Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8871 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-21-2018 9:15 AM
333 online now:
creation, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), RAZD, Stile (6 members, 327 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: paradigm of types
Post Volume:
Total: 840,480 Year: 15,303/29,783 Month: 1,247/1,502 Week: 4/241 Day: 4/36 Hour: 3/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
535455
56
5758Next
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
Faith
Member
Posts: 29837
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 826 of 867 (841125)
10-08-2018 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 825 by Tanypteryx
10-08-2018 11:42 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
There was no tower of Babel. It's a myth. It is fictional.

There were people writing in China, India, Mesopotamia, and Egypt before the time when the story of the biblical flood is supposed to have happened. They kept on writing right through the biblical flood and never bothered to mention it.

I think they all have Flood stories though, don't they? The real problem is just that the dating is wrong: they did all their writing after the Flood.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 825 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-08-2018 11:42 AM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 827 by JonF, posted 10-08-2018 12:45 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 828 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-08-2018 1:02 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 840 by ramoss, posted 10-09-2018 9:36 AM Faith has responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 4213
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 827 of 867 (841138)
10-08-2018 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 826 by Faith
10-08-2018 11:50 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
The Egyptians didn't have a flood-everything story.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 826 by Faith, posted 10-08-2018 11:50 AM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 847 by creation, posted 10-11-2018 9:15 AM JonF has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1726
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 828 of 867 (841140)
10-08-2018 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 826 by Faith
10-08-2018 11:50 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
I think they all have Flood stories though, don't they?

Do they? Can you show them to us?

The real problem is just that the dating is wrong: they did all their writing after the Flood.

The actual evidence shows there was never a global flood anytime when humans existed.

The whole purpose of this thread is presenting evidence for dating methods. What dating methods do you use?


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 826 by Faith, posted 10-08-2018 11:50 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19572
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 829 of 867 (841142)
10-08-2018 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 823 by creation
10-08-2018 9:54 AM


Re: And now some questions on sanity
My guess as to when the flood was is based on many facets of science and the bible and history.

In other words it is made up and could not be reproduced by anyone else (a key element of actual science processes).

Measuring a year in the far past on earth by this current nature is nothing more than a statement of faith.

Except that it is independently reproducible by others and that it cross-references with other systems.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 823 by creation, posted 10-08-2018 9:54 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 832 by creation, posted 10-09-2018 12:14 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19572
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 830 of 867 (841148)
10-08-2018 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 824 by creation
10-08-2018 9:55 AM


Re: Small clarification for you and Percy
Missing rings do occur in trees grown in this nature. To assume it was also true in the past nature is nothing more than blind faith in a same state past.

Sadly -- for you -- it can be documented by comparing two independent dendrochronologies. This was done with the Bristlecone pines, and two missing rings were documented.

From http://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control=msg&m=814151#m814151

Accuracy of tree ring dating of Bristlecone Pine for calibration of the radiocarbon time scale(3)

quote:
... The final chronology contains 5403 annual values ...
... Year-by-year comparison indicates that the rings dated at 5859M and 5330M are absent from the Campito chronology. Insertion of a nominal value of '0' for the ring width index for each of these years (Figure 6) brings the chronologies into exact synchrony.

A long tree ring chronology for bristlecone pine has been developed independently of previous work. Several lines of evidence show that the growth rings are true annual rings. Evaluation of several potential sources of error in tree ring dates indicates that any uncertainty in calendar dates assigned to annual rings in this series is due to annual rings that may be absent from all samples for a particular year or years. Internal evidence and intrachronology comparison suggest that there are only two such occurrences in the 5403-year Campito record developed in this work. Annual rings for these years are represented in the Methuselah chronology, which has served as the standard for most radiocarbon calibration studies. ...


The time scale used here is the same "extended scale," where 8000 equals 1 BCE, so 8001-5859 = 2142 BCE and 8001 - 5330 = 2671 BCE. The "M" designates the Master chronology above.

Again this thread is about correlations ... and if you actually read it you would have a better idea of the kinds and depth of the evidence that puts your claims to shame.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 824 by creation, posted 10-08-2018 9:55 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 831 by creation, posted 10-09-2018 12:13 AM RAZD has responded
 Message 848 by creation, posted 10-11-2018 9:18 AM RAZD has responded

  
creation
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 831 of 867 (841181)
10-09-2018 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 830 by RAZD
10-08-2018 1:41 PM


Re: Small clarification for you and Percy
All correlations rest on the same baseless belief.

Missing rings cannot be documented past 4500 years. You seek to invoke a belief that because today there are missing rings, that this has to apply to an unknown nature also in the past.

