Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Your knowledge is appalling. The majority agree that the text should not be there. End of this deflection. Start a new thread if you want to argue this.
Where is your citation of the fresh flesh? That was the purpose of the post.
And the Bible tells us the majority is going to hell, so there is no support in numbers in Biblical terms. And the majority did not agree with Noah either, yet the world was destroyed with that majority, and only Noah and his family survived. I would suggest you consider the numerous Text it is found in, and not ignore how many early church fathers quoted it. And if you believe we should not be speaking about this, then perhaps you should not of brought it up in the first place.
And the Bible tells us the majority is going to hell, so there is no support in numbers in Biblical terms. And the majority did not agree with Noah either, yet the world was destroyed with that majority, and only Noah and his family survived. I would suggest you consider the numerous Text it is found in, and not ignore how many early church fathers quoted it. And if you believe we should not be speaking about this, then perhaps you should not of brought it up in the first place.
The point it was brought up was illustrative but it went Piyush Jindal right over your head.
Start a new thread and stop deflecting, where is your citation of the alleged flesh or is that also pulled out of your imagination?
Did you read the article in it's entirety or just dismiss it. The rules of the forum do not allow us to copy and paste an entire article thus the link. The article in it's entirety has nothing to your link of glowing eyes in the dark - you think I do not know what causes that?
Seeing your faith is based on and you cite the Hebrew scriptures, are you now dismissing their commentaries? Would they not be closer to the truth seeing it is their culture and all?
These are rhetorical questions you need not reply.
Geez
Often, the commentaries are one of the first things I dismiss. Some of the things I read in commentaries are really very funny. Yet from time to time, they can be helpful. If the Jews had been closer to the truth, they would of imbraced Jesus. Yet with all their knowledge of the Scriptures, they missed the time of their visitation. Neither their culture, or their knowledge, could open their blind eyes. And they are as blind today, as they were in the days when Jesus walked the earth.
Nope. The article by Dennis Swift (on numerous websites) actually says:
I know it doesn't make sense, and if that's not what he meant, then perhaps he should change his story.
As for testing carbon ON the figurines- I don't know enough about this field. I'm sure Rifleman or SeekerSA would know more about how that's done.
My questions would be: Would someone be able to tell if some type of organic material was caked onto the object afterwards, or if it had been ON the object for a long time? What if the object was very recent but had been buried later in soil that contained organic material that was thousands of years old?
I read the account, and it clearly states he had fragments that were removed in 1956, it does not stated that he had them tested in 1956.
It was the fragments that he removed in 1956 that was tested later on.
I would believe it would be possilbe to fake a date if that was what you really wanted to do. Yet they did use two kinds of testing, and on both types, the dates came back ancient. One could make an arguement for C14 testing, yet it would be harder to fake a thermoluminescent test. And they did that test numerous times.
Often, the commentaries are one of the first things I dismiss. Some of the things I read in commentaries are really very funny. Yet from time to time, they can be helpful. If the Jews had been closer to the truth, they would of imbraced Jesus. Yet with all their knowledge of the Scriptures, they missed the time of their visitation. Neither their culture, or their knowledge, could open their blind eyes. And they are as blind today, as they were in the days when Jesus walked the earth.
While that is your POV, the Rabbis who have access to data you do not have access to, would by defacto have a better explanation seeing they speak Hebrew and all.
The site I wanted to post was a biblical teacher of the Torah and was answering questions from students of the Torah. He and other's cited the Behemoth and Leviathan were in fact words not of Hebrew origin. The latter word has some similarities to another Hebrew word which they discuss.
C14 is only good for 50k years or so. The fossils have been tested using the appropriate dating techniques that is more accurate and spans much longer periods.
C14 can only be used on stuff that actually ingests carbon in one way or another. What guarantee would one have the carbon on the surface was not a foreign contamination? However we have posted this ad nausium but you choose to ignore.
No they would not - only in your puny closed mind.
The burden of proof resides with your camp. Accept Rifleman's offer or shut up already.
Such as?
You really want to discuss volcanoes? BTW we do not take creationist sites as a valid link unless you can corroborate that with other scientific impartial links, like folk who do not need to sign off on an inerrant biblical POV or YEC worldview.
As for dating of the age of rocks, you still have not offered ANYTHING in terms of moon rocks or the Canadian rocks dated at 4.5Bn years old.
Seeing Mount St. Helens is an active volcano, it stands to reason that the cap age may not be as old as other rocks dated elsewhere, heard of geological recycling?
We have described the dating method whereby samples are heated to test age and once that is done the sample is reset, or IOW, that test can only be carried out once per sample.
BTW that reply was entirely off the top of my head or IOW memory of what has been stated here time and again, I am not even a scientist like Rifleman.
The C14 testing of the figurines has been done like this on many other artifacts, why do we only see the protest on these artifacts?
And if you can't get the dates right for Mt. Saint Helens, why would you think you have the dates correct on anything else?
So you agree Job was borrowed from another culture then?
I think you are stretching here. The cedar in the ME is not a Christmas tree. In fact I was surprised when it was offered as we had a mens deodorant called cedarwood and the pic on the
cans was the same as the ME type.
Job was not borrowed from another culture. His time just predates other text of the bible as he lived just after the flood. Job is probably the oldest text. This is considering that Genesis was a compilation by Moses. The original text of Genesis predates the book of Job and come from before the flood.
