U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 04-25-2010, 05:31 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
25,007 posts, read 18,656,201 times
Reputation: 9903

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
And once again, that is because they incorrectly believe that dinosaur bones are millions of years old. Just like they use to believe soft tissue would never be found in dinosaur bones. They were wrong about the soft tissue, and they are wrong about dinosaur bones being millions of years old.
So you are saying that science SHOULD use C-14 to date dino bones?...Sorry Campbell, I know that would make you happy, but science now has very accurate methods to date these fossils, and sadly for you those dates prove that you don't know what you are talking about.

Before you claim that radiometric dating is not accurate by using the time honored, but lame creationist excuse... "How do we know if the decay rates of the isotope used have remained the same over time"

Think about this... Samples are dated using various isotopes giving matching results. If radiometric dating wasn't accurate, then for this to happen, the decay rate for each different isotope would have to have changed by the same amount and contamination and leakage of many different elements in the sample would have to be equivalent.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-25-2010, 05:57 PM
 
7,654 posts, read 6,669,842 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
So you are saying that science SHOULD use C-14 to date dino bones?...Sorry Campbell, I know that would make you happy, but science now has very accurate methods to date these fossils, and sadly for you those dates prove that you don't know what you are talking about.

Before you claim that radiometric dating is not accurate by using the time honored, but lame creationist excuse... "How do we know if the decay rates of the isotope used have remained the same over time"

Think about this... Samples are dated using various isotopes giving matching results. If radiometric dating wasn't accurate, then for this to happen, the decay rate for each different isotope would have to have changed by the same amount and contamination and leakage of many different elements in the sample would have to be equivalent.


Carbon 14 is used to date bones sanspeur. And they don't date dinosaur bones only because they believe they are to old. Yet if they are that old, why do they find carbon 14 in dinosaur bones sanspeur?

article (http://mooni.fccj.org/~ethall/c14/c14.htm - broken link)
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 06:36 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
25,007 posts, read 18,656,201 times
Reputation: 9903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
Carbon 14 is used to date bones sanspeur. And they don't date dinosaur bones only because they believe they are to old. Yet if they are that old, why do they find carbon 14 in dinosaur bones sanspeur?

article (http://mooni.fccj.org/%7Eethall/c14/c14.htm - broken link)
You must have goofed, that's not a creationist site, and it confirms what I said...CARBON 14 IS NOT used to date dinosaur fossils.
From your link
Quote:
Limitations.... Because the C-14 half-life is 5,730 years, objects cannot be dated that are too old. After about ten half-lives (57000 years), the amount of C-14 remaining will be so small that the fossil can't be dated reliably. Therefore, anything more than about 50,000 years can't be dated.
To date really old artifacts like dino bones the following isotopes are used

* Potassium-40 half-life of 1.3 billion years
* Uranium -235 half-life 700 million years
* Uranium -238 half-life 4.5 billion years
* Rubidium-87 half-life 49 billion years

Nowhere on that site does it say that carbon is found in dino fossils.

Quote:
The most widely known form of radiometric dating is carbon-14 dating. This is what archaeologists use to determine the age of human-made artifacts. But carbon-14 dating won't work on dinosaur bones. The half-life of carbon-14 is only 5,730 years, so carbon-14 dating is only effective on samples that are less than 50,000 years old. Dinosaur bones, on the other hand, are millions of years old -- some fossils are billions of years old. To determine the ages of these specimens, scientists need an isotope with a very long half-life. Some of the isotopes used for this purpose are uranium-238, uranium-235 and potassium-40.
HowStuffWorks "How do scientists determine the age of dinosaur bones?"

