#190154 - 07/26/10 07:16 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ronniechoate34]
|
starlight.2
Member
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 793
|
Evolutionists, I have a question. Since you people believe that the earth is billions of years old, why is their no recorded history that exists prior to 4000bc? Surely if the earth is billions of years old their must be some written record from earlier than 4000bc. There apparently weren't any stone carvings, no wars, no countries, there was nothing.
How do you guys explain that away?
dinosaurs didn't have opposable thumbs. 
_________________________
Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace.
--Dalai Lama
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190157 - 07/26/10 07:25 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: starlight.2]
|
Paulwa_dup1
Member
Registered: 02/12/05
Posts: 4951
Loc: Washington
|
How about ancient human tribes Starlight? Supposedly much older than modern man by thousands of supposed years.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190158 - 07/26/10 07:26 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ghoti]
|
ghoti
Member
Registered: 04/06/02
Posts: 8469
Loc: Ishpeming, MI 75.128.229.255
|
Ronnie, there are cave paintings that date back FAR older than 6000 years ago, tools such as arrowheads and knives, and many, many skeletons. The evidence that humans have existed far longer than 6000 years is overwhelming.
There may have been more sophisticated cultures in the past, but glaciers and changing ocean levels could have erased traces of them. The onset of modern society seems to have followed shortly after the development of agriculture.
Before that, the evidence of archeology indicates that humans had to rely on hunting and gathering. Once growing crops and raising stock animals became more common people tended to stay in one place and develop cities and commerce.
_________________________
Feisty survivors populate this site. Avoid controversies unless you have a very thick skin.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190160 - 07/26/10 07:34 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: Paulwa_dup1]
|
Paulwa_dup1
Member
Registered: 02/12/05
Posts: 4951
Loc: Washington
|
Because Ghoti, IMO God used the laws of science (which He designed) to govern the physics of mans domain and surrounding heavens. Man was a working model right off the bench and then a few days later he added women from a part of man. He says He used a rib, I don't doubt Him. The rib contained DNA and bone and marrow, probably He worked from that considering it was a very great invention of His or maybe creation would be a better description.Anyway He used what He needed to do woman. Hre really did a great job too don't you think?
Paul
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190166 - 07/26/10 08:47 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ronniechoate34]
|
shakey56
Member
Registered: 03/31/04
Posts: 1889
Loc: where the wild roadrunners roa...
|
Evolutionists, I have a question. Since you people believe that the earth is billions of years old, why is their no recorded history that exists prior to 4000bc? Surely if the earth is billions of years old their must be some written record from earlier than 4000bc. There apparently weren't any stone carvings, no wars, no countries, there was nothing.
How do you guys explain that away?
And surely your IQ is not above room temperature. There is no belief involved. It is a matter of accepting the overwhelming evidence. You are making huge assumptions based on completely discredited theories that man just showed up pretty much like he is 6,000 years ago. Up until 4,000 bc either man had not evolved enough to communicate with the written word or any writings from then have not survived.
On the other hand how do you explain the documented differences in man over recorded time?
_________________________
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190168 - 07/26/10 09:07 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: shakey56]
|
Paulwa_dup1
Member
Registered: 02/12/05
Posts: 4951
Loc: Washington
|
I pretty much think ancient man did stone writing Shakey I am sure they didn't have any stationery stores back then so they used what was available..lots of stone..but there hasn't been much records found from that period..probly cause there was not any humans around or any other life. Guess that boils down to figuring where the error is in carbon dating and changes in the atmosphere. Dang those old bones anyway!!
Paul
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190170 - 07/26/10 09:17 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: Paulwa_dup1]
|
ghoti
Member
Registered: 04/06/02
Posts: 8469
Loc: Ishpeming, MI 75.128.229.255
|
Carbon dating and the other methods for finding the age of ancient objects have been tested over and over. If you think there's a flaw in those methods, please point it out exactly.
Just because the findings of science don't fit your theology doesn't mean they're wrong. Actually it proves that you're the one who's wrong.
