The earth is only 6000 years old.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Justin_Mee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
itinerant1 said:
Conserved to a point only. However, if you would like me to provide quotes from cell biologists who would take issue with your claim about DNA, I can do that. And the nonsense of a 6,000 year old Earth has to be discarded if you ever want any credibility outside of the YEC cult.

Yes, how many kinds, would it take, and how do you define “kinds”?

Just cite me some reliable scientific claims and evidence (fossil records, number of generations required, rates of evolution, and so on.) that would even make IDvolution sound plausible.

I made no denial (or affirmation) regarding EES. How did you ever come up with that one?

I am not even sure what you understand by EES.

In science, the concept of self-organization needs a sound philosophical underpinning. For an organism to “self-organize” presupposes something already in existence of the organismic self for it to act organizationally in this goal-oriented manner.
Click to expand...
Yup - quote away.

IDvolution does not require long ages as evo does, it is not constrained.

So what are the odds of EES? And what happens to common descent under this idea?
 
buffalo said:
Bogus alert!

We have already discussed high concordance.

The illustration you are fond of posting is a human attempt to translate knowledge to a picture. Say a jet flew by an ancient. They may be apt to describe this as a “fiery chariot” or “bird that roars like lion”.

God may be laughing at the way we describe DNA.
Click to expand...
“Bogus”, “high concordance”, “fiery chariot”, “God laughing”: That is about as empty of a response as it gets.

The picture represents what we know about how the ancient Babylonians, Sumerians, Hebrews, and so on believed the world to actually be. Your statement that is just a “human attempt to translate knowledge to a picture” it stated in such a way as to imply that cosmological ideas cannot be conveyed graphically. That is utter nonsense and it should be recognized as such. It doesn’t take an Einstein to realize you are talking gibberish.

I can draw a picture that represents our solar system according to the current scientific understanding. I can even include Pluto, the demoted planet, and the larger Eris. That picture is a “human attempt to translate knowledge to a picture,” and it is a reliable representation of how we view the solar system in the 21st century. Nobody in their right mind would take issue with it, except flat-Earthers and geocentrists who have a problem with facts in the first place, much less a graphic representation of reality.
 
itinerant1 said:
“Bogus”, “high concordance”, “fiery chariot”, “God laughing”: That is about as empty of a response as it gets.

The picture represents what we know about how the ancient Babylonians, Sumerians, Hebrews, and so on believed the world to actually be. Your statement that is just a “human attempt to translate knowledge to a picture” it stated in such a way as to imply that cosmological ideas cannot be conveyed graphically. That is utter nonsense and it should be recognized as such. It doesn’t take an Einstein to realize you are talking gibberish.

I can draw a picture that represents our solar system according to the current scientific understanding. I can even include Pluto, the demoted planet, and the larger Eris. That picture is a “human attempt to translate knowledge to a picture,” and it is a reliable representation of how we view the solar system in the 21st century. Nobody in their right mind would take issue with it, except flat-Earthers and geocentrists who have a problem with facts in the first place, much less a graphic representation of reality.
Click to expand...
You can only draw what you know about the solar system inside our frame.
 
edwest2 said:
To buffalo -

I am seeing the same talking points here that I see on anti-theist forums. Apparently, if you sin by denying one aspect of science then you are guilty of denying all. You can then read about how we are all so dependent on science that we couldn’t live without it. That certain people are hypocrites for denying “science” because they live with all of the great things it provides, like medicine. This is nothing more than a campaign to get people to bow to the new god: The Mind of Man. Man is above God as well. Man interprets Scripture based on his understanding. Based on science. Though there is not one single peer reviewed paper about God, the Bible or the supernatural as described in the Bible.

To my brothers and sisters in Christ. Understand what the Church teaches and why. Science will not get you to heaven, only God can do that. You are not a haphazard mistake but willed by God.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
Ed,

You have floated up to heaven again on a cloud of pious piffle, leaving Buffalo here by himself unable to discuss OT cosmology. 😛
 
buffalo said:
Did all the ancients believe this drawing? Which ones did? TImeframe? Which one’s didn’t.

