Tools that may be a million years old discovered near Tarragona

Catalan News Agency (CNA) ^ | Monday, 13 June 2016 | unattributed

[CurlyDave]

Have you noticed that every one of the days ends with ‘and the morning and evening were the Nth day’...

What book are you reading?

Every bible I own, or have read, which probably numbers in the hundreds, says "evening and morning" not the other way around.

This is not just a trivial difference. It the reason why Jewish days begin at sundown, not sunrise.

[null and void]

Yeah. I screwed up, posting before coffee.

The seventh day doesn’t end with ‘evening and morning’.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

Rinos in Iberia?

So they somehow migrated across Europe, then crossed the land bridge to Alaska, and then worked their way down to what is now the US.

I was wondering how they had gotten here in such large numbers.

[bgill]

Oh, so that’s where I left that hammer.

[CurlyDave]

The seventh day doesn’t end with ‘evening and morning’.

Well, the text does't say that, but pretty clearly by the time we get to Genesis 2:18 God has finished resting and is now working again.

This leaves only two possibilities. One is that God did not rest for the entire 7th day, and the more common interpretation which is that the 7th day ended and God had finished resting.

[null and void]

Thanks!

[BroJoeK]

Resettozero: "As long as certain branches of science are locked into the the eons mindset, it's doubtful they'll stumble over the truth of the matters."

jsanders2001: "I've never been one to put much faith in the carbon dating method....
There are tons of articles out there that show there are very serious flaws in the system that are written by scientists themselves."

Here are your problems:

1. It's not just "carbon dating methods".
   There are dozens of different methods for counting the years backwards in time.
   Carbon-14 is just one of those, good back to circa 60,000 years ago.
   But there are many other radiometric dating methods, some of which can date back billions of years.
   And beyond those are such things as tree rings and growth rings on stalagmites in caves, or layers from ice-cores in Antarctica.
   Beyond those are such methods as Thermoluminescence dating and even measuring the rate of mutations in species' DNA.

   All of these many methods have issues, especially when done improperly, but correctly done they produce results consistent with each other and with old-earth (4.5 billion years) estimates of geological time scales.

2. No serious scientists, none, doubt the legitimacy and validity of these dating methods, when done properly.
   But there are issues and pitfalls in any method, and those are what you see reported by conscientious scientists in peer-reviewed publications.

3. Anti-science efforts to discredit these dating methods were not themselves legitimate.
   All they prove is that if you give false or incomplete information to a laboratory, it will produce bad results -- GIGO, garbage in = garbage out.
   No surprises there.

Bottom line, what science reports is: the Earth, and life on it, is billions of years old, and there's no serious confirmed scientific evidence falsifying that theory.

[SunkenCiv]

Then you have an imaginary problem.

[SunkenCiv]

IOW, such theologians believe it, based on absolutely nothing. That's why theology isn't science.

[Resettozero]

Bottom line, what science reports is: the Earth, and life on it, is billions of years old, and there's no serious confirmed scientific evidence falsifying that theory.

Never said differently. That indeed is what you labeled "science reports" for these past couple of hundred years or less. There are (published) scientists who disagree with many contemporary findings including some of which you just posted, I among them, and for many more reasons that the few you mentioned.

I've been subjected to indoctrination regarding what you posted today most of my life, and many times here on FR. And yet, in my post, I was questioning not the dating methodologies but rather the philosophies employed, which I believe skew the validity of the findings of "certain branches of science (which) are locked into the the eons mindset" as regards dating of objects. This includes most of the media, university, federal, and privately-funded official science endeavors.

This skewing of the validity of dating published findings of many of the groups mentioned, because of faulty presuppositions, keeps many people employed by these same groups somewhat in the dark and still distant from stumbling onto the truth of this matter, as I posted previously: A few thousand years-old maybe, for those chiseled tools featured in this article.

[odawg]

I was referring to the Biblical theology, not science, as you should have noticed.

Isa. 14:13:
King James Bible
For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

[SunkenCiv]

"Me not like radiocarbon dating" is a non sequitur, because that wasn't the method used to date the artifacts -- but it is a common regurgitated straw man argument that originates at various smear websites devoted to trashing the scientific method. At its source, it stems from either ignorance or dishonesty, or both.

[SunkenCiv]

Since the Earth isn't a few thousands of years old, and I didn't ping you, scram.

[SunkenCiv]

And this isn’t in the religion forum of FR, as you should have noticed.

[SunkenCiv]

LOL

[Resettozero]

Since the Earth isn't a few thousands of years old, and I didn't ping you, scram.

Your premise is faulty and this is an open thread you posted on Free Republic, Nazi!

[SunkenCiv]

It’s a tough one to sell when telling the parents, “I’ve decided on my major”.

[SunkenCiv]

...and if it were to break, is the store still in business?

[Moonman62]

Since the Earth isn’t a few thousands of years old, and I didn’t ping you, scram.

...

Those peddling ignorance get irritating, don’t they?

[Moonman62]

Your premise is faulty and this is an open thread you posted on Free Republic, Nazi!

...

Someone the other day proposed that science threads be closed like some of the religion threads. Perhaps that would be a good idea.

I take solace knowing that not all religious people promote ignorance.