The earth is only 6000 years old (II)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Philipp
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
buffalo said:
Hello - the question was - Why are the fossils still at the top of Everest?
Click to expand...
Because there was a thick piece of fossiliferous rock that was lifted up. The top part of that rock may have eroded away but there are still fossils in the part of it that is left. There are currants all the way through a Currant Cake; there are fossils all the way through the rock layer at the top of Everest.

Was that really so difficult to work out?

rossum
 
The so-called evidence involving biblical geneologies is questionable since it presumes the Hebrews shared our sense of history, which they most certainly did not.

The reputed ancient ages of the patriarchs, for instance, involves Jewish casuistry rather than necessarily actual ages, which would have had by themselves no meaning for the Hebrews.

The extended ages of the patriarchs is understood in the context of Adam and his loss of the preternatural gifts. The idea of Orginal Sin and its consequences for the human race is described in terms that attempt to account for present-day short life spans. That is, the human race has become increasingly evil and rebellious ever since Adam’s time, (whenever that may have been). We move from immortality, to long life spans, and end up with short life times.

The Jews believed long life and prosperity was the result of virtue. One way to show that the human race, and especially particular individuals were less sinful than the present day is to attribute to them longer lives.

When Jewish casuistry in the Old Testament is properly understood then one sees the irrelevance and uselessness of calculating calendar years with Biblical geneologies.

Furthermore, the Jewish rabbis and sages tended to apply the ideas about the consequences virtue and sinfulness as a rule of thumb. That is, the prosperous and long-lived man was virtuous, and so on. But this “rule of thumb” approach was increasingly seen to run counter to actual experience in which the evil man prospered and the virtuous may their life cut short.

All of this comes to a head and is addressed in the Book of Job in which Job’s interlocutors represent all the Jewish wisdom of the past regarding sin and virtue, good and evil. And they are rebuked by Yahweh. Hence, we cannot assume in any particular case what may be the hidden causes of prosperity or disaster.

In sum, the Book of Job gives Old Testament readers reason for caution in interpreting the long ages of the partriarchs as literal rather than an effective picturesque manner of teaching an aspect of the consequences of Original Sin. Though, as we have seen from the Book of Job, a progressive understanding of good and evil must rule out any literal only reading of the long ages of the patriarchs.

I have never met a “creationist” who has exhibited anything more than the most superficial and oftentimes errant understanding of the Old Testament.
 
Farsight001 said:
Because Everest used to be under an ocean. That should have been clear by his/her post. Uplift turned it into a mountain, but it used to be a sea floor.
Click to expand...
Yep that’s right — an ocean of water that covered everything up to summit of the hills and mountains of that da kinda of small in that day. We thus are all on the same page. Now we have go to the history book of the ages - the Bible and see what the OT, Christ and the church fathers wrote and of course of all the cultures of the world including the Chinese. When we do that it becomes apparent it was the biggy flood some folks call the deluge. Amen and :cool:
 
rossum said:
Because there was a thick piece of fossiliferous rock that was lifted up. The top part of that rock may have eroded away but there are still fossils in the part of it that is left. There are currants all the way through a Currant Cake; there are fossils all the way through the rock layer at the top of Everest.

Was that really so difficult to work out?

rossum
Click to expand...
How thick?
 
rossum said:
Thick enough that it has not all eroded away yet. Ask a geologist if you need to know more. Try here.

Where is your evidence of men living for more than 500 years?

rossum
Click to expand...
Let us start with current man. For the sake of argument if Adam lives around 10000BC that would put modern man at say 300 generations since. Let us say 10 deleterious mutations for each generation would make 3000 mutations for current man. Ancient man could hypothetically live longer.

Do you have evidence that man did not live to 500?
 
rossum said:
Thick enough that it has not all eroded away yet. Ask a geologist if you need to know more. Try here.

Where is your evidence of men living for more than 500 years?

rossum
Click to expand...
Your no help.

