shielding power from cosmic rays. Should
IBEX detect changes in the shape of the ribbon,
that could show how the heliosphere is interacting
with the Local Fluff.]
ADDENDUM:
[Critical analysis of evidence discussed within these
records shows some historical validity of the existence
of an Abraham, connected with knowledge of planetary
motions, practice of an internationally recognized religious
priesthood, as well as being a teacher and communicator
through letters and writings. Secondary evidence is thus
provided for the statement given in The Book of Abraham,
translated from papyrus by Joseph Smith, Jr., from
Chapter 1,
Verse 31; namely:
"But the records of the fathers, even the patriarchs,
concerning the right of Priesthood, the Lord my God
preserved in mine own hands; therefore a knowledge
of the beginning of the creation, and also of the planets,
and of the stars, as they were made known unto the
fathers, have I kept even unto this day, and I shall
endeavor to write some of these things upon this
record, for the benefit of my posterity that shall
come after me."]
. . .
B. Book of Jubilees . . . [Chapter 8]
. . . Arpachshad [Arphaxad] took to himself a wife
and her name was Rasu'eja, the daughter of Susan,
the daughter of Elam, and she bare him a son . . .
called . . . Kainam. And the son grew, and his father
taught him writing, and he went to seek for himself
a place where he might seize for himself a city. And
he found a writing which former (generations) had carved
on the rock, and he read what was thereon, and he
transcribed it . . . for it contained the teaching of the
Watchers in accordance with which they used to
observe the omens of the sun and moon and stars
in all the signs of heaven. And he wrote it down
. . .
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/ancientandmoderngenealogies.htm
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On May 31, 5:36�pm, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 May 2010 17:06:31 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>
>> too bad the creationists didn't even know what the 'sun' was. guess
>> god kinda forgot to include that in his dictation.
>>
>>
>>
>> >Local Fluff is the Local Interstellar Cloud through
>> >which the Solar System is currently moving. The
>> >Local Interstellar Cloud's potential effects on Earth
>> >are now prevented by the solar wind and the Sun's
>> >magnetic field. The cloud has a temperature of about
>> >6000 degrees C, which is about the same temperature
>> >as the surface of our Sun, and thus astronomically,
>> >does seem to be the first of two light sources, i.e.,
>> >"And the evening and the morning were the first day."
>>
>> except that the density of this gas is so thin, there is no light
>> observable to the human eye. so �it would not have been visible
>>
>> guess god forgot that, too.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>REPLY: Hello? Hello? Are you there?
>Are you up to date on your information?
uh, yeah, actually; 2000 years more up to date than you are.
>
>[The IBEX satellite was launched with a Pegasus-XL
>rocket on October 19, 2008, at 17:47:23 UTC. The
>nominal mission baseline duration will be two years
>to observe the entire solar system boundary.]
>Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX)
thanks for proving me right. i said the light is not visible to the
human eye. you just agreed.
glad to see you can admit you were wrong.
>ADDENDUM:
>[Critical analysis of evidence discussed within these
>records shows some historical validity of the existence
>of an Abraham,
not a single shred of evidence exists for abraham at all. not one
scrap.
connected with knowledge of planetary
>motions, practice of an internationally recognized religious
>priesthood, as well as being a teacher and communicator
>through letters and writings. Secondary evidence is thus
>provided for the statement given in The Book of Abraham,
>translated from papyrus by Joseph Smith, Jr., from
>Chapter 1,
smith was a liar, a forger and a con artist. the mormon religion is a
degenerate, backward cult
mormon bullshit snipped
JacobSmith
----------------------------------------------------
Pliny the Elder, circa A.D. 23 - 79, scholar, historian,
and scientific encyclopedist, born at Novum Comum in
northern Italy but mainly resident of Rome, mentions
the Phoenicians in his thirty seven book work:
Natural History. This record, considered by some
as the apex of ancient science after the time of the
school of Aristotle, stated that: "To the Phoenician
people belongs the glory of having invented letters
and discovered the sciences of astronomy, navigation
and the art of war." In Ancient Fragments, by
Isaac Preston Cory, Esq., mention is made
of the Greek historian previous to the Christian era,
by name called Eupolemus. This Eupolemus notes
that in the tenth generation, Abraham lived in Camarina
of Babylonia [Urie], a city of the Chaldeans, and was
of noble heritage and superior to all others in wisdom.