Quote:
For example, it has been known since the 1960s that the famous Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary, the line marking the end of the dinosaurs, was 65 million years old. Repeated recalibrations and retests, using ever more sophisticated techniques and equipment, cannot shift that date. It is accurate to within a few thousand years. With modern, extremely precise, methods, error bars are often only 1% or so.
Accuracy of Fossils and Dating Methods (ActionBioscience)
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 06:41 PM
 
646 posts, read 299,541 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicIsYourFriend View Post
That's brazen! You ignore my post entirely so that you can maintain this ridiculous stance that the bible's principles apply in every situation everywhere for all time. Typical.
Boy, have you got that wrong! There is no claim, here or anywhere, "that the Bible's principles apply in every situation, everywhere for all time." Can you show me where I said that - even once? The statement is that IF APPLIED, the Bible's principles never fail. Why you fail to see that is beyond me.
[quote]For convenience, here's my post again. Also for your convenience, I narrowed it down to only two biblical principles that do fail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicIsYourFriend;
Oh boy. I asked twice: is this lousy-but-with-good-intentions or lousy-and-don't-give-a-crap? It's vague because it doesn't specify.

The Bible does not specify when it speaks of honoring your parents. I don’t see why I should because I could not improve on that. I told you before: the Bible was not directed to, nor intended to be observed by unbelievers. They are the ones that fail because they refuse to apply these principles. Millions of people are successfully applying these principles. How do you explain that?
Quote:
If you're lousy but you tried your best to be a good parent, then you might deserve honor. If you're Josef Fritzl, then you don't. Yet your bible would have Elisabeth Fritzl honoring her father every day he comes down to her tiny dungeon and rapes her. And I doubt he would grieve if she did.

Whether she honors her parents or not means nothing to me. The Bible does not hold her to that standard. It is totally a voluntary action. What do you know about her attitude toward the Bible? If people do not respect it nor live by it, they cannot be expected to honor it. YOU did not specify, but if she never heard of it in her prison why should she be expected to abide by it?

“In reality, our parents gave each of us something we cannot possibly give to them in return. For, whatever else we may owe them,
we owe them our present life. Without them, we would not be. This obvious truth of itself should be more than enough reason for heeding the divine command: “‘Honor your father and your mother’; which is the first command with a promise: ‘That it may go well with you and you may endure a long time on the earth.’”—Ephesians 6:2, 3.

Are you glad you’re alive? “While we are first indebted to our Creator as the true Source of all life, we should feel a deep sense of indebtedness to our parents. What can we give to them in exchange for what they gave us? God’s Son said that all the world’s possessions cannot buy life, for you simply cannot put a price tag on life. (Mark 8:36, 37; Psalm 49:6-8)

God’s Word tells us: “Do not you people be owing anybody a single thing, except to love one another.” (Romans 13:8) In a special way, we should feel moved to keep giving love to our parents as something owed them as long as they and we live. While we cannot give them life as they gave it to us, we can contribute to them something that makes life worth living. We can contribute to their joy and their feeling of deep satisfaction. We can do that in a special way that possibly no other persons can, for we are their children.” (Family Life, pp. 161-162)

“Giving honor to parents by obeying them is also essential for preserving unity and order in the family, and in society as a whole. If children do not learn to honor parents, they are not likely to respect any other kind of authority. Their disobedience will therefore make them misfits in society, persons who disregard the rights of others. Then, too, if children refuse to obey parents who have their interests at heart, how can they be obedient to the invisible heavenly Father, Jehovah God?

Another factor that makes obedience to parents righteous is that parents have the benefit of age and experience. A child’s background is definitely limited and so are its powers of reasoning and understanding. Especially in the early years of life, a child needs parental guidance and discipline to avoid trouble.” (AW 75 10/22 p. 27)
Quote:
I tire of this pathetic semantics game of yours. Honor thy parents is not a biblical principle? How about this failed biblical principle, it's not a law:
Quote:
Romans 13:1-2. Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
WRONG!! Paul’s counsel was directed to the Christian congregation in Rome and adapted
by Christians everywhere - NOT TO EVERYONE. That is why true Christians cannot support subversive movements in any country. People who refuse to apply Biblical principles will fight their own governments and flout their laws. God has ALLOWED men to govern themselves by means of human governments, without which chaos would reign supreme and the life of every worshipper of God would be snuffed out.

