Something I pondered...

Originally posted by project86


Good question, but what I was trying to get at by posting the Dead Sea Scroll site was that the deeper people look into ancient artifacts, the more they prove that the stories in the Bible are true. Hence the names on the scrolls are that of the names in the Bible...see the correlation. In short, if they as men existed, and the stories about them were true, then maybe the stories about creation are true as well.

in other words, because the bible can be trusted in ALL areas that can be tested, there\'s no reason to doubt it in arears that cannot be tested.

the final method of dating that i will talk about is relative dating, which will be the easiest to explain.  relative dating looks at where artifacts are placed, and what surrounds them.  example 3 feet under the ground is a beer bottle burried, 30 feet down is an Aztec neckless, then 60 feet down is the femur bone of a t-rex, logic says that the beer bottle was the last item to be placed there, and the t-rex was the first.  and to my knowledge we have yet to find a human artifact, or fosil beneath that of a dino.

as for evolution vs. creationism, i have info on that also, but am too lazy to argue about.

Also, if humans evolved from monkeys etc, then why arent animals these days still evolving? There is NO chemical proof to suggest that an animal can morph or evolve over time into something else. - Racer

Actually, as far as I know, plants, animals, etc. are still evolving today, but the evolution process takes quite a long time, and doens\'t happen overnight. Examples would be like human mutations and such.

See Yuz.

ok i got this thing going through my head really quick

god created man in hope of making us his perfect children - but yet we arent perfect - if he is so almighty then why did he screw up when he was creating us and if he didnt make us perfect then why does he punish us if we arent trying to be perfect and believe in him

i swear religion is like a dictatorship - its a do what i say only what i say and follow my words or else you will be sent to hell - wow sounds like a lot of great choices- let me think what im gonna choose :rolleye:

my thing is if we were created here on earth by god and all and to survive we have to kill things and eat them - ummm that doesnt sound very fair to the cow which cant even sin but yet we slaughter it and kill it and its ok with god - wow a little hyprocritical to me - kill cow not people

dont get me wrong i love my steaks - just saying religion is way too hyprocritical at times and i love how their bible isa big theory and stuff and how everything science is a big theory but at least they have reasoning behind their theories - religion just has words


note this rant was not to anyone directly - just me sharing stuff off the top of me head

Originally posted by ROL Jamas


Actually, as far as I know, plants, animals, etc. are still evolving today, but the evolution process takes quite a long time, and doens\'t happen overnight. Examples would be like human mutations and such.

See Yuz.

you are correct, a great example would be the coccyx, how we as humans are slowly growing out of it, some people have one some don\'t.

oh yeah forgot to mention dendrochronology, as a dating method...

being nice is not a key to heaven, neither is stomping someone.

What about devoting the majority of your life to the happiness of others?  Surely, since I have a girlfriend and will so also have a family, and a house and food to care for and feed them, and devoting your life to their happiness, that there will be great rewards wherever I end up for my acts.  

(This paragraph is not specifically directed at anyone on this board)
The funny thing is, there has been more murder and killing in the name of God then there has been for any other cause.  Then I see people post crap like like MM quoted from that christian message board.  My brother is terminally ill and I love him and care for him moreso then I would any Christian on this Earth, and why?  Because unlike those die hard Christians who think that any cripple or retard should be locked away and kept under guard, my brother actually has a soul.

Originally posted by Sublimesjg
ok i got this thing going through my head really quick

god created man in hope of making us his perfect children - but yet we arent perfect - if he is so almighty then why did he screw up when he was creating us and if he didnt make us perfect then why does he punish us if we arent trying to be perfect and believe in him

i swear religion is like a dictatorship - its a do what i say only what i say and follow my words or else you will be sent to hell - wow sounds like a lot of great choices- let me think what im gonna choose :rolleye:

my thing is if we were created here on earth by god and all and to survive we have to kill things and eat them - ummm that doesnt sound very fair to the cow which cant even sin but yet we slaughter it and kill it and its ok with god - wow a little hyprocritical to me - kill cow not people

dont get me wrong i love my steaks - just saying religion is way too hyprocritical at times and i love how their bible isa big theory and stuff and how everything science is a big theory but at least they have reasoning behind their theories - religion just has words


note this rant was not to anyone directly - just me sharing stuff off the top of me head

nice post, good job of thinking for yourself, instead of just regurgitating other peoples thoughts.  i have some friends that just can\'t think for themselves to save their lives, and it\'s refreshing to see a post that strays away from conformity.

[Evi]

What the he**...? You don\'t have to go to Church to be religious...that\'s a bunch of BS...okay?

It doesn\'t say in the bible...go to church or go to hell. You have this thing called freedom...Church is just optional. Never mind...I\'m talking my head off...

i remember this article that interpeted the bible to say in so many words, that u r supposed to worship in your home, and it was some what blasphamous to pray at a house of worship, ie a church.  does any1 know what i\'m talking about?

Originally posted by EviscerationX
What the he**...? You don\'t have to go to Church to be religious...that\'s a bunch of BS...okay?

It doesn\'t say in the bible...go to church or go to hell. You have this thing called freedom...Church is just optional. Never mind...I\'m talking my head off...

Thats what I said dude, but church just strengthens the faith.

Originally posted by theomen


The oldest rocks which have been found so far (on the Earth) date to about 3.8 to 3.9 billion years ago (by several radiometric dating methods). Some of these rocks are sedimentary, and include minerals which are themselves as old as 4.1 to 4.2 billion years. Rocks of this age are relatively rare, however rocks that are at least 3.5 billion years in age have been found on North America, Greenland, Australia, Africa, and Asia.