Abraham was stated to be the inventor of astrology
and the Chaldaean magic; esteemed of God due to
his eminent and recognized piety. Under the direction
of the God of Heaven, Abraham removed and lived in
Phoenicia, and there taught the Phoenicians the motions
of the sun and moon and all other things, for which reason,
he was held in great reverence, by the Phoenician King.
Louis H. Feldman writes about "Proselytes and
'Sympathizers' in the light of the new inscriptions
from Aphrodisias", in Revue des Etudes juives,
CXLVIII (3-4), juillet-decenbre 1989, pp. 265-305;
that: "The Jews' reputed skill in astrology may
likewise have proved an attraction. The Graeco-Jewish
historian Artapanus (ca. 100 B.C.E.) (ap. Eusebius,
Praeparatio Evangelica 9.18.1) states that it was
Abraham who taught the Egyptian pharaoh the
science of astrology. Similar statements are
found in pseudo-Eupolemus (ap. Eusebius,
Praeparatio Evangelica 9.17.8)
and Josephus (Antiquities 1.167).
Indeed, Hadrian (Sciptores Historiae Augustae,
Quadrigae Tyrannorum 8.3) remarks that there is
no chief of a synagogue who is not an astrologer
(mathematicus), soothsayer (haruspex), or anointer
(aliptes). Moreover, in the middle of the second century,
Vettius Valens, in his astrological work, Anthologiae
(2.28,29), refers to Abraham as a most wonderful
astrological authority. Furthermore, Abraham's skill
in astrology is mentioned no fewer than four times in
Firmicus Maternus' fourth century astrological treatise,
the Mathesis (4: Proemium 5, 17.2, 17.5, and 18.1).
Firmicus' contemporary Julian (Contra Galilaeos 356C)
remarks that Abraham employed the method of divination
from shooting stars and from the flight of birds. Since,
we may remark, proselytes are regarded as children
of Abraham, himself the first proselyte, they would
presumably identify with him as an astrologer."
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jun 1, 8:25�pm, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 20:06:09 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>>
>>
>>
>> <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >On May 31, 5:36�pm, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 31 May 2010 17:06:31 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>>
>> >> too bad the creationists didn't even know what the 'sun' was. guess
>> >> god kinda forgot to include that in his dictation.
>>
>> >> >Local Fluff is the Local Interstellar Cloud through
>> >> >which the Solar System is currently moving. The
>> >> >Local Interstellar Cloud's potential effects on Earth
>> >> >are now prevented by the solar wind and the Sun's
>> >> >magnetic field. The cloud has a temperature of about
>> >> >6000 degrees C, which is about the same temperature
>> >> >as the surface of our Sun, and thus astronomically,
>> >> >does seem to be the first of two light sources, i.e.,
>> >> >"And the evening and the morning were the first day."
>>
>> >> except that the density of this gas is so thin, there is no light
>> >> observable to the human eye. so �it would not have been visible
>>
>> >> guess god forgot that, too.
>>
>> >--------------------------------------------------------
>>
>----------------------------------------------------
>Pliny the Elder, circa A.D. 23 - 79, scholar, historian,
he couldnt see the lesser light either. guess god forgot to tell him
about it, eh?