Where in Genesis does it say “flat earth”?
Click to expand...
I listed some of the Semitic peoples that held to this ancient Babylonian view of the cosmos found in the Bible. You ask whether all of the ancients believe this drawing. Well I can’t claim that all of the ancients have seen this particular drawing, but it has been noted in this thread more than once, that the Greeks had a different world-view. Do you remember those posts? Also, among Greek philosophers there were different views of the earth.

Ancient Greek, Egyptians and Semitic races believed the Earth was flat. Classical Greek philosophers and astronomers variously believed in a flat, round, or even cylindrical Earth.

Any good history of science or astronomy can fill you in on all the details of who believed what and when regarding the Earth.

I previously posted Biblical references that support the graphic representation. The OT contains no reference to or Hebrew word whatsoever that indicates a spherical or round Earth. So, one cannot infer a round Earth from the Bible.

Yet we find references to the Earth’s surface as flat (measurable by God), with edges and corners.
 
itinerant1 said:
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=675&pictureid=5622

This picture represents the world of the ancient Hebrews. The picture is from the New American Bible, St. Joseph Edition. This pre-scientific Babylonian view of the world is the same one shared by the Mesopotamians, Canaanites, and other Semitic tribes.

Below are Biblical references to this world view.

Abyss
“…and darkness covered the abyss (Gn 1:2)

According to the ancient Semites the “abyss” was the primordial ocean. God divided the abyss into salt-water seas (Gn 1:9 ff), and fresh water:
[a] “God said, ‘Let there be a vault through the middle of the waters to divide the waters in two.’ And so it was. God made the vault, and it divided the waters under the vault from the waters above the vault. God called the vault ‘heaven’. (Gn 1:6 ff )”

Rakia; vault, firmament or dome:
[a] “The heavens declare the glory of God, the vault of heaven proclaims his handiwork (Ps 19:1)”
**“Alleluia! Praise God in his holy place, praise him in the heavenly vault of his power (Ps 150:1)”
[c] “Over the heads of the living creatures was what looked like a solid surface glittering like crystal, spread out over their heads, above them, and under the solid surface, their wings were spread out straight, touching one another, and each had a pair covering its body (Ez 1:22-23”)."
[d] “Beyond the solid surface above their heads, there was what seemed like a sapphire, in the form of a throne. High above on the form of a throne was a form with the appearance of a human being (Ez 1:26).”
[e] “Then, in vision I saw that above the solid surface over the heads of the winged creatures there was above them something like sapphire, which seemed to be like a throne. (Ez 10:1).”

The fresh water is contained under the earth, and above the dome (“rakia,” vault, firmament) of the sky, which holds the upper waters in place:
[a] “…and waters above the firmament (Ps. 148:4)”.
** “Waters above the heavens! Bless the Lord (Dn 3:60)”.

For the ancient Hebrews, and their Mesopotamian and Canaanite neighbors, the vault of the sky (firmament) was a solid dome. The English word “firmament” is derived from the Latin “firmamentum”, which represents the Greek “stereoma”, “a hard object”. These terms translate the Hebrew “rakia”, which designates a thin, beaten metal plate. The conception of the sky in Genesis is that of a thin bowl-shaped surface that covers the earth.

Rainwater (Gn 7:4, 12) pours down through apertures in the vault:
[a] “…and the sluices of heaven opened (Gn 7:11).”
** “The springs of the deep and the sluices of heaven were stopped (Gn 8:2”).
[c] “The equerry on whose arm the king was leaning retorted to Elisha, ‘Even if Yahweh made windows in the sky, could this word come true?’ ‘You will see it with your own eyes,’ Elisha replied, ‘though you will eat none of it.’ (2 K 7:2)”

In addition to the fresh water (clouds, rain, hail and snow) held above the firmament, fresh water was contained under the earth:
[a] “He collects the waters of the sea like a dam, he stores away the abyss in his treasure-house (Ps 33:7).”
** “The waters have made it grow, the deep has made it tall, pouring its rivers round the place where it is planted, sending rivulets to all the wild trees (Ez 31:4).”

