Posted on 02/02/2013 9:30:30 AM PST by bray
Radiometric dating is one of the most valued and consistently reliable scientific assessments. And yes, while there are assumptions regarding the practice, those are the product of the testing and refining of method. If you have an example of result being driven by desire, I’d be interested in hearing about it.
Thanks for the link to Mt. Blanco.
I suppose they have quite an inventory on hand.
If you bother to look you may understand that they are in fact selling casts of what they found.
What they have found, however, numbers in the thousands and have been studied and verified.
How is that working out?
I am sure by you staying home and not offending anybody you are really bringing people to the cross? Name one person in the Bible who tried your theory. Paul, Stephen, Peter, Simon, oh yeah they were all martyred? Sad huh?
Pray for America
Looks like you got someone smarter than you on your tail. You may want to leave while you’re behind with your fake proof.
The trick is that stars are created when gravity acts on clouds of gas and compacts them. In the early stages of its life a star spews out vast amounts of water at very high pressure.
Water under very high pressure (50,000 atmospheres or higher) takes the molecular form of a double-helix ~ in very long chains.
A new born star undoubtedly spews out all sorts of other chemicals in long or short chains at the same time. The chemicals of life are all water soluable. Add 2 and 2 together and there you have it. Not being an xenobiologist I can't take you any further into the details.
Which is to say that we may well live in a universe where a fundamental fact of existence is that new stars spew the seeds of life into their own near environment. Sometimes life prospers. Sometimes life doesn't prosper. It may well not need to be shipped in from some other solar system ~
“Genesis posits that it all began with a big bang.”
Really? Chapter and verse, please.
I think Jesus brought people to God, not the cross. I don’t think he would approve of any teaching that drove people away from God.
That was succintly stated. I especially enjoyed the comment, “Evolutionists use the fossil record to draw lines between phyla and it’s the lines that are their proof.” That sits well on top of the fact that their fossil records,when used in conjunction with their geological records, are a cicular argument for determining the age of either group of records. Where the age of the rock is determined/known by the fossils found in it and the age of the fossil is determined/known by the age of the rock it is found in. Incidentally, there is no known uniform stratafication identified as representative data for verifying the dating of those sub sets. Piece-meal is not objective, it is alwys subject to a bias of interpretation.
Ashkenazi Jews and all Finns of whatever ethnic origin (there are several there) score higher than the Chinese, and the Chinese who live in cities and have access to education score higher than everybody else.
And how does challenging evolution drive people away from God? How does pointing out the cult of atheism drive people away from God?
So you accept the explanation on faith. Just what I said.
I came to God, and Christ by trying to prove evolution as being true.
I found God, not because I wanted to, quite the contrary, I fought tooth and nail on a very long journey.
It is a simple process of elimination, a process that continues for most of the secular scientific community as they hold onto the unknown, the next "missing link" that can save them.
Scientists will readily admit that they don't have all the answers, however they put their faith in the process. Ultimately, it is an enterprise based on uncertainty. Always ready and all to willing to accept fraudulent evidence if it advances the theory.
I am a Christian, but I couldn't quote a single passage from the bible.
Nicely done! So we may not be billions and billions of years old due to scientific bias?
Pray for America
in the beginning God created..... There you have it ~ no antecedent at all. That’s WITH A BANG! not only that, it’s a bang that you don’t see until the density is reduced enough for light to emerge (let there be light is in there BTW). So what are you attacking. Are you against Genesis or the Evolutionists ~ please tell us because arguing against a big bang just doesn’t cut it for we traditionalists.
There is so much beauty in so many Bible passages, and that book is, well, alive in some way that is difficult to describe unless you’ve spent time reading and pondering it.
I strayed pretty badly from my teen years onward into middle age, but found my way back. The scripture I’d credit for that is I Corinthians 15:35-44, but the entirety of I Corinthians 15 is just stunning. Paul was an amazing person with an an amazing mind, it’s just cosmic. Poetic, too.
http://m.youversion.com/bible/kjv/1cor/15
Different people respond differently, though. Maybe those passages don’t sing as much for you as they did and still do for me.
Do try to spend some time with the Bible, though. You’re cheating yourself to an extent.
I've been through the science of dating years ago, so forgive me if I can't hit you with what I've learned in this forum. I don't sit on their websites with links in hand so I can play gotcha.
I will suggest, that if you are at all curious two things will happen:
You will find a boat load of evidence.
You will shoot the messenger.
No the age of this world is totally “up in the air.” What I do know is that, while denied by many, their is objective knowledge that God exists. Any timetable was made by God when the world was created. There is sound rational argumentation proving this existence is not happenstance. To get a teaser of this proof check out my about page on/about the Kalam.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.