>and scientific encyclopedist, born at Novum Comum in
>northern Italy but mainly resident of Rome, mentions
>the Phoenicians in his thirty seven book work:
>Natural History. This record, considered by some
>as the apex of ancient science
and creationism hasnt progressed an iota since.
after the time of the
>school of Aristotle, stated that: "To the Phoenician
>people belongs the glory of having invented letters
>and discovered the sciences of astronomy, navigation
>and the art of war." In Ancient Fragments, by
>Isaac Preston Cory, Esq., mention is made
>of the Greek historian previous to the Christian era,
>by name called Eupolemus. This Eupolemus notes
>that in the tenth generation, Abraham lived in Camarina
no one cares what he thought. it's irrelevant. there's no evidence
abraham existed. mythology and just so stories arent evidence
>Louis H. Feldman writes about "Proselytes and
>'Sympathizers' in the light of the new inscriptions
>from Aphrodisias", in Revue des Etudes juives,
>CXLVIII (3-4), juillet-decenbre 1989, pp. 265-305;
>that: "The Jews' reputed skill in astrology
ah. now we're getting somewhere. your cult beliefs include astrology?
that's as scientific as you get.
may
>likewise have proved an attraction. The Graeco-Jewish
>historian Artapanus (ca. 100 B.C.E.) (ap. Eusebius,
>Praeparatio Evangelica 9.18.1) states that it was
>Abraham who taught the Egyptian pharaoh the
>science of astrology. Similar statements are
>found in pseudo-Eupolemus (ap. Eusebius,
>Praeparatio Evangelica 9.17.8)
>and Josephus (Antiquities 1.167).
gee. where's his evidence for this? i guess he found the evidence the
same place he found the evidence for astrology
you're quoting crap from 2000 years ago. it's irrelevant. it's not
historical. there is NO evidence that abraham existed. people can make
up all the fairy tales they want
that's not evidence.
richardal...@googlemail.com
So where does it say this in the Bible?
RF
> Ray
richardal...@googlemail.com
> On May 31, 1:15�am, "richardalanforr...@googlemail.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <richardalanforr...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > On May 31, 1:52�am, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
> > > Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> > > ------------------
> > > Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> > > of this earth,
>
> > Nobody with any education in science ir.
>
> > > due to incorrect assumptions
>
> > UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION #1
> > What "incorrect assumptions"?
>
> > > from carbon dating
>
> > FALSEHOOD #1
> > Carbon dating is not used to establish the age of the earth.
>
> > > and geologic formations.
>
> > FALSEHOOD #2
> > "Geologic formations" are not used to date the earth.
>
> But you readily accept genealogies to be used in determining the age
> of the Earth according to the Bible?
What on earth gave you that idea?
> (And geologic formations are used
> to conclude that the Earth is very old.)
No, they are not. Because we know that the rate of formation of
sedimentary structures varies enormously, "geological formations" are
not used to date the earth.
> You accept a false method because you want the Bible to look stupid.
I suggest that the people who are imposing their crabbed and dishonest
interpretation on the Bible rather than trying to understand it are
the ones making the Bible look stupid.
>
> You need to obtain some honesty, Richard. Oh wait, you're an Atheist
> (= naturally dishonest).
As I specifically avoid any discussion of my religious beliefs or lack
of them, you have no way of knowing if I am an atheist or not. What I
*have* done is to express a detestation for dishonesty.
What do you think it tells us about you and your moral values that you
think that a detestation for dishonesty is the mark of an atheist?
RF
> > > the "fountains of the great deep" were broken up?http://www.academic-genealogy.com/ancientandmoderngenealogies.htm-Hide quoted text -
Walter Bushell
<2bf9735e-0a08-487c...@c22g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
marks...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On May 31, 5:41 am, TomS <TomS_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > "On Mon, 31 May 2010 01:50:30 -0700 (PDT), in article
> > <1b1f5190-8322-47a6-b432-23009cb63...@u7g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>,
> > richardalanforr...@googlemail.com stated..."
> >
> >
> >
> > >On May 31, 1:52 am, JacobSmith <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political
> > >> Science, Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes
> > >> ------------------
> > >> Many people are in doubt concerning the age
> > >> of this earth, due to incorrect assumptions
> > >> from carbon dating and geologic formations.