Religion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 830 by RAZD, posted 10-08-2018 1:41 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 839 by RAZD, posted 10-09-2018 8:40 AM creation has not yet responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 832 of 867 (841182)
10-09-2018 12:14 AM
Reply to: Message 829 by RAZD
10-08-2018 1:05 PM


Re: And now some questions on sanity
No year 5000 years ago is independently producible.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 829 by RAZD, posted 10-08-2018 1:05 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

    
creation
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 833 of 867 (841183)
10-09-2018 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 820 by RAZD
10-07-2018 2:22 AM


Re: Small clarification for you and Percy
Today there are missing rings because of rot. Not in the former nature times though. You just believe there must have been for no reason.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 820 by RAZD, posted 10-07-2018 2:22 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

    
creation
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 834 of 867 (841184)
10-09-2018 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 810 by dwise1
10-05-2018 1:15 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
Looking at the times given in Gen for Noah in the flood, and looking at Revelation we do see a 360 day year actually.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 810 by dwise1, posted 10-05-2018 1:15 PM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 867 by dwise1, posted 10-19-2018 1:08 PM creation has not yet responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 835 of 867 (841185)
10-09-2018 12:20 AM
Reply to: Message 798 by Tangle
10-04-2018 3:54 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
Your dates for civilizations are all based on the same belief. You thought belief was science?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 798 by Tangle, posted 10-04-2018 3:54 AM Tangle has not yet responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 836 of 867 (841186)
10-09-2018 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 799 by ringo
10-04-2018 12:11 PM


Re: And now some questions on past times
Yes we see a lot of things in this nature. You see squat in the former nature, but simply believe it was the same.

Religion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 799 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 12:11 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 841 by ringo, posted 10-09-2018 11:55 AM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 837 of 867 (841187)
10-09-2018 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 805 by Tangle
10-05-2018 2:49 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
No. It would mean that something changed that affected how long a day was. Could a changed distance from earth to sun do it?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 805 by Tangle, posted 10-05-2018 2:49 AM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 838 by dwise1, posted 10-09-2018 1:52 AM creation has not yet responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3179
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.7


(1)
Message 838 of 867 (841193)
10-09-2018 1:52 AM
Reply to: Message 837 by creation
10-09-2018 12:24 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
No. It would mean that something changed that affected how long a day was. Could a changed distance from earth to sun do it?

Oh, do you have any evidence of that?

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Please do present your evidence.

Oh!!! No evidence? Gee!!!! Why are we not surprised in the least? What a bunch of fucking morons you all are!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 837 by creation, posted 10-09-2018 12:24 AM creation has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19572
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 839 of 867 (841204)
10-09-2018 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 831 by creation
10-09-2018 12:13 AM


Re: Small clarification for you and Percy
All correlations rest on the same baseless belief.

Repeating a previously addressed assertion based on your belief alone, is not a refutation of the evidence presented, or the argument against it, rather it is just stubborn denial by someone who cannot accept facts.

Missing rings cannot be documented past 4500 years. ...

But that would obviously be your magical belief years and not the real actual scientific years:

creation writes:

Message 816 You see, I place the flood at 70,000,000 years ago or so, in science years. In actual real years it was 4500.

You just have it backwards. Let me correct that for you:

creation: You see, I place the flood at 70,000,000 real actual years ago or so, in science years. In actual real belief years it was 4500.

There, much better, yes?

... You seek to invoke a belief that because today there are missing rings, that this has to apply to an unknown nature also in the past.

Talk about invoking a belief ... this is just more of the fantasy that you (and you alone) have created to avoid the cognitive dissonance caused by the real actual evidence of reality.

Again, with no evidence of this fantasy concoction having any basis in reality, it can safely be ignored by science.

Enjoy

Message 832: No year 5000 years ago is independently producible.

As this would be your belief years and not real actual scientific years, it too is a meaningless statement

Message 833: Today there are missing rings because of rot. Not in the former nature times though. You just believe there must have been for no reason.

And again, as this is based solely on your personal delusion, it is another meaningless assertion.

Enjoy

Message 834 to dwise1: Looking at the times given in Gen for Noah in the flood, and looking at Revelation we do see a 360 day year actually.

Based on 12 lunar months of 30 days each. A calendar that needed frequent correction to match the solar year.

quote:
The Hebrew or Jewish calendar (הַלּוּחַ הָעִבְרִי‬, Ha-Luah ha-Ivri) is a lunisolar calendar used today predominantly for Jewish religious observances. ...

The present Hebrew calendar is the product of evolution, including a Babylonian influence. Until the Tannaitic period (approximately 10220 CE), the calendar employed a new crescent moon, with an additional month normally added every two or three years to correct for the difference between twelve lunar months and the solar year. The year in which it was added was based on observation of natural agriculture-related events in Israel.[1] Through the Amoraic period (200500 CE) and into the Geonic period, this system was gradually displaced by the mathematical rules used today. The principles and rules were fully codified by Maimonides in the Mishneh Torah in the 12th century. Maimonides' work also replaced counting "years since the destruction of the Temple" with the modern creation-era Anno Mundi.


So again you make a meaningless assertion that doesn't match reality.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : adding responses to other posts


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 831 by creation, posted 10-09-2018 12:13 AM creation has not yet responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3086
Joined: 08-11-2004


(2)
Message 840 of 867 (841208)
10-09-2018 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 826 by Faith
10-08-2018 11:50 AM


Re: And now some questions on past times
Not only are the dating of the writings are different, the evidence for the various flood that they relate are of different time frames. In other words, there were different floods, for which there are pieces of actual physical evidence for.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 826 by Faith, posted 10-08-2018 11:50 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 842 by Faith, posted 10-09-2018 12:13 PM ramoss has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
535455
56
5758Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018