Fossils Found In Tibet Revise History Of Elevation, Climate

…Major tectonic changes on the Tibetan Plateau may have caused it to attain its towering present-day elevations – rendering it inhospitable to the plants and animals that once thrived there – as recently as 2-3 million years ago, not millions of years earlier than that, as geologists have generally believed. The new evidence calls into question the validity of methods commonly used by scientists to reconstruct the past elevations of the region.
 
hugh_miller said:
Yep that’s right — an ocean of water that covered everything up to summit of the hills and mountains of that da [kinda of small in that day. We thus are all on the same page. Now we have go to the history book of the ages - the Bible and see what the OT, Christ and the church fathers wrote and of course of all the cultures of the world including the Chinese. When we do that it becomes apparent it was the biggy flood some folks call the deluge. Amen and :cool:
Click to expand...
Either you didn’t understand what I said, or you’re patronizing me. I don’t appreciate condescension, so if that’s what it is, then stop. If you just missed it, let me mention it again - uplift. This means that portions of tectonic plates push against each other and lift the ground up slowly over time. The grand canyon is itself in the process of uplifting. It means that the mountain was not always there.
[/quote]
 
buffalo said:
Could a person with pristine genetics live to 500?
Click to expand...
I doubt it because he might have an accident involving a dinosaur.😦

I am not sure what your reference is for pristine genetics. I used the word pristine as part of prior, pristine, and blessing which is why the first generations did not commit incest like what was happening in the time of Moses. For me, pristine was defined as remaining in a pure state uncorrupted by civilization. After 500 years, there would be larger civilizations in which abuses of intramarriage would occur. Mmmm, maybe a hermit could live 500 years. 😉

Just saw your math for generations in another post. I didn’t follow it, but that is nothing new for me. However, even some researchers admit to having difficulty with determining generation times when considering overlapping generations. Me thinks trying to figure out which assumptions are the best in biological research is worse than trying to figure out the age of the earth.:eek:
 
hugh_miller said:
Yep that’s right — an ocean of water that covered everything up to summit of the hills and mountains of that da :
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, and certainly not all at the same time. Different mountain ranges used to be sea floor in different geological epochs.
 
buffalo said:
Your no help.

Fossils Found In Tibet Revise History Of Elevation, Climate

…Major tectonic changes on the Tibetan Plateau may have caused it to attain its towering present-day elevations – rendering it inhospitable to the plants and animals that once thrived there – as recently as 2-3 million years ago, not millions of years earlier than that, as geologists have generally believed. The new evidence calls into question the validity of methods commonly used by scientists to reconstruct the past elevations of the region.
Click to expand...
Are you seriously trying to use a scientific finding that the uplift of the Tibetan plateau happened two to three million years ago to show that the Earth is only 6,000 years or so old? Do you really have so little respect for your audience that you think we will find such apallingly bad arguments convincing? You can do better than this buffalo.

As to the results you cite, I will cite:New findings from Tibetan Plateau suggest uplift occurred in stages

“The middle part of the plateau was uplifted first at least 40 million years ago, while the Himalayan Range in the south and also the mountains to the north were uplifted significantly later,” said Xixi Zhao, a research scientist at the University of California, Santa Cruz.

Source.
If different parts of the Tibetan Plateau were uplifted at different times between 40 ma and 2 ma that would explain the differing results.

rossum
 
buffalo said:
Let us start with current man. For the sake of argument if Adam lives around 10000BC that would put modern man at say 300 generations since. Let us say 10 deleterious mutations for each generation would make 3000 mutations for current man. Ancient man could hypothetically live longer.
Click to expand...
How many of those deleterious mutations would have been eliminated by natural selection? What support do you have for the figure of 10 deleterious mutations? The fixing of 10 mutations in a single generation is well past Haldane’s Limit so you would also need to provide a mechanism for avoiding those constraints. Do you have any support for that number or did you just pick it out of a hat?