> > >> Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if
> > >> the atmospheric bombardment by radioactive
> > >> decay has been constant over the ages and if,
> > >> and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a
> > >> constant over time. However, according to Holy
> > >> Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking of
> > >> the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds
> > >> of mortal death into their bodies in the Garden
> > >> of Eden), there was no death; thus, no radioactive
> > >> decay.
> >
> > >> The whole purpose of the life of the Messiah
> > >> Jesus Christ, His subsequent death on the
> > >> cross and resurrection shortly thereafter, was
> > >> to bring to pass the immortality and eternal
> > >> life of man. This was done to reverse the death
> > >> process brought upon all the descendants of
> > >> Adam and Eve and all life in, above and on the
> > >> earth. Additionally, the Holy Scripture states
> > >> that the atmosphere was at the time of the
> > >> profiled patriarchs, different in composition from
> > >> what it is today. All indications are that there
> > >> was no rainbow in the heavens prior to the flood
> > >> that covered the whole earth.
> >
> > >FALSEHOOD #5
> > >The only "indication" that there were no rainbows before the
> > >"flood" (for which there is no evidence whatsoever) is a line of text
> > >in the bible. For there *not* to have been rainbows at any time in the
> > >past would require a fundamental revision of most of physics.
> >
> > [...snip...]
> >
> > I am not aware of a text in the Bible which says that there were no
> > rainbows before the Flood. The Bible does say:
> >
> > 1) God put a rainbow in the sky after the Flood, but it does not
> > explicity say that this was the first rainbow ever.
> >
> > 2) In the description of Eden, it says that there was no rain, so
> > there would be no rainbows. Although that does not exclude the
> > colored arcs forming in waterfalls or other rainbow-like phenomena.
> >
> > BTW, it is an optical illusion that there are rainbows in the heavens.
> >
> > --
> > ---Tom S.
> > Surely, God could have caused birds to fly with their bones made of solid
> > gold,
> > with their veins full of quicksilver, with their flesh heavier than lead
> > The Crime of Galileo (1976) by Giorgio De Santillana, p. 167
>
> So, I suppose Leprechauns are mythical too, and the pots of gold
> simply a lie ?
Sadly these days the pots are filled with credit default swaps.
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Walter Bushell
Mark Isaak <eci...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:52:26 -0700, JacobSmith wrote:
>
> > ID & Creationist Biology, History, Philosophy, Political Science,
> > Religion, Science, Social/Sociology Classes ------------------
> > Many people are in doubt concerning the age of this earth, due to
> > incorrect assumptions from carbon dating and geologic formations.
> > Carbon dating is theoretically correct only if the atmospheric
> > bombardment by radioactive decay has been constant over the ages and
> > if, and only if, radioactivity of the elements is a constant over time.
> > However, according to Holy Scripture, prior to Eve and Adam partaking
> > of the forbidden fruit, (which brought the seeds of mortal death into
> > their bodies in the Garden of Eden), there was no death; thus, no
> > radioactive decay.
>
> Why can't *I* change the laws of physics by eating an apple?
Because you are not me.
JacobSmith
> > sayest, Return, ye children of men. For a thousand
> > years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past,
> > and as a watch in the night. Here we have the man
> > Moses making the Day of God = 1000 years.
>
> I know I'm somewhat playing right into your hands just by responding
> to this, but whatever. The gospel is absolutely impossible to take
> literally at every word. If we agree on this, we can move on. If you
> disagree, then I label you as an insanely irrational person and this
> conversation is over. Now, assuming you're not five and believe
> everything you read or hear, this "thousand year" thing is an example,
> if that's not obvious enough in the context of that quoted passage.
> The dude is God after all, right? A day could be a million years to
> him or a split second. So don't even bother with using Moses' saying
> 1000 years as an actual measurement for the passage of time. Also,
> Moses' mentioning of man's age is not an absolute either, just an
> average (if we assume it to be correct).