Fresh water under the earth wells forth as springs and fountains:
[a] “In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, and on the seventeenth day of the month, that very day all the springs of the great deep burst through, and the sluices of heaven opened (Gn 7:11).”
** “The springs of the deep and the sluices of heaven were stopped up and the heavy rain from heaven was held back (Gn 8:2).”
[c] “Through his knowledge the depths were cleft open, and the clouds distil the dew (Prv 3:20).”

The world********** or universe is imagined as a vast edifice, supported with pillars resting upon foundations laid in the abyss. There are chambers or storehouses for light and darkness, wind, snow and hail. The earth itself is a flat disc or platform (“Or who stretched the measuring line across it”), with edges (“to grasp the earth by its edges”) and is supported by pillars (“What supports its pillars at their bases?”).

Select verses from the Book of Job, Ch. 38 relevant to cosmology:
4 Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundations? Tell me, since you are so well-informed!
5 Who decided its dimensions, do you know? Or who stretched the measuring line across it?
6 What supports its pillars at their bases? Who laid its cornerstone

13 to grasp the earth by its edges and shake the wicked out of it?

16 Have you been right down to the sources of the sea and walked about at the bottom of the Abyss?

19 Which is the way to the home of the Light, and where does darkness live? -

22 Have you visited the place where the snow is stored? Have you seen the stores of hail, 23 which I keep for times of distress, for days of battle and war?

The Earth does not move:
“tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firm, it cannot be moved (1 Chr 16:30),”

“The world is indeed set firm, it can never be shaken; your throne is set firm from of old, from all eternity you exist (Ps 93:2).”

“Say among the nations, ‘Yahweh is king.’ The world is set firm, it cannot be moved. He will judge the nations with justice (Ps 96:10).”

“You fixed the earth on its foundations, for ever and ever it shall not be shaken (Ps 104:5).”

For additional discussion of Hebrew cosmology you can go to this page:
A COMMON COSMOLOGY OF THE ANCIENT WORLD

A re-repost
Click to expand...
 
itinerant1 said:
I listed some of the Semitic peoples that held to this ancient Babylonian view of the cosmos found in the Bible. You ask whether all of the ancients believe this drawing. Well I can’t claim that all of the ancients have seen this particular drawing, but it has been noted in this thread more than once, that the Greeks had a different world-view. Do you remember those posts? Also, among Greek philosophers there were different views of the earth.

Ancient Greek, Egyptians and Semitic races believed the Earth was flat. Classical Greek philosophers and astronomers variously believed in a flat, round, or even cylindrical Earth.

Any good history of science or astronomy can fill you in on all the details of who believed what and when regarding the Earth.

I previously posted Biblical references that support the graphic representation. The OT contains no reference to or Hebrew word whatsoever that indicates a spherical or round Earth. So, one cannot infer a round Earth from the Bible.

Yet we find references to the Earth’s surface as flat (measurable by God), with edges and corners.
Click to expand...
The ancients knew the stars were rotating. Presenting this as a representation for your argument is poor.

Plus in the 5th cetury BC mythology was being intermixed.

The relevant question is what did Adam know?
 
StAnastasia said:
Piping it will not be possible because it would freeze in deep space. In any case, we would need it much sooner than that as terrestrial petroleum sources fall into steep decline.
Click to expand...
SUBJECT: Just how old is shale containing hydrocarbons?

You are quite correct; I was actually injecting a bit of humor. I was implying that the Creator must have a sense of humor by creating such a potential source of fuel so far away which for many years was thought to be all fossil fuel on earth. In any event the energy required to manufacture and maintain such imaginative piping would be “truly out of this world” and at least, based on cost effectiveness, quite prohibitive even for the “Futuristic probers.”