I think that your idea of culture is different then that presented in the bible. According to the bible we all come from Adam and Eve. After the flood Noah's sixteen grandson's became the fore-fathers of different nations. For example Eber became the father of the Hebrews. So, if you say from a different culture, Job may very well be a different culture or a descendant of a different grandson of Noah. This does not dillute the content of the book of Job who's story was past down in the Hebrew liniages as the histories prior to the flood belong to all nations, because it is every nations history.
The bolded part is a common misconception by the YEC camp.
If you read the 300 lies link I posted earlier, Ken Hovind makes this same assertion and is soundly rebutted. Been reading 2 days now and just like what we see here, the inconsistencies of the YEC camp are evident by doctor (NOT) Hovind's lame assumptions.
You are now trying to deflect to the "fall" which suggests that (unscripted) the animals back then were all herbivores then suddenly began eating each other - amazing transition don't you think? Or did God suddenly tweak his creation to punish the animals for Adam's sin?
Did sharks and killer whales eat sea weed? Was the lion king called Gumby or did he have teeth like a cow. Oh nevermind the teeth, how about the digestive system that also needed modification? Why are there no fossils of lions with cow's teeth, as your creation event taken literally, we should have evidence of this if we go digging in Iraq/Iran? I mean if there were no carnivores, how exactly did the food chain work? Did vultures (you know the animal kingdom's undertakers) "evolve" after the fall?
You think this beak is "designed" to eat seeds? How about them bald eagles of the USA, their talons merely for clinging to the branches?
Sure looks like he had a disadvantage picking up seeds with that beak.
Seeing we eat both meat and plants, how come God never gave us new one to eat meat you know raw and all. And while we are on that subject, how did the beasties on the ark survive 18 months w/o meat seeing they were now genetically modified or were they genetically modified to eat grass again? Another tweak?
How is it that Adam did not name every species as we are still discovering live species today that require naming or did that record get lost in the flood?
I think I make my point.
If genesis was literal and all the beasties were grass and fruit eaters, lion laying with the lamb et al. it is just as ridiculous to assume Cain married his sister (incest) wherein we have a built in rejection mechanism not to be sexually attracted to our siblings - Oh I forget, the tweak later on.
Genesis is how you explain origins to a kindergarten, evolution is how it is explained to an adult - ya know age appropriate sex ed and all.
Which is easier to explain to a 5 year old about a rainbow, the flood story or the principles of refraction of sunlight through a sphere of water? Age appropriate (unless your Irish then it is the leprechauns)
Somewhere over the rainbow...
Dentation does not dictate diet. Sharp teeth and Sharp claws do not mean that an animal must eat meat. Animals prior to the flood ate vegetation. Post flood environment, they began to eat mean. lions did not have teeth like a cow. They had teeth like they do today they just eat meat now. Deer in Alaska eat small birds. Have their teeth suddenly become sharp? No, they have remained the same.
Adam did not name species. Species is a modern (not well defined) classification. You can look at dog and regardless whether it is a terrier or a great dane they are both dog. Humans have bread out traits, but this is not evolution. Throw all the dogs together in one room for a couple generations and you will end up with dog. More similar to original dog God created. Same is with humans. All our different colored skin comes from two people. Mendels law shows how you can have predictable traits in offspring. If Darwin knew Mendels work, he would have thrown his own theory out.
[SIZE=2]Dr. Wiens has a PhD in Physics, with a minor in Geology. His PhD thesis was on isotope ratios in meteorites, including surface exposure dating. He was employed at Caltech's Division of Geological & Planetary Sciences at the time of writing the first edition. He is presently employed in the Space & Atmospheric Sciences Group at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.[/SIZE]
First edition 1994; revised version 2002.
Radiometric dating--the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements--has been in widespread use for over half a century. There are over forty such techniques, each using a different radioactive element or a different way of measuring them. It has become increasingly clear that these radiometric dating techniques agree with each other and as a whole, present a coherent picture in which the Earth was created a very long time ago. Further evidence comes from the complete agreement between radiometric dates and other dating methods such as counting tree rings or glacier ice core layers. Many Christians have been led to distrust radiometric dating and are completely unaware of the great number of laboratory measurements that have shown these methods to be consistent. Many are also unaware that Bible-believing Christians are among those actively involved in radiometric dating.
I read the account, and it clearly states he had fragments that were removed in 1956, it does not stated that he had them tested in 1956.
It was the fragments that he removed in 1956 that was tested later on.
I would believe it would be possilbe to fake a date if that was what you really wanted to do. Yet they did use two kinds of testing, and on both types, the dates came back ancient. One could make an arguement for C14 testing, yet it would be harder to fake a thermoluminescent test. And they did that test numerous times.
Swift writes: "Tierney had two fragments of Julsrud type ceramics excavated at El Toro Mountain in Acambaro and in 1956, in Julsrud's presence, Tierney submitted these pieces to Dr. Victor J. Bortolet".
I don't know how anyone could read that as anything other than he submitted them to Dr Bortolet in 1956????
But whatever. It isn't really important as I think it is just a stupid mistake on the author's part. The piece obviously didn't get anywhere near an editor or publisher. It just illustrates the general amateur quality of these sites.
There's another time mixup in the same article which is not really relevant but is quite funny:
Quote:
In the summer of 1955 Charles Hapgood, the Professor of History and Anthropology at Keene State College of the University of New Hampshire, spent several months in Acambaro and conducted a very detailed investigation of the collection. Charles Hapgood had already distinguished himself as the author of a number of books including "Earth's Shifting Crust" (1958), "Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings" (1966), and "The Path of the Pole" (1970).
In 1955 Hapgood had already distinguished himself as the author of books he hadn't even written yet. (1958,1966,1970)
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