Remember this:
“The wicked one is plotting against the righteous one, And at him he is grinding his teeth……..The wicked one is keeping on the watch for the righteous And is seeking to put him to death.” (Psalm 37:12, 32)

Do you think that God established the Roman Empire? They did everything they could to stamp out monotheism. They were the ones who put Christians in the arena for wild animals and gladiators to destroy. And they failed.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 07:12 PM
 
646 posts, read 299,541 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
Probably a good decision, Rafius. There are those, un-named, which, by their stubborn but persistent and completely predictable output, will only serve to raise your blood pressure.

I'll summarize: the bible is so full of utter contradictions, of errors and mis-quotes, managed by so many good websites, that it's pointless to try to list them here. Because the opposition will then provide their own website links.

Problem is, whenever I've systematically looked into those outrageously prevaricating sites, I find, for instance, that a given biblical scripture is used in several different contexts, often unrelated, to "prove" several different points. How exactly does that work, pray tell? They show the supposedly inerrant aspects of a prophecy, but as far as I understand, these can only apply to a one-time occurrence, right? So how exactly can they recycle them again and again? I'd have thought that they would expire, like a MacDonald's coupon, after one use, no?

We have here, running rampant, Beliefs of Convenience, Selective Beliefs, Discriminatory Quote-Mining, and on and on. All intended to prove to the less critical thinkers, "such and such", which, by any logical assessment, simply do not. An Epic Fail on all fronts.

So, let's move on to better debates, OK? You'll thank me for this advice, Raf...
You seem to forget the topic of this thread.
It's all about the Bible. People who can't handle it should not participate in it.
I'll summarize:
I took the Bible from the aspect of prophecy and proved that those prophecies were accurate to the letter.
Cyrus' conquest of Babylon, written in advance, was accurate.
The desolation of Babylon was accurate.
Daniel's description of the timing and appearance of Messiah was accurate.
The Bible described the kingdoms of David and Solomon. This proved accurate too.
The dispersal of languages from the Plains of Shinar proved to be accurate.
The treatment of Jesus proved to be according to prophecy.
The list goes on and on.
That book is the Word of God.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 07:14 PM
 
646 posts, read 299,541 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwaggy View Post
In which language did god write the bible? Hebrew?
The Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 07:20 PM
 
646 posts, read 299,541 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
But you can't have it both ways Campbell. You can't keep screaming that scientific dating method are humbug when they provide evidence that the Bible is wrong and then embrace those same scientific dating methods when you think that they show the Bible to be correct.
I have to wonder what scientific dating method has proved the Bible to be correct.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2010, 07:34 AM
 
646 posts, read 299,541 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
This web page is full of falsehoods and can be disproved.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2010, 09:40 AM
 
646 posts, read 299,541 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
You must have goofed, that's not a creationist site, and it confirms what I said...CARBON 14 IS NOT used to date dinosaur fossils.
From your link

To date really old artifacts like dino bones the following isotopes are used

* Potassium-40 half-life of 1.3 billion years
* Uranium -235 half-life 700 million years
* Uranium -238 half-life 4.5 billion years
* Rubidium-87 half-life 49 billion years

Nowhere on that site does it say that carbon is found in dino fossils.

HowStuffWorks "How do scientists determine the age of dinosaur bones?"

Accuracy of Fossils and Dating Methods (ActionBioscience)
There is nothing accurate about the dating mathods used on fossils.

Scripture says that man's history is a little more than 6,000 years old. Headlines say that Peking Man is 500,000 years old; but which is correct and how did they arrive at that conclusion?

"There are several ways scientists estimate the age of fossils. The one in which they put highest confidence is the radioactive method. How does it work? Is it really accurate?

Usually it is not the fossil itself that is dated, but a radioactive mineral found in the same stratum of rock with the fossil.