>
> As a disclaimer to all that anyway, you cannot counter science with
> scripture. Scripture was written from between a hell of a long time
> ago up to about 200 years after Jesus died. Modern science has only
> been around since about the time of Galileo, which were its very early
> beginnings. There is a huge time gap in between. There is no science
> in the bible and while anyone holding a scientific background on here
> already knows this I feel obligated to point it out for the, er, less
> scientific of us.
-------------------------------------------
REPLY:
Galileo is the beginning of "modern" science,
or Galileo di Vincenzo Bonaiuti de' Galilei? "His
multiple interests included the study of astrology,
which at the time was a discipline tied to the studies
of mathematics and astronomy." I have already noted
"Indeed, Hadrian (Sciptores Historiae Augustae,
Quadrigae Tyrannorum 8.3) remarks that there is
no chief of a synagogue who is not an astrologer
(mathematicus), soothsayer (haruspex), or anointer
(aliptes). Moreover, in the middle of the second century,
Vettius Valens, in his astrological work, Anthologiae
(2.28,29), refers to Abraham as a most wonderful
astrological authority. " Please note the word
association: astrologer (mathematicus).
"Galileo made original contributions to the science
of motion through an innovative combination of
experiment and mathematics. . . . Galileo's father,
Vincenzo Galilei, a lutenist and music theorist, had
performed experiments establishing perhaps the
oldest known non-linear relation in physics: for a
stretched string, the pitch varies as the square root
of the tension. These observations lay within the
framework of the Pythagorean tradition of music,
well-known to instrument makers, which included
the fact that subdividing a string by a whole number
produces a harmonious scale. Thus, a limited amount
of mathematics had long related music and physical
science, and young Galileo could see his own father's
observations expand on that tradition." "According to
Johannes Kepler, the connection between geometry
(and sacred geometry), cosmology, astrology, harmonics,
and music is through musica universalis "
"The Battle of Jericho is described in the Bible
(Joshua 6:1-27) as the first battle of the Israelites
during their conquest of Canaan. According to the
narrative, the walls of Jericho fell after Joshua's
Israelite army marched around the city blowing
their trumpets." "John Garstang (May 5, 1876 –
September 12, 1956, Beirut) was a British
archaeologist of the ancient Near East, especially
Anatolia and the southern Levant." "Garstang
discovered the remains of a network of collapsed
walls which he dated to about 1400 BC, the time
he believed the Israelites were on their conquest,
that had apparently fallen in a dramatic fashion
as opposed to being ruined by abandonment
or decay from natural forces. "
[Galileo considered his theory of the tides to provide
the required physical proof of the motion of the earth.]
[As a general account of the cause of tides, however,
his theory was a failure. If this theory were correct,
there would be only one high tide per day.]
[Albert Einstein expressed the opinion that Galileo
developed his "fascinating arguments" and accepted
them uncritically out of a desire for physical proof of
the motion of the Earth. Galileo dismissed as a
"useless fiction" the idea, held by his contemporary
Johannes Kepler, that the moon caused the tides.]
"Galileo defended heliocentrism", which "is the
astronomical model in which the Earth and planets
revolve around a stationary Sun at the center of the
universe." There is no such thing as a stationary Sun.
"The Sun is the star at the center of the Solar System,"
"and its mass accounts for about 99.86% of the total
mass of the Solar System." So I am to believe finite
man that knows exceedingly little, dwelling on earth
within .14% of the total mass, telling me they know
what the whole Universe is about, even though admitting
ithey can't even measure it for want of instrumentation?
There are many on this list that follow in the footsteps
of Galileo, having "fascinating arguments" that are then
accepted uncritically, by others on this list, out of a
desire for "scientific" proof of the denial of a ruling God.
Reality has it that physics is only as good as its
measuring capacity, and the Bible is only as good
as the surviving correct forms of the Word of God
contained therein, recorded as coming from a god
of truth; words that are actual, absolute and measurable.
The last time I remember, the living form of the Word
of God was rejected, beaten almost to death, and
then crucified between two thieves for telling the truth.