However, there is also shale and mudstone hydrocarbons and there is hope that in the not too distant future most of the world’s oil will come from shale. Inn the USA it is primarily in the Green River formation of Colorado and several other states. Here is the link to a very interesting and relatively short article:
energybulletin.net/node/2680

But what is most interesting to the team of scientists and fossil hunters that I network with is the results of C-14 dating a sample of dark shale containing 10.88 % carbon. The report was just recently circulated a few weeks ago. It’s the first time shale has been C-14 dated. The age was 45,139 +/- 270 RC years BP. Our lady fossil hunter and specialist on insect fossils in the Green River Formation obtained the shale for us from a quarry. The formation according her studies is nominally 2500 feet in depth with some spots up to 5000 feet deep.

The Green River Shale is of the “Eocene period” and allegedly 35-55 million years old in age. It’s quite probable that the now 19th century Darwin/Lyellian, now obsolete geological assumptions, had precluded scientists trained in geology to C-14 date such carabon containing rocky material as our RC physicist can not find any reference to dating oily shale; of course geologists trained in main stream geology would not even consider using $550/sample when they KNOW the shale was formed in lake bottoms, etc. over millions of years. Interestingly above date is similar to other RC dates from Colorado like carbonized fossil wood attached to petrified tree trunks in dinosaur strata of Colorado and lignin from the Glendive Montana Dinosaur and Fossil Museum upper strata of the Montana Badlands. Coal appears to be just slightly older and diamond from 55,000 to 80,000 RC years BP.

COCONINO SANDSTONE OF THE GRAND CANYON: Just as shale was thought to have formed in lake bottoms * the Coconino sandstone strata is considered blown sand and desert dunes with ripple marks which means they formed over long periods of time. jstor.org/pss/30056678 BUT at a meeting of the Geological Society of America (GSA) in Portland Oregon October 18-21 a geologist/paleontologist has reported… “the discovery of dolomite ooliths, small ball-like structures that are only formed in marine settings. Other featurres such as grains of very soft mica are also evident under the microscope. The article further quotes Dr. Whitmore: We would not expect to see these minerals if this sandstone was formed in a desert. Whitmore continues: The blowing action of sand would quickly destroy these minerals; however they might survive if carried and deposited by water.” John Davis, Pulbic Relations Cedarvill University cedarville.edu/Offices/Public-Relations/CampusNews/2009/Whitmore-Presents-Controversial-Discoveries.aspx

*[PDF] INSIDE: A NEW TWIST ON MUD DEPOSITION -FLUME STUDIES. We visualized ripples by shining strong lights through the turbid … assumptions about mud deposition and mudstones do not reflect physical realities. … Formation of Indiana consists of fine to very …
www.sepm.org/sedrecord/SedRec7_2.pdf - Similar

I hope that this will help readers of this thread understand that the PAS in Rome have “missed the boat” as has Darwin and Lyell. They all sort of jumped the gun in their careless assumption that descent from a common ancestor occurred over millions and billions of years. More and more it is looking like those millions and billions of years needed for this common ancestor thing to thrive simply do not exist. Catastrophism better explains the formation of the sediments and creation “at once” by God perhaps only 1000’s of years BP. 🙂
 
buffalo said:
The ancients knew the stars were rotating. Presenting this as a representation for your argument is poor.

Plus in the 5th cetury BC mythology was being intermixed.

The relevant question is what did Adam know?
Click to expand...
Mythology was just not in the mix in the 5th century only, as anyone even vaguely familiar with world history would know.

Constellations changed, as especially the Babylonians knew, since they were diligent observers and recorders of cosmological events, but more so for mythological and superstitious reasons, than scientific. That fact of “rotating” stars, as we know from the history of cultures and science, did not preclude belief in a flat earth. It is your knowledge of cultures and science that is devastatingly poor.