URANIUM-LEAD DATING
Uranium is a radioactive element that very slowly changes into lead. The common form of uranium, U-238, disintegrates at such a rate that in 4,500 million years half of it changes into lead. The age of a mineral containing uranium can be determined by measuring how much lead has formed in it.

So from a chemical analysis of a mineral for its uranium and its lead content, a simple calculation gives its age. But the analysis is complicated by the fact that there are different isotopes of lead, and only lead 206 comes from uranium 238. So the chemist must get the help of the physicist with his mass spectrometer to see how much of this particular isotope is in the lead.

However, there are two very important assumptions that must be true if the answer is to be correct:

First, that there was no lead mixed in the uranium mineral when it formed in the cooling magma of molten rock. If there was any lead present, then the newly formed rock would look as if it was already millions of years old

Second, that no lead has escaped from the mineral. If some of the telltale lead had been leached out of an old mineral, it would appear much younger under analysis.

So, you see, the method is not foolproof. Nevertheless, with proper attention to such possible pitfalls, acceptably reliable dates have been put on many old rock formations. Based on this method, the age of the oldest parts of the earth’s crust has been set at over four billion years.

But uranium minerals are not found in the same rocks as fossils. This is because in igneous rocks, or even those that have been metamorphosed by heat, any fossils would have been destroyed. So other radioactive clocks must be used for dating fossils." (AW 81 11/22 p. 13)

Then there's POTASSIUM-ARGON DATING

next....................
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2010, 09:51 AM
 
646 posts, read 299,541 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Accuracy of Fossils and Dating Methods (ActionBioscience)
POTASSIUM-ARGON DATING. The element potassium is widespread in the mineral world. It has a very rare isotope, K-40, which decays with a half-life of 1,300 million years. Most of it changes into calcium, but 11 percent of it decays in a different way, to argon. Now argon is an inert gas. It does not combine with other elements and is usually found only in the atmosphere. But minerals such as feldspar, containing potassium that has not been disturbed for a long time, do contain trapped argon because of the radioactive process.

This property of potassium is utilized in a situation where fossils have been buried in a fall of volcanic ash. The theory of dating by the potassium-argon method is simple. When a volcano erupts, the molten rock that is thrown out loses the argon that was previously formed from the potassium in the rock. The rock solidifies as the volcanic plume cools, and its potassium, now free of argon, starts over again making it. Thus the potassium-argon clock has been set to zero, and anything buried by the eruption can be dated by analyzing the surrounding ash.

The theory sounds good, but in practice difficulties arise once more in the basic assumptions. On the one hand, the possibility that argon has leaked out of the mineral would make the age measurement too small. On the other hand, if not all the argon was boiled out of the molten rock by the volcanic heat, the clock would be set in error at the beginning.

This can be especially serious in cases where the potassium-argon method is used on relatively recent deposits—say, younger than a few million years. The slightest trace of argon remaining in the ash will cause a huge error. For example, if a potassium mineral had been buried, building up argon for a billion years before it was ejected in an eruption, then as little as one eighth of one percent of the argon left in the ash would date a freshly buried bone in it as being already a million years old.

This might not be a serious error in sediment a hundred million years old. But you can see how wrong it would make any claim for a supposed ancestor of man found in the Olduvai gorge in Tanzania—a claim that the fossil is one or two million years old. It is hard to read seconds on a clock that has only an hour hand.

Corroborating the undependability of scientific dating, note the following. Two scientists wanted to relate a new find to a previous one, which had been dated as being 65 million years old. However, potassium-argon dating said their new find was only 44 million years old—21 million less. No problem—where there’s a will there’s a way. The two scientists “attribute this to loss of argon or to impurities,” reports Science News, July 18, 1981.

Wishy-washy when it suits their purpose, dogmatic when it doesn’t. (AW 81 11/22 p. 13)

Next method:
RADIOCARBON DATING.

next.................
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $89,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top