We are lucky today to have what is left is His written word,
from the time of Adam and through all intelligent sources.
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>"The Battle of Jericho
never happened. there's no evidence joshua existed, or that he
attacked jericho. ever.
JacobSmith
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 19:20:11 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>
>
> >"The Battle of Jericho
>
> never happened. there's no evidence joshua existed, or that he
> attacked jericho. ever.
-----------------------------------------------
REPLY:
[Canaanite Hazor is mentioned on several occasions
in external records: it is first mentioned in the 19th
century BCE in the Egyptian Execration texts. Hazor
is the only Canaanite site mentioned in the archive
discovered in Mari (18th century BCE). The Mari
documents clearly demonstrate the importance,
wealth and far-reaching commercial ties of Hazor.
In the archive discovered at El-Amarna, Egypt,
(14th century BCE) there are several references
to Hazor, as well as in records of the military
campaigns conducted by the Egyptian Pharaohs,
during the 15th - 14th centuries BCE
According to the Biblical narrative, Jabin, the King
of Hazor, headed a coalition of Canaanite cities
against the advancing Israelites, led by Joshua.
The Israelites won the battle and Joshua burned
and ravaged the city (Jos. 11:1 - 12).
"And Joshua turned back at that time, and took
Hazor, and smote its king with the sword: for Hazor
formerly was the head of all those kingdoms. Everyone
in it they put to the sword. They totally destroyed them,
not sparing anything that breathed, and he burned up
Hazor itself .. Israel did not burn any of the cities built
on their mounds - except Hazor." (Jos 11:10-12)
Evidence of this violent destruction by burning was
discovered in various areas of excavation of the site.
Another Israelite battle, this time against a Canaanite
army led by Sisera, Jabin's general, is described in
the Book of Judges, Chapter 4.]
http://hazor.huji.ac.il/
More importantly, in Joshua, Chapter 1, we find
the command given unto Joshua the son of Nun:
" 8 This book of the law shall not depart out of thy
mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night,
that thou mayest observe to do according to all that
is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way
prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success. "
Since the book of the law survived, so too survived the
recorded life of Joshua the son of Nun who possessed
the book and used it in his daily activities, in leading Israel.
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Jun 3, 7:51 pm, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 19:20:11 -0700 (PDT), JacobSmith
>>
>> <tinst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"The Battle of Jericho
>>
>> never happened. there's no evidence joshua existed, or that he
>> attacked jericho. ever.
>
>-----------------------------------------------
>REPLY:
>
>[Canaanite Hazor is mentioned on several occasions
no mention of israelites slaves. no mention of an exodus. no mention
of a huge number of people leaving egypt. no mention of the drowning
of an egyptian army
etc etc.
none. something like 600,000 men are supposed to have left egypt with
their families
no record of one of the greatest mass migrations in world history.
it never happened
>
>
>Evidence of this violent destruction by burning was
>discovered in various areas of excavation of the site.
>Another Israelite battle, this time against a Canaanite
>army led by Sisera, Jabin's general, is described in
>the Book of Judges, Chapter 4.]
>http://hazor.huji.ac.il/
wow. a city was destroyed by burning. bet that never happened in
history.
kadesh barnea? a city supposed to have been occupied by joshua?
it was abandoned several centuries before he ever arrived, at the time
of the biblical narratives
the exodus never happened.
joshua never attacked jericho.
etc etc
JacobSmith
BTW, it is an optical illusion that there are rainbows in the heavens.
---------------------------------------------------
REPLY:
[A rainbow is an optical and meteorological
phenomenon that causes a spectrum of light
to appear in the sky when the Sun shines onto
droplets of moisture in the Earth's atmosphere.]
This a sign of intelligent design, that everyone in
the world can see and determine for themselves.
[A rainbow does not actually exist at a particular
location in the sky. Its apparent position depends
on the observer's location and the position of
the sun.] Compare this with man made holography.