How did you ever come up with the idea that the relevant question is what Adam knew? That makes no sense whatsoever from what we know about the Bible, Hebrew culture, and OT cosmology.

And still you have not addressed the issue of the pre-scientific cosmology in the Bible.
 
hugh_miller said:
The Green River Shale is of the “Eocene period” and allegedly 35-55 million years old in age. It’s quite probable that the now 19th century Darwin/Lyellian, now obsolete geological assumptions, had precluded scientists trained in geology to C-14 date such carabon containing rocky material as our RC physicist can not find any reference to dating oily shale; of course geologists trained in main stream geology would not even consider using $550/sample when they KNOW the shale was formed in lake bottoms, etc. over millions of years. Interestingly above date is similar to other RC dates from Colorado like carbonized fossil wood attached to petrified tree trunks in dinosaur strata of Colorado and lignin from the Glendive Montana Dinosaur and Fossil Museum upper strata of the Montana Badlands. Coal appears to be just slightly older and diamond from 55,000 to 80,000 RC years BP.
Click to expand...
I haven’t had a chance yet to read your posts carefully, but are you saying coal and diamonds were dated using C-14?
 
itinerant1 said:
I haven’t had a chance yet to read your posts carefully, but are you saying coal and diamonds were dated using C-14?
Click to expand...
The diamond dates are spurious, they were being used as calibration to determine the background in a mass spectrometer. The date was a measure of the accuracy of the spectrometer, not a measure of the age of the diamonds.

rossum
 
hugh_miller said:
I hope that this will help readers of this thread understand that the PAS in Rome have “missed the boat” as has Darwin and Lyell. They all sort of jumped the gun in their careless assumption that descent from a common ancestor occurred over millions and billions of years. More and more it is looking like those millions and billions of years needed for this common ancestor thing to thrive simply do not exist. Catastrophism better explains the formation of the sediments and creation “at once” by God perhaps only 1000’s of years BP. 🙂
Click to expand...
??

where?

when?

all over the world?

all the rock formations of the planet?

all the fossils?

even the moon and pieces of meteorites?
 
itinerant1 said:
I haven’t had a chance yet to read your posts carefully, but are you saying coal and diamonds were dated using C-14?
Click to expand...
Yes, by several research teams with dates as young as 43,000 radiocarbon years for coal and 55,000 - >80,000 years for diamonds with concordant dates for six samples from one diamond at 69,400 +/- 1000 RC years BP where RC stands for RadioCarbon years as opposed to “real years”. There are several excellent discussions on web sites but my computer is working too slow today so I can’t get those for you right now. Hopefully my basement main frame unit will work better after my breakfast.

Contamination or machine background is the tact taken by proponents of old earth paradigms but it is a major problem as these dates are repeatable AS great care is taken to eliminate contamination and machine background. It has become even more of a problem as diamond which is >99% plus carbon also contains significant amounts of C-14.
One major lab that dated diamonds submitted by Dr. Andrew Snelling of Answers in Genesis has closed their lab to all outside sample submissions according to the former lab director of this University facility who was suddenly retired; I contacted him to see why I could not submit a sample and he wrote back that they were only doing internal research on their AMS unit. Uhm! i wonder why? The following is a rough summary without giving the +/- range for megafauna, dinosaurs, coal, methane and diamond etc.

Saber tooth tiger from La Brea tar pits in LA: 12,000 - 28,000 RC years BP***
Mammoths in Eurasia: 4000- >53,000 RC years BP
Ancient giant bisonom Alaska: 31,000 RC years BP
Dinosaurs from Texas to Alaska: 23,000-31,000 RC years BP
Neanderthals: 29,000 - 40,000 RC years BP
Coal: 43,000 -50,000 RC years BP
Lignite: 44,000
Amber from US, Poland and Russia: >46,000- 53,000 RC years BP
Limestone [calciuim carbonate] and natural gas