While these values do not compute an age for the Earth, they do establish a lower limit (the Earth must be at least as old as any formation on it). This lower limit is at least concordant with the independently derived figure of 4.55 billion years for the Earth\'s actual age.

if you have a cup of sand, and you leave it outdoors in the wind and rain for as long as you like. it will never sorted into different layers within your lifetime in these \'normal conditions\'

if you have another cup of sand, but this time, you put it into another big glass of water, and you shake it around a bit. and when the particles settly down and sink to the bottom, they\'d be sorted out in layers. and if you leave glass alone outdoors for a few weeks, the water would have evaporated, and and sand at the bottom would be dry.

now imagine that the cup of sand is the size of the earth, and applying the first scenario, then the dating methods will say the earth is billions of years old. (which presents a lot of other problems of which some of the others have already stated)

in the second scenario, if the whole earth is covered with water (which is scientifically possible if all the ice caps melts), then the  dating methods cannot be applied because the assumptions that led to the method is wrong.

there are a lot more other established dating methods, but NONE of them take into account the possibility of world wide castrophies such as a Noah\'s flood. so until they can proved that such a flood never happened (which they cannot), then they cannot use the results from their dating methods as facts.

Originally posted by theomen
as i said carbon doesn\'t work for things over 50,000 years old there are ways to date items that are older than 50.000 years.
it involves measurement of three isotopes of lead (Pb-206, Pb-207, and either Pb-208 or Pb-204). A plot is constructed of Pb-206/Pb-204 versus Pb-207/Pb-204.

If the solar system formed from a common pool of matter, which was uniformly distributed in terms of Pb isotope ratios, then the initial plots for all objects from that pool of matter would fall on a single point.

Over time, the amounts of Pb-206 and Pb-207 will change in some samples, as these isotopes are decay end-products of uranium decay (U-238 decays to Pb-206, and U-235 decays to Pb-207). This causes the data points to separate from each other. The higher the uranium-to-lead ratio of a rock, the more the Pb-206/Pb-204 and Pb-207/Pb-204 values will change with time.

Q) what if the solar system is NOT formed from a common pool of matter? so that the isotope ratios are NOT uniformly distributed? so that the initial plots does NOT fall on the same point.

A) the isotope ratio dating method goes down the toilet.

Originally posted by Alkimo



if you have a cup of sand, and you leave it outdoors in the wind and rain for as long as you like. it will never sorted into different layers within your lifetime in these \'normal conditions\'

if you have another cup of sand, but this time, you put it into another big glass of water, and you shake it around a bit. and when the particles settly down and sink to the bottom, they\'d be sorted out in layers. and if you leave glass alone outdoors for a few weeks, the water would have evaporated, and and sand at the bottom would be dry.

now imagine that the cup of sand is the size of the earth, and applying the first scenario, then the dating methods will say the earth is billions of years old. (which presents a lot of other problems of which some of the others have already stated)

in the second scenario, if the whole earth is covered with water (which is scientifically possible if all the ice caps melts), then the  dating methods cannot be applied because the assumptions that led to the method is wrong.

there are a lot more other established dating methods, but NONE of them take into account the possibility of world wide castrophies such as a Noah\'s flood. so until they can proved that such a flood never happened (which they cannot), then they cannot use the results from their dating methods as facts.

ok here are the big guns, we also have Potasium-Argon dating which is similar to carbon 14, it is used to date volcanic materials, it was used in pompei, it can date between 50,000, and 2 billion years.  there is also fission track, which uses tiny little microsopic damage tracks in glass and other materials that have low uranium, these tracks expand at a fixed rate, and are acurate for up to 2billion years.

now for your reasoning, that you won\'t believe in something until they prove the flood never happend.  what if i said i wouldn\'t believe something until they prove that a martian came down and populated the earth, with a martian prison colony, like how the brittish did with australia.  this theory has as much merit as yours, and is just as difficult to prove wrong.

Originally posted by theomen


nice post, good job of thinking for yourself, instead of just regurgitating other peoples thoughts.  i have some friends that just can\'t think for themselves to save their lives, and it\'s refreshing to see a post that strays away from conformity.

thanks i try this isnt the first time i have questioned religion but mostly i question the way it is taught and the way it seems people corrupt it in the past to their own likings



and about the earth being covered by water - could the sand be taken from way under the ground under the ocean and deep into the earth where they can grind away from rock and test it - also if samples were taken from many places and tested to bring up the same results then doesnt that mean anything - sure if there was a flood such as the one noah talked about in the bible then how can you explain where all that water went if it completely covered the earth - i mean whats it gonna do evaporate and just rain back down onto the water covered earth - doesnt add up to me

sorry if i come off as stupid here but i debating with logic and not the know how of geology and the way dating works

Originally posted by theomen
the final method of dating that i will talk about is relative dating, which will be the easiest to explain.  relative dating looks at where artifacts are placed, and what surrounds them.  example 3 feet under the ground is a beer bottle burried, 30 feet down is an Aztec neckless, then 60 feet down is the femur bone of a t-rex, logic says that the beer bottle was the last item to be placed there, and the t-rex was the first.  and to my knowledge we have yet to find a human artifact, or fosil beneath that of a dino.

as for evolution vs. creationism, i have info on that also, but am too lazy to argue about.

that because heavier things would sink to the bottom faster, so in the flood, it would be logical that the dino\'s corpse is beheath the human corpse/artifact.