Dennis Gabor was a Nobel Prize for Physics winner.
http://www.nobel-winners.com/Physics/dennis_gabor.html
[a technique that allows the light scattered from
an object to be recorded and later reconstructed
so that it appears as if the object is in the same
position relative to the recording medium as it was
when recorded. The image changes as the position
and orientation of the viewing system changes in
exactly the same way as if the object were still
present, thus making the recorded image
(hologram) appear three dimensional.]
[The technique of holography can also be used
to optically store, retrieve, and process information.]
[Holography can be put to a variety of uses other
than recording images. Holographic data storage
is a technique that can store information at high
density inside crystals or photopolymers. The ability
to store large amounts of information in some kind
of media is of great importance, as many electronic
products incorporate storage devices.]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography
Compare holographic data storage is a technique
that can store information at high density inside
crystals or photopolymers, with: Additionally, the
Bible is scientific in modern terms, forecasting
future events. He that hath an ear, let him hear
what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him
that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden
manna, and will give him a white stone, and in
the stone a new name written, which no man
knoweth saving he that receiveth it. . . . And
before the throne there was a sea of glass like
unto crystal: . . . This is the equivalent, in modern
terminology, of receiving a Computer Lap Top,
for individual intelligence retrieval, with password
protection; living within an environment of a sea
of glass like unto crystal, in which the earth is
sanctified into a massive data bank depository.
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/science.htm#THEOLOGY_and_SCIENCE:_THE_BIBLE_IS_SCIENTIFIC
[The ability to store large amounts of information
in some kind of media is of great importance, as
many electronic products incorporate storage
devices. As current storage techniques such
as Blu-ray Disc reach the limit of possible data
density (due to the diffraction-limited size of the
writing beams), holographic storage has the
potential to become the next generation of popular
storage media.The advantage of this type of data
storage is that the volume of the recording media
is used instead of just the surface.]
Holographic data storage records "information
throughout the volume of the medium and is
capable of recording multiple images in the
same area utilizing light at different angles.
Additionally, whereas magnetic and optical data
storage records information a bit at a time in a
linear fashion, holographic storage is capable
of recording and reading millions of bits in parallel,
enabling data transfer rates greater than those
attained by optical storage." "The theoretical
limits for the storage density of this technique
is approximately several tens of Terabytes
(1 terabyte = 1024 gigabytes) per cubic centimeter."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_memory
The suggestion is given in the Bible, of what future
technology will bring to this earth in a more glorified
(holographic memory system) state of existence.
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/worldancestry.htm
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On May 31, 4:41 am, TomS <TomS_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>BTW, it is an optical illusion that there are rainbows in the heavens.
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>REPLY:
>[A rainbow is an optical and meteorological
>phenomenon that causes a spectrum of light
>to appear in the sky when the Sun shines onto
>droplets of moisture in the Earth's atmosphere.]
>This a sign of intelligent design, that everyone in
>the world can see and determine for themselves.
yeah. creationists, parasites that they are, know this because of
science
creationism had no role whatsoever in discovering the laws of optics.
>
>The suggestion is given in the Bible, of what future
>technology will bring to this earth in a more glorified
>(holographic memory system) state of existence.
>http://www.academic-genealogy.com/worldancestry.htm
the bible doesn't know shit about shit. it's useless. it's amazing how
creationists are always discovering stuff in the bible...after it's
been discovered somewhere else.
JacobSmith
REPLY:
Science says that [Without the Sun,
the resulting average temperature on Earth
would be slightly above the temperature of
outer space (-270.15 �C; -454.27 �F).] So,
as mentioned heretofore in the discussion,
"Prior to this series of events, the earth was without
form and void; and darkness was upon the face of
the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters. This clearly suggests that the
earth was formed out of a portion of the Universe,
of unorganized gaseous matter and fluid element,
which was permeated by light from God, condensed
into a liquid gravitation field, and further defined with
more rigid land mass, which was then set into
rotational spin."