_________________________
Feisty survivors populate this site. Avoid controversies unless you have a very thick skin.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190171 - 07/26/10 09:22 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: Paulwa_dup1]
|
shakey56
Member
Registered: 03/31/04
Posts: 1889
Loc: where the wild roadrunners roa...
|
I pretty much think ancient man did stone writing Shakey I am sure they didn't have any stationery stores back then so they used what was available..lots of stone..but there hasn't been much records found from that period..probly cause there was not any humans around or any other life. Guess that boils down to figuring where the error is in carbon dating and changes in the atmosphere. Dang those old bones anyway!!
Paul
And you just proved your IQ level matches Ronnie's...lol
_________________________
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190175 - 07/26/10 11:10 PM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ghoti]
|
Deo
Member
Registered: 02/11/08
Posts: 127
|
I grew up as an orthodox Hindu and was a student of the holy books called the Ramayan and Bhagavat Gita. The problem was that it is being run by a ruling priestly class who claimed divine right to their position and power- a position that quickly threw me off organised religion. Being an early seeker of God I found myself in the company of other seekers and found some answers in the Upanishads, Vedas and the Bible.
I am an atheist now but still a seeker now but tend to find answers via the scientific method-there is no faith involved but reliance on hard data.
Deo
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190178 - 07/27/10 06:32 AM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ghoti]
|
ronniechoate34
Member
Registered: 02/06/10
Posts: 540
Loc: tennerida
|
Ronnie, there are cave paintings that date back FAR older than 6000 years ago, tools such as arrowheads and knives, and many, many skeletons. The evidence that humans have existed far longer than 6000 years is overwhelming.
There may have been more sophisticated cultures in the past, but glaciers and changing ocean levels could have erased traces of them. The onset of modern society seems to have followed shortly after the development of agriculture.
Before that, the evidence of archeology indicates that humans had to rely on hunting and gathering. Once growing crops and raising stock animals became more common people tended to stay in one place and develop cities and commerce.
Six thousand years. Is there any proof besides the faulty dating methods used by scientists? We can prove their dating methods are faulty. Can they prove these things are as old as they claim them to be? I don't see how they could since their methods of dating objects has shown itself to be unreliable.
So, ultimately science can't prove that any trace of man kind existed prior to four thousand years ago.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190179 - 07/27/10 06:42 AM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ronniechoate34]
|
ghoti
Member
Registered: 04/06/02
Posts: 8469
Loc: Ishpeming, MI 75.128.229.255
|
What's your proof that the dating methods are wrong? If it's valid it should be openly published so the scientific world can change their thinking. Science is always looking for fresh approaches and new information.
Up to this point, every time the dating methods have been checked against other sources they've proved valid.
_________________________
Feisty survivors populate this site. Avoid controversies unless you have a very thick skin.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190182 - 07/27/10 07:56 AM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ronniechoate34]
|
shakey56
Member
Registered: 03/31/04
Posts: 1889
Loc: where the wild roadrunners roa...
|
We = sadly deluded pseudo scientists only out to protect their cash cow group of true believers from the truth.
A tip Ronnie: have some reliable evidence before making claims here. This is not a fundie site where this stuff will be blindly accepted.
Edited by shakey56 (07/27/10 07:56 AM)
_________________________
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190183 - 07/27/10 07:57 AM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: shakey56]
|
ronniechoate34
Member
Registered: 02/06/10
Posts: 540
Loc: tennerida
|
Carbon dating accuracy: what are the flaws of carbon dating?
Used to estimate the age of ancient artifacts and human and animal remains, radiocarbon dating is regarded by many as one of the miracles of modern science. Some, however, have serious doubts about the credibility of this technique.
Radiocarbon dating works by comparing the amount of normal carbon that is found in a sample with the amount of radioactive carbon. Both carbon and radioactive carbon are found in every living organism. While carbon is quite prevalent in these organisms, radioactive carbon is present only in tiny amounts. Some contend that the relative ratios of carbon and radioactive carbon that are found on the earth have remained constant over time and that, using known rates of decay; we can estimate age on the basis of changes in this ratio in a particular artifact or remains.
