|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence for an Old Earth | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
I want evidence for an old Earth. Open to Creationists and Evolutionists alike. Evidence, no information that has been proved wrong, or refuted. I just want to see if any of it is logical. Get technical if you want.
------------------The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
How would you date these half lives? Most Dating methods of today are unreliable, this "evidence" isn't really reliable at all... I want proof.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
[Hi Proph!
Please do not cut-n-paste long excerpts into messages. The discussion is intended to be between members rather than between exceprts from websites. Please instead compose the argument in your own words and provide the link as a reference. I have edited your message to eliminate the lengthy cut-n-pastes and replaced them with links. This is the only time I will be doing this as it is time consuming. The next time I will simply delete the message if it hasn't drawn any responses by the time I detect it, or suspend your posting privileges if it has. If your posting privileges should become suspended, you may get them restored by sending email to Admin containing assurances that you will follow the requests of administrators and follow the forum guidelines in the future. Thanks! --PercyEvC Forum Administrator] "...half-lives of hundreds of millions of years or more, and are used for radiometric dating." "So even though you don't even know how the half-lives of radiometric elements are measured, you nonetheless know that dating methods based upon these half-lives are unreliable? Hmmm." I was confused because of how he said it... I am not familiar with half life dating... I have heard of it. I was pointing out that radiometric dating is unreliable and inaccurate which I firmly believe. This is Why, I read this from Interactive Bible Home Page www.bible.ca
[Lengthy cut-n-paste from deleted. --Admin] http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dating-radiometric.htm#inaccurate ALSO bible.ca
[Lengthy cut-n-paste from deleted. --Admin] http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dating-radiometric.htm#decayrate I know this is a lot of information but might as well give you guys something to think about. *RRhain you've stated some dogmatic remarks about how David was a homosexual and how in the Bible it says nothing about homosexuality being wrong. That is crazy... Any Christian can normally give you a reference off the top of their head and if they can't they'll just tell you that homosexuality is said to be an abomination to the Lord in the Bible! I doubt I can take any more comments from you seriously after that. Plain Ignorance is what it is.
[Please stay on topic. --Admin] ------------------The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk [This message has been edited by Admin, 08-11-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
Radiometric Dating provides several dates, they date again and again until they get the date that agrees with the evolutionary timeline...
------------------The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
Crashfrog, the bible was originaly written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Translated into English! What the english Bible says is what the others say just in another language! Sheesh...
------------------The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
I said I firmly believe that the world is young, I never said I firmly believe in the Site Interactive Bible Home Page www.bible.ca! But you put words into my mouth. Now that you brought it up I do firmly believe that what this guy is saying on bible.ca is reliable. Now that article being decades old, that I didn't know was true and if it is, so what you know, the site is doing a great job of telling people what is right (from the Creationist point of view.) Thats all that matters to me. I was asking for evidence and it seems I'm the only one providing it. This wasn't supposed to be a debate. Just a question.
------------------The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
DC85 said:
quote: Do you realize how many people I am talking to? Calm down and give me time. I am only 14 so I am learning a lot at one time here. "We can't Because there is no evidence that goes against it. Right now all the evidence Points to Evolution and None point to the Bible " Examples? " Believe me If I could Disprove Evolution I and every other Evolutionist would do it in a heart beat. "Of course not your brainwashed. "you ignored my post........" Sounds good! Its hard when Im trying to talk to 10 other evolutionists. I don't know what your post was. "Almost All things in Creationist sites(against evolution) have been proven wrong. yet they never EVER Update. wonder why....... search the web I am sure you can easily find Answers that prove them wrong on everything they say. " You need back-up, come on give me some examples? Crashfrog, the bible was originaly written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Translated into English! What the english Bible says is what the others say just in another language!Are you truly that ignorant about translation? I assume you speak no foreign languages, right? But surely you've heard the phrase "lost in the translation"? Why do you suppose we have that phrase if translation is simply a matter of word exchange? Furthermore, if it's so easy to translate bibles (or anything else) why are there so many translations of the bible in English? Rrhain has told you what the Bible says in Greek. Your bible translates wrong. What part of this aren't you getting? The Greek is there for you to read. So is the English. They don't agree. What more evidence do you need to say that your bible is mistranslated? Ok I agree now maybe a few words were lost... David was not a