|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 2:06 am
ryokomayuka Mein Kulturkampf ryokomayuka Mein Kulturkampf ryokomayuka Spartan1989 is right carbon dating has been to have errors. http://www.specialtyinterests.net/carbon14.html http://www.varchive.org/ce/c14.htm Here's couple about about Noah's arc: http://library.thinkquest.org/29178/noahand.htm http://www.kjvbible.org/greenland_ice_sheet.html Carbon dating has been proven to be unreliable if used on materials more than 60000 years old. However, this is still six times as long as Creationists believe the Earth has existed. Furthermore, Carbon Dating was not used to find the age of the earth; instead, elements like Uranium and Thorium. Uranium has a half-life of over 4 billion years, making it perfect to determine the age of the Earth. I've heard about how if you put a pencil in mirowave and you then carbon date it will say it is severl thousand years old. Here some articles about debunking it: http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=293 http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_assumptions.php I have no idea if that's true or not, but regardless, CARBON DATING IS NOT USED TO DETERMINE THE AotE! Seriously, I want a creationist to come up with an argument that's not a strawman once in a while. What's straw man? Anyway if God can do anything they why couldn't he have created the earth just as it is said in the bible? Because of all the evidence to the contrary. Duh.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:20 pm
Galad Damodred ryokomayuka Mein Kulturkampf ryokomayuka Mein Kulturkampf ryokomayuka Spartan1989 is right carbon dating has been to have errors. http://www.specialtyinterests.net/carbon14.html http://www.varchive.org/ce/c14.htm Here's couple about about Noah's arc: http://library.thinkquest.org/29178/noahand.htm http://www.kjvbible.org/greenland_ice_sheet.html Carbon dating has been proven to be unreliable if used on materials more than 60000 years old. However, this is still six times as long as Creationists believe the Earth has existed. Furthermore, Carbon Dating was not used to find the age of the earth; instead, elements like Uranium and Thorium. Uranium has a half-life of over 4 billion years, making it perfect to determine the age of the Earth. I've heard about how if you put a pencil in mirowave and you then carbon date it will say it is severl thousand years old. Here some articles about debunking it: http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=293 http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_assumptions.php I have no idea if that's true or not, but regardless, CARBON DATING IS NOT USED TO DETERMINE THE AotE! Seriously, I want a creationist to come up with an argument that's not a strawman once in a while. What's straw man? Anyway if God can do anything they why couldn't he have created the earth just as it is said in the bible? Because of all the evidence to the contrary. Duh. Let me put it simple for you: basically the entire earth shows that it was NOT created as stated in the Bible. Therefore the Bible is either a very odd metaphor (and poorly written) or just not true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 3:18 pm
elmon Galad Damodred ryokomayuka Mein Kulturkampf ryokomayuka I've heard about how if you put a pencil in mirowave and you then carbon date it will say it is severl thousand years old. Here some articles about debunking it: http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=293 http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_assumptions.php I have no idea if that's true or not, but regardless, CARBON DATING IS NOT USED TO DETERMINE THE AotE! Seriously, I want a creationist to come up with an argument that's not a strawman once in a while. What's straw man? Anyway if God can do anything they why couldn't he have created the earth just as it is said in the bible? Because of all the evidence to the contrary. Duh. Let me put it simple for you: basically the entire earth shows that it was NOT created as stated in the Bible. Therefore the Bible is either a very odd metaphor (and poorly written) or just not true. But there is evidence to the contrary. What about this website? http://www.creationism.org/ What about the animals who defies evolution like the giant whale blue, the dragon fly, the giraffe? http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1653.cfm http://www.gnmagazine.org/booklets/EV/animaloddities.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:38 pm
first off, where does it ever say, in the bible or elsewhere that the earth is 4000 years old? second, timelines based off of geneology wouldn't be amazingly accurate. and thirdly, neither the bible or evolution can be proven true. it just comes down to belief, faith, and trust. why bother discussing it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:16 am
Perhaps neither can be proven true, but evolution has multitudinous evidence supporting it, whereas the Bible has near to none, and what little evidence exists is of doubtful reliability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:02 am
