Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9041 total)
590 online now:
dwise1, nwr (2 members, 588 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Post Volume: Total: 885,918 Year: 3,564/14,102 Month: 184/321 Week: 44/59 Day: 5/4 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2752 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 208 of 1486 (679075)
11-12-2012 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by RAZD
11-10-2012 11:00 AM


Re: Amazing

It seems to me that the biblical account/s are open to interpretation, in part because they do not address age directly.

This is not a thread to discuss this further (jar), as it is focused on the correlations in dating methods and their results.

If I understand you correctly, you are saying this idea of dating things is outside the Site's intended consideration of Evolution Vs Creationism, and only the techniques of Modern day dating are under discussion?

Is this a part of the site where the science people get their science straight among themselves, and some other location exists for the Creationism people?

It occurs to me that though Genesis is open to private interpretations, it does establish some links between the geological and biological events it enumerates and the time line of seven "days" which could be understood as the same geological rock layers we use radioactive dating to identify in regard to age.

My point being that things like first life appearing in a Spontaneous Generation during the third "day" coorelated one-to-one with science Abiogenesis in the Archeozoic "evening"/Proterozoic "morning" Eras.

Now disregard this idea if this thread is purely a scientific review for us science people so we are all on the same page about our particular disciplines. [/B]

(I agree, it is good that such lesson be examined by the science side of these discussions so the real facts are clear to all science minded people posting here.)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by RAZD, posted 11-10-2012 11:00 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by RAZD, posted 11-12-2012 11:36 AM kofh2u has responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2752 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 210 of 1486 (679137)
11-12-2012 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by RAZD
11-12-2012 11:36 AM


Re: Amazing

This thread is where creationist people can attempt to justify any concept they have of the age of the planet, life, the universe, etc. by showing how the correlations exist.

So this is the place where one MUST either say the Bible contradicts science and there science is wrong, or conversely, that the Bible says is wrong because science contradicts people who SAY what the Bible says, not what it DOES say.

The fact that it is way long later, in Gen 1:14, that the 24 hoiur day is even created makes no difference in this ridiculous limitation to people whose reading comprehension is so poor and science people who want to pull their pants down here without my too cents?

How convenient to lies on both sides.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by RAZD, posted 11-12-2012 11:36 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by RAZD, posted 11-12-2012 6:56 PM kofh2u has responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2752 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


(1)
Message 212 of 1486 (679224)
11-13-2012 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by RAZD
11-12-2012 6:56 PM


Re: Amazing

Not really. This is the place where you see how science explains all the correlations in a coherent and rational manner, and that if you think you have a alternate explanation, that you must then also be able to explain all the correlations, or admit that it doesn't explain the evidence that contradicts a young earth.

Well that surprises me.

I though the Evolution Vs Creationism site was actually about science demonstrating that the Bible is wrong particularly in Genesis1.

With that understanding, I post what the Bible actually says, which is NOT a young earth.

So you silence this input because it eliminates the conversation if I am correct,...
... and it negates your attack on the Bible.
You want to focus on the Straw Man of a very small bunch of Christian dummies who can not read Genesis comprehensively.

What I see is a set of rules which allow science people to pretend they have overcome the Christian faith in the bible by focusing on the few imbeciles.

How nice for the science side of this site,...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by RAZD, posted 11-12-2012 6:56 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by Eli, posted 11-13-2012 12:14 AM kofh2u has not yet responded
 Message 214 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-13-2012 12:33 AM kofh2u has responded
 Message 216 by RAZD, posted 11-13-2012 7:07 AM kofh2u has responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2752 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 215 of 1486 (679241)
11-13-2012 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by Adminnemooseus
11-13-2012 12:33 AM


Re: Does the Bible say the Earth is young?

Thread title:

"Does the Bible say the Earth is young?"

Answer:

No.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : And thus kofh2u gets a 24 hour suspension.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-13-2012 12:33 AM Adminnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2752 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 217 of 1486 (682309)
12-01-2012 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by Adminnemooseus
11-13-2012 12:33 AM


Re: Does the Bible say the Earth is young?

Appearances are that the bulk of the creation side are young Earth.

I think many would love to see a one-on-one (or few-on-few) "Great Debate" on this issue, between the young Earth creationist side and the not a young Earth creationist side.

Feel free to propose such,

1) Thank you fpr moving my post to a place acceptable to you.
I hope people here wil go there andl ask qeustions about measuring the History of the Earth by using geology as the ruler or clock.

2) In regard to your question here, "Does the Bible say the Earth is young?" I agree with you science minded people.
So does the pope, by the way.

In 1998, the pope said that the ToE was to compelling to mainyain arguments against it. Hence the Catholic christians are also against the few remaining YEC Protestants.

3) This thread apparently is intended to use science to oppose the remaining christians who are called YECs.
I add my sentiments to the science arguments which supports this criticism, and I also criticize the YEC reading comprehension.

I am in full support of all the science presented here that ridicules the YEC nonsense.

4) I add the observation that, using correct reading comprehension also criticizes the way YECs understand Genesis.

My contribution to this thread adds the argument that YECs can't read comprehensively.

Genesis agrees with science by telling the YECs in Gen 1:14, that the 24 hour Earth Day is a different "day" or duration than the seven that are referred to from Gen 1:1 on.

The history of the universe is measured by seven major events.
Those events have long durations called "days" by the bible writers, but that word does not mean 24 hour earth days.

The Hebrew word yowm can mean a 24 hour day, but can also mean any duration even an Age.

Gen 1:14 clearly explains to the YECs that Earth Time appears with first life on the third cosmic duration, i.e. the Mesoarchean evening of the Archean Eon and the Proterozoic morning:

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-13-2012 12:33 AM Adminnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2752 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 218 of 1486 (682310)
12-01-2012 7:53 AM
Reply to: Message 216 by RAZD
11-13-2012 7:07 AM


Re: Amazing? Not really

It is not an attack on the bible, rather it is an attack on an interpretation of the bible that tells people that the earth is young. If you do not ascribe to such an interpretation then this does not attack the bible as you interpret it.

...there is no need for you to participate further on this thread, as the purpose of the thread is to have people who disagree with the age of the earth to present information on how they explain the correlations that occur.

That was very informative.
Thank you.

You see this thread as science people Vs YECs on the issue of seven "days."

That was not clear to me in the Opening Post.
I now am advised that the Opening Post ought be understood as "YECs only in defense of Young Earth misinterpretation of Genesis."

I bow to your exclusivity and will refrain from interacting with you from here on out.

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by RAZD, posted 11-13-2012 7:07 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021