homosexual and thats all I was trying to prove and why don't you give me some examples of where it says that about david in the Bible? (Greek whatever). This is open to you or RRhain or anyone else! RRhain has not told me what it says in Greek please RRhain tell me. "Well besides the whole geologic column, I'd have to say plate tectonics.Plate tectonics, which supports the theory of continental drift, is responsible for moving continents and making new ones, creating mountains, for most of the earthquakes and volcanoes around the globe, etc.. There is absolutely no evidence for catastropic plate tectonics, so that is not even a remote possibility. Evidence: -- rocks, as well as mineralized and petroleum systems that match up across divides; -- current movement of the plates (at about a couple cm per year); -- ocean derived sedimentary rocks at tops of mountains; -- paleomagnetism; -- intracontinental island arc and ophiolite remnants; -- tropical vegetation and fossils in todays artic regions and vice versa; -- aulocogens; -- relatively young age of the ocean floor; --overturned, folded, metamorphosed sedimentary layers." The geologic column is a fraud. http://www.trueorigin.org/geocolumn.aspThis link tells why in great detail. I don't know about plate tectonics so that I cant talk to you intelligently about. "But you put words into my mouth. Exactly what words did I put into your mouth? I don't remember doing anything close, but if asked to put words into your mouth they'd be "I am ridiculously ignorant of my subject and I am talking out my ass, so I am going to shut-up now and go read." Please stop getting heated from a debate... Sheesh, Insults, Insults, Insults. I'm not getting into it with someone who is constantly ridiculing my beliefs... "Now that you brought it up I do firmly believe that what this guy is saying on bible.ca is reliable. After having been shown what thrash it is? Unbelievable!" I did not mean that article, I should have been more descriptive. "Now that article being decades old, that I didn't know was true and if it is, so what you know, the site is doing a great job of telling people what is right (from the Creationist point of view.) If you don't know what is right, why are you supporting the author? That smacks of dishonesty and hypocracy.You do know the truth about that site. I told you. Go verify the information if you want. So you can no longer hide behind, 'I don't know.' From now on, if you spread this garbage, you do so knowing it is garbage. That qualifies as lying. There is no 'right from a creationist perspective,' nor is there 'right from an evolutionist perspective.' There is 'information that can be verified' and there is 'mis-information.' What you are pushing is the latter. quote: Thats all that matters to me. What matters is that your agenda be pushed? Do you have any concern for the truth at all? "More insults... Nice. ------------------The Greatest single cause of Atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable. -DC Talk {Note: This message is a reply to DC85's message 30. I have added the quote box and quote attribute at the top - (ps: Everybody, calm down!) - Adminnemooseus} [This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 08-12-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
The geologic column is incomplete in most places because the earth has experienced catastrophic events and lengthy periods of erosion in almost every location. This in no way refutes the fact that human fossils are found in young rocks, dinosaurs in older rocks, fish in still older rocks, then only small invertebrates, then bacteria.
"lengthy periods of erosion"Ever here of the Flood? ------------------"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
I'd have to see the verse to believe it, understand my perspective here? An evolutionist is telling me interpretations of the Bible... They aren't put in exact words but if what you're telling me is true then yes it seems very blatant. If he is a homosexual it's not a big deal for me thinking about it, just because everyone is a sinner. He would be judged accordingly. (This just my opinion, no need for insults from anyone.)
------------------"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
Life didn't survive it, well except for sea life that is. See Below for why I think the fossils seem to be sorted in most cases.
"The geologic column is incomplete in most places because the earth has experienced catastrophic events and lengthy periods of erosion in almost every location. This in no way refutes the fact that human fossils are found in young rocks, dinosaurs in older rocks, fish in still older rocks, then only small invertebrates, then bacteria." It's how you date these rocks that I am at disagreement with how accurate the dating is. Also, I assume logically thinking here that the humans being smart would swim to the top of the flood waters trying to stay alive, the animals who can't swim like dinosaurs (just the weight of some land dinosaurs makes that problem), or smaller animals that can't do much of anything would be at the bottom. This is just what I think would have happened if you think the Flood occured then this theory is logical. ------------------"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
prophecyexclaimed,
Ever here of the Flood? "So why do rock units experience multiple age gaps? This couldn't occur under a global flood scenario. How does the flood explain the areas of the world where the main ten era's are present, yet your own cite explains to you that there are gaps both in & between them? One big gap, that was evident glabally, would be excellent evidence of a flood, it just doesn't exist, though. Mark" Please explain multiple age gaps? Seriously I have not the slightest idea of what that means. ------------------"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
Life didn't survive it, well except for sea life that is.