Galad Damodred Perhaps neither can be proven true, but evolution has multitudinous evidence supporting it, whereas the Bible has near to none, and what little evidence exists is of doubtful reliability. Same with Evolution. The spotted moth and Haeckel's embryo are both falsehoods that are passed off as truths. There are probably more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:31 am
ryokomayuka Galad Damodred Perhaps neither can be proven true, but evolution has multitudinous evidence supporting it, whereas the Bible has near to none, and what little evidence exists is of doubtful reliability. Same with Evolution. The spotted moth and Haeckel's embryo are both falsehoods that are passed off as truths. There are probably more. We have all kinds of genetic and geological evidence. There are piles and piles of evidence for evolution, but practically none for the Bible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:26 pm
elmon ryokomayuka Galad Damodred Perhaps neither can be proven true, but evolution has multitudinous evidence supporting it, whereas the Bible has near to none, and what little evidence exists is of doubtful reliability. Same with Evolution. The spotted moth and Haeckel's embryo are both falsehoods that are passed off as truths. There are probably more. We have all kinds of genetic and geological evidence. There are piles and piles of evidence for evolution, but practically none for the Bible. Some of those piles are lies. Some of those piles are speculation. Some of those piles have with veil of truth. There is evidence for the bible. Of there is no way to prove one hundred to percent what happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:54 pm
ryokomayuka elmon ryokomayuka Galad Damodred Perhaps neither can be proven true, but evolution has multitudinous evidence supporting it, whereas the Bible has near to none, and what little evidence exists is of doubtful reliability. Same with Evolution. The spotted moth and Haeckel's embryo are both falsehoods that are passed off as truths. There are probably more. We have all kinds of genetic and geological evidence. There are piles and piles of evidence for evolution, but practically none for the Bible. Some of those piles are lies. Some of those piles are speculation. Some of those piles have with veil of truth. There is evidence for the bible. Of there is no way to prove one hundred to percent what happened. So tell me... What evidence is there of the Great Flood, pray tell? Or that Methuselah lived for nearly a thousand years?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:21 pm
Galad Damodred ryokomayuka elmon ryokomayuka Galad Damodred Perhaps neither can be proven true, but evolution has multitudinous evidence supporting it, whereas the Bible has near to none, and what little evidence exists is of doubtful reliability. Same with Evolution. The spotted moth and Haeckel's embryo are both falsehoods that are passed off as truths. There are probably more. We have all kinds of genetic and geological evidence. There are piles and piles of evidence for evolution, but practically none for the Bible. Some of those piles are lies. Some of those piles are speculation. Some of those piles have with veil of truth. There is evidence for the bible. Of there is no way to prove one hundred to percent what happened. So tell me... What evidence is there of the Great Flood, pray tell? Or that Methuselah lived for nearly a thousand years? Here something about the flood. http://www.creationism.org/topbar/grandcanyon.htm The ark may have been found in Iran. There are stories of great floods found in many cultures around the world. Cultures that are separated by great distances. http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/09/13/great.flood.finds.ap/index.html http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c010.html http://www.theoutlaws.com/unexplained10.htm So far as Methuselah I don't know. It would be nearly impossible to prove everything in the bible especially the farer back you go. Adam and Eve to Noah's floor probably wouldn't have much. After the flood there would be more. Once you get the new testament there is much more. There are other sources to back it up even. A lot of it is based on faith.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:58 am
I quite literally facepalmed upon reading those. Thank you. You've just given me more cause to be a pessimist in the human condition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 6:11 am