Go and sequence the DNA from an ancient Egyptian mummy who lived a lot closer to Adam than we do. Show from the DNA of that mummy that the number of deleterious mutations was significantly lower. Then, and only then, will you have some evidence rather than speculation to support your case.
Do you have evidence that man did not live to 500?
Click to expand...
It is up to you to provide evidence that man did live to 500. We can observe today that men do not live to 500. We can observe that DNA from old human remains falls within the boundaries of current human DNA (yes, we have sequenced some ancient Egyptian DNA among others). There is no evidence that 10,000 year old human DNA was significantly different from modern human DNA. We have sequenced some 30,000 year old Neanderthal DNA which was significantly different from modern human DNA so if there was a significant difference 10,000 years ago we would expect to be able to see it.

rossum
 
rossum said:
. We can observe today that men do not live to 500.

rossum
Click to expand...
I figured you would end up here. We do not see man living to old ages now so we do not believe it happened in the past, so therefore we pull out our scientism card again.
 
rossum said:
Are you seriously trying to use a scientific finding that the uplift of the Tibetan plateau happened two to three million years ago to show that the Earth is only 6,000 years or so old? Do you really have so little respect for your audience that you think we will find such apallingly bad arguments convincing? You can do better than this buffalo.

As to the results you cite, I will cite:New findings from Tibetan Plateau suggest uplift occurred in stages

“The middle part of the plateau was uplifted first at least 40 million years ago, while the Himalayan Range in the south and also the mountains to the north were uplifted significantly later,” said Xixi Zhao, a research scientist at the University of California, Santa Cruz.

Source.If different parts of the Tibetan Plateau were uplifted at different times between 40 ma and 2 ma that would explain the differing results.

rossum
Click to expand...
:tsktsk: No - merely to show this article that states it happened a lot faster and recently than previously believed.
 
rossum said:
How many of those deleterious mutations would have been eliminated by natural selection? What support do you have for the figure of 10 deleterious mutations? The fixing of 10 mutations in a single generation is well past Haldane’s Limit so you would also need to provide a mechanism for avoiding those constraints. Do you have any support for that number or did you just pick it out of a hat?

Go and sequence the DNA from an ancient Egyptian mummy who lived a lot closer to Adam than we do. Show from the DNA of that mummy that the number of deleterious mutations was significantly lower. Then, and only then, will you have some evidence rather than speculation to support your case.

It is up to you to provide evidence that man did live to 500. We can observe today that men do not live to 500. We can observe that DNA from old human remains falls within the boundaries of current human DNA (yes, we have sequenced some ancient Egyptian DNA among others). There is no evidence that 10,000 year old human DNA was significantly different from modern human DNA. We have sequenced some 30,000 year old Neanderthal DNA which was significantly different from modern human DNA so if there was a significant difference 10,000 years ago we would expect to be able to see it.

rossum
Click to expand...
Typical uniformitarian rebuttal — the present is always the key to the past and natural selection to the rescue. Buffalo may have been on the right track. For example:

Maybe the environement may have been different before all those catastrophic asteroids hit the earth along with the great deluge along with catastrophic mountain building like the
Himalayas. A significant and rapid change in the environment may have caused an acceleration of mutations after the “deluge” so by the time the mummy came along very few humans lived beyond say 70 years old.

What might some of those beneficial environments be on earth during those early year 1000’s of years after creation? Well how about an hyperbaric situation on earth like in the treatment of some medical ailments in modern medicine. Go to: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbaric_medicine for starters; I quote from this link:

***The increased overall pressure is of therapeutic value when HBOT is used in the treatment of decompression sickness and air embolism;[2]
For many other conditions, the therapeutic principle of HBOT lies in its ability to drastically increase partial pressure of oxygen in the tissues of the body. The oxygen partial pressures achievable using HBOT are much higher than those achievable while breathing pure oxygen at normobaric conditions (i.e. at normal atmospheric pressure);
A related effect is the increased oxygen transport capacity of the blood. Under atmospheric pressure, oxygen transport is limited by the oxygen binding capacity of hemoglobin in red blood cells and very little oxygen is transported by blood plasma. Because the hemoglobin of the red blood cells is almost saturated with oxygen under atmospheric pressure, this route of transport cannot be exploited any further. Oxygen transport by plasma, however is significantly increased using HBOT as the stimulus.
*** REF: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbaric_medicine

When they had an undesirable meeting with a nasty dinosaur the cuts would have healed much faster.

Rossum you just need to junk that uniformitarian philosophy and those long ages. They inhibit the “search for truth in science” :rolleyes:

However I do thank you for suggesting that the Napal Geologic Survey Group in Kathmandu be contacted to learn more about Mt. Everest etc. Problem is their contact e-mail does NOT work. 🙂 so you weren’t much help there either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top