Radioactive carbon is absorbed by living organisms throughout their entire life. When the organism dies that absorption stops and the radioactive carbon begins to break down. Because this break down occurs at a known rate it is theoretically possible to compare the amount of regular carbon and the amount of radioactive carbon and estimate just how long an organism has been dead.
Although the theory of radiocarbon dating is interesting, there are several inherent problems with the process. The first of these problems is the fact that the original ratio of carbon and radioactive carbon is unknown. The second problem is that the possibility of contamination of the sample over time is quite high. The older the sample the higher the probability of contamination, in fact! What this means is that using carbon dating to date very old samples is really quite impractical given our current level of knowledge and technological capabilities.
While carbon dating continues to be considered by many as a viable way of obtaining authoritative dates for a wide range of artifacts and remains, there is much room for error in the process. Even the use of accelerator mass spectrometry to analyze the relative levels of carbon and radioactive carbon has resulted in flawed determinations. It is not uncommon for different laboratories to determine quite different ages for the same artifact! While some of this deviation could possibly be explained by contamination or erred methodology in the labs themselves, it is apparent that the problems with carbon dating are much more complex than that.
Very simply put, too many things are unknown to allow the carbon dating process to be as accurate as many proclaim it to be. Factors as diverse as changes in the earth’s magnetic field and changes in the amount of carbon available to organisms in times past could translate into perceivable differences in the carbon ratios in artifacts and remains from ancient times. Even changes in the atmosphere itself could impact this carbon ratio. We know that changes such as these have occurred over time. They are still occurring today in fact.
The fact that carbon and radioactive carbon are independently formed means that their ratios to one another could have changed substantially from ancient times to today. To base our knowledge on the age of the earth and its various constituents on information gleaned from a technique that depends on carbon and radioactive carbon ratios is very simply unrealistic.
http://www.essortment.com/hobbies/carbondatingac_szhq.htm
Prove that this article is wrong, shakey. There isn't any way for you to do that. If I were you I'd quit blindly accepting everything spouted by scientists.
Edited by ronniechoate34 (07/27/10 08:00 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190184 - 07/27/10 08:06 AM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ronniechoate34]
|
shakey56
Member
Registered: 03/31/04
Posts: 1889
Loc: where the wild roadrunners roa...
|
Since you obviously don't have a clue, here's a definition: re·li·a·ble (r-l-bl)
adj.
1. Capable of being relied on; dependable: a reliable assistant; a reliable car.
2. Yielding the same or compatible results in different clinical experiments or statistical trials.
Your link has no documentation or evidence of scientific study to support its contentions.
_________________________
Against logic there is no armor like ignorance.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#190185 - 07/27/10 08:07 AM
Re: Are there modern-day prophets?
[Re: ronniechoate34]
|
ronniechoate34
Member
Registered: 02/06/10
Posts: 540
Loc: tennerida
|
Creationists believe that the assumptions of radiometric dating are invalid and cannot be proven. These assumptions are:
(1) the radioactive element decays at a constant rate
(2) the rock crystal being analyzed is not contaminated by infusion of excess end product
(3) the rock crystal contained no end product when it was formed
(4) leaching of the parent element out of the rock sample did not occur.
The Potassium-Argon dating method suffers from both leaching and contamination problems. Rubidium-Strontium and Uranium-Lead also has problems of the same kind. Potassium, Rubidium and Uranium salts are highly soluble. Leaching of the parent element out of the rock would increase the age of a K-Ar sample. One way to test this would be to analyze the sample before and after soaking it under pouring water. This would reduce the concentration of the potassium ions to the point that it would increase the date of the rock dramatically. I have heard that this experiment has been done, demonstrating this effect (I am searching for the reference).
Recent studies of Mt. St. Helens rock known to have come from the 1980 eruption (Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, see http://www.christiananswers.net) yielded erroneous dates in the millions of years. Similar studies at the Grand Canyon found volcanic rocks dated at the top of the canyon older than those found in the bottom. Something's wrong here.
http://www.rae.org/radiodat.html
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