ryokomayuka Galad Damodred ryokomayuka elmon ryokomayuka Galad Damodred Perhaps neither can be proven true, but evolution has multitudinous evidence supporting it, whereas the Bible has near to none, and what little evidence exists is of doubtful reliability. Same with Evolution. The spotted moth and Haeckel's embryo are both falsehoods that are passed off as truths. There are probably more. We have all kinds of genetic and geological evidence. There are piles and piles of evidence for evolution, but practically none for the Bible. Some of those piles are lies. Some of those piles are speculation. Some of those piles have with veil of truth. There is evidence for the bible. Of there is no way to prove one hundred to percent what happened. So tell me... What evidence is there of the Great Flood, pray tell? Or that Methuselah lived for nearly a thousand years? Here something about the flood. http://www.creationism.org/topbar/grandcanyon.htm The ark may have been found in Iran. There are stories of great floods found in many cultures around the world. Cultures that are separated by great distances. http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/09/13/great.flood.finds.ap/index.html http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c010.html http://www.theoutlaws.com/unexplained10.htm So far as Methuselah I don't know. It would be nearly impossible to prove everything in the bible especially the farer back you go. Adam and Eve to Noah's floor probably wouldn't have much. After the flood there would be more. Once you get the new testament there is much more. There are other sources to back it up even. A lot of it is based on faith. If faith is the path to truth, man would have died out long ago. The humongous piles for evolution may not all hold true or are not 100% true, but they are far more true than the evidence that supports the bible. As I stated earlier, we have reason to believe that there was a guy named Jesus who formed his own little sect, but that means absolutely nothing. Most of your faith isn't even true: Maria and Joseph were not engaged, they were married, but never had sex as a tribute to their Jewish god. Besides, even God himself can't stand above the most basic of laws in this universe: energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so where did all the water from the flood go?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:28 am
Galad Damodred I quite literally facepalmed upon reading those. Thank you. You've just given me more cause to be a pessimist in the human condition. Why?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:44 am
elmon ryokomayuka Galad Damodred ryokomayuka elmon We have all kinds of genetic and geological evidence. There are piles and piles of evidence for evolution, but practically none for the Bible. Some of those piles are lies. Some of those piles are speculation. Some of those piles have with veil of truth. There is evidence for the bible. Of there is no way to prove one hundred to percent what happened. So tell me... What evidence is there of the Great Flood, pray tell? Or that Methuselah lived for nearly a thousand years? Here something about the flood. http://www.creationism.org/topbar/grandcanyon.htm The ark may have been found in Iran. There are stories of great floods found in many cultures around the world. Cultures that are separated by great distances. http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/09/13/great.flood.finds.ap/index.html http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c010.html http://www.theoutlaws.com/unexplained10.htm So far as Methuselah I don't know. It would be nearly impossible to prove everything in the bible especially the farer back you go. Adam and Eve to Noah's floor probably wouldn't have much. After the flood there would be more. Once you get the new testament there is much more. There are other sources to back it up even. A lot of it is based on faith. If faith is the path to truth, man would have died out long ago. The humongous piles for evolution may not all hold true or are not 100% true, but they are far more true than the evidence that supports the bible. As I stated earlier, we have reason to believe that there was a guy named Jesus who formed his own little sect, but that means absolutely nothing. Most of your faith isn't even true: Maria and Joseph were not engaged, they were married, but never had sex as a tribute to their Jewish god. Besides, even God himself can't stand above the most basic of laws in this universe: energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so where did all the water from the flood go? It means a lot. What he did was more than that it was like revolution. That's why the Jewish leaders and Roman leaders wanted him dead so much. It has effect history is many ways. Mary and Joseph had other kids no where in the bible does it say that didn't they sleep to together. Mary and Joseph just didn't sleep together until after Jesus was born. Some people just want to believe Mary remained a virgin for the rest of her life but it's not logically why they would not. Sometimes you have to separate what people believe what is in the bible with what is actually in the bible. The water could have gone into the oceans, lakes, ice caps, in the atmosphere, into the ground. Edit: I just reread what I said about faith and I think typed it wrong. When I type I don't think I was being clear. Faith is important. No matter what other say one has faith that it is true. If anything can be learned from the Noah story I guess it could be sometimes one should believe the village idiot because that was what people saw Noah. He said it would rain and everyone said he was crazy and was impossible and it would never happen and Noah was right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