(1) Temperature (-270.15 �C; -454.27 �F)
(2) Plasmas are by far the most common phase
of matter in the universe, both by mass and by
volume. All the stars are made of plasma,
and even the space between the stars is filled
with a plasma, albeit a very sparse one. Plasma
has properties quite unlike those of solids, liquids,
or gases and is considered to be a distinct state
of matter. Like gas, plasma does not have a definite
shape or a definite volume unless enclosed in a
container; unlike gas, in the influence of a magnetic
field, it may form structures . . .
(3) Gamma-ray bright type explosion, proportionally
related to the rest-mass energy of the Sun, from
the mouth of God, having a glorified holographic
memory system, implanting a localized field force
around which mas particles subsequently formed.
[No known process in the Universe can produce
this much energy in such a short time, by highly
focused words, collimated light that would not
disperse with distance, into a narrow jet traveling
at speeds exceeding 99.995% of the speed of light.]
(4) Zeldovich pancake type earth formation from primordial
density fluctuation of random Gaussian fields (resulting
in "dense pancakes, filaments, and compact clumps
of matter").
(5) Continuing shock wave word of God disturbances,
that propagate through the earth medium, including
extremely rapid rises in pressure, temperature and
density (rock formations), writing (burning light rays)
from primary holographic memory system, to newly
formed, radiation free secondary memory disk (Earth).
(6) Adam becomes mortal, by his own free choice, after
his wife is deceived and partakes of death producing
elements, beginning radioactive element decay on
earth; agriculture production and physical procreation.
Ancient rocks exceeding 3.5 billion years in age on
all of Earth's continents, is theoretically possible, but
not correct in actuality, which is circa 6,000 years. It
is the same mass of confusion, when considering the
age of stars in relation to the theory age of the Universe.
"Small stars (called red dwarfs) consume their fuel very
slowly and last tens to hundreds of billions of years. At
the end of their lives, they simply become dimmer and
dimmer. However, since the lifespan of such stars is
greater than the current age of the universe (13.7 billion
years), no red dwarfs are expected to have yet reached
this state." Theories in conflict and adjusted for "fit".
[The lower the mass of a red dwarf, the longer the lifespan.
It is believed that the lifespan of these stars exceeds the
expected 10 billion year lifespan of the sun by the third
or fourth power of the ratio of their masses to the solar
mass; thus a red dwarf with 0.1 solar mass may continue
burning for 10 trillion years.]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_dwarf
(6) ETC. . . .
bpuharic
<tins...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>REPLY:
>Science says that [Without the Sun,
>the resulting average temperature on Earth
>would be slightly above the temperature of
>outer space (-270.15 �C; -454.27 �F).] So,
>as mentioned heretofore in the discussion,
>"Prior to this series of events, the earth was without
>form and void;
which has nothing to do with science. vomiting your religious beliefs
here on TO doesn't make them science
>
>(1) Temperature (-270.15 �C; -454.27 �F)
>
>(2) Plasmas are by far the most common phase
> of matter in the universe, both by mass and by
> volume. All the stars are made of plasma,
creationists didn't know what stars OR plasma was.
>(3) Gamma-ray bright type explosion,
creationism didnt know what gamma rays were
proportionally
> related to the rest-mass energy of the Sun, from
> the mouth of God, having a glorified holographic
> memory system, implanting a localized field force
> around which mas particles subsequently formed.
> [No known process in the Universe can produce
> this much energy in such a short time, by highly
> focused words, collimated light that would not
> disperse with distance, into a narrow jet traveling
> at speeds exceeding 99.995% of the speed of light.]
creationism didn't know what the speed of light was, or even what
light was.
creationism didnt know there WAS a universe
>
>(4) Zeldovich pancake type earth formation from primordial
> density fluctuation of random Gaussian fields (resulting
> in "dense pancakes, filaments, and compact clumps
> of matter").
meaningless
all you've proven is that creationism is useless
thanks. we already knew that