Huh? Land life survived somehow, right? And how would sea life survive a flood that held enough sediment to deposit several kilometers of geologic column? That would be a Mud, not a flood. Also, I assume logically thinking here that the humans being smart would swim to the top of the flood waters trying to stay alive, the animals who can't swim like dinosaurs (just the weight of some land dinosaurs makes that problem), or smaller animals that can't do much of anything would be at the bottom. Ah, yes, the fleeing theory. What about the humans who couldn't swim? How about the dinosaurs that could? Why do we never find human bones below dinosaurs? Surely some human must have fallen behind a dinosaur? And (this is the real clincher) why don't we find fossil grasses with dinosaur bones? Are you telling me that grass and other modern plants picked up their roots and ran ahead of the flood? Ludicrous! Land life's only "life-line" (pun not intended) was the Ark. How would it survive a 40 day rapid Flood? You might not understand how fast this Flood happened. I'm telling you that indefinatly some Sea Life would have survived, I wasn't there I don't know how much of it survived."What about the humans who couldn't swim? How about the dinosaurs that could? Why do we never find human bones below dinosaurs? Surely some human must have fallen behind a dinosaur? " I think humans would have gone to higher ground if possible, think, think, think, yes they would have been able to go higher in most cases. But you're saying the ones that couldn't swim why haven't we found any yet... I ask you the same of the "missing links". No answer yet, on both accounts. "And (this is the real clincher) why don't we find fossil grasses with dinosaur bones? Are you telling me that grass and other modern plants picked up their roots and ran ahead of the flood? Ludicrous! " I would suspect the grasses to be obliterated rapidly. And the cypress trees, having knees, also had feet and ran to higher ground, while the poor footless seed ferns in the same swamp drowned and went extinct.I don't think so. The fossil record can't be massaged enough to look like that's what happened, and geologists had already figured that out by 1830. Try a newer argument - this one won't swim. Enough with the Sarcastic remarks, they are pointless. If the Flood happened ( and I believe it did ) the Bible says that the Earth flooded for 150 days, It rained for 40. For 150 days life was drained from the earth through the Flood, I think that the force of the Flood alone could and did wipe out most of the plant life. ------------------"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
"But the Ark isn't big enough to support as much life as the bible says, plus food, plus drinkable water, plus a compliment of human caretakers. Even juveniles. And two of every population is far too few to resuccitate an entire population, even if they're God's own "perfect" specimens."
Crashfrog, The Arc had a lot more room after it was filled with the animals. I took a lesson on it at a chapel that was being held at the camp I was at. The guy was saying that 2 of every animal isn't what you think. I don't totally get it yet but he said that with one type of dog or wolf you would soon get all the types of dog and/or wolf. It ties somehow into Adaptation. I know that drdino.com has some info on it if your willing to do some research. "I mean, let's say you just let the animals off the ark. You've got two antelopes and two lions. What are the lions going to eat? An antelope? If your population of antelopes consists of only one mated pair, and then one of them is killed, guess what happens to your antelopes?"I do not think that God would let this happen. Also Noah was a smart guy he probably fed the animals greatly and seperated predator and prey. "So the Ark story doesn't hold water (or keep it out, as the case may be.)"No, I think it does. No, they're quite point-ful. You're just missing the point. The question isn't "did the flood kill plants?" but rather "if the flood killed everything at once, why aren't all types of plants distributed evenly throughout the fossil record? Why do more advanced plants appear solely at the top of the geologic column? I can't answer that but I am sure that there is something wrong with the record, or in fact there are more advanced plants at the bottom or the "geo column". Sorry if this seems "answer" insuffcient but its all I can say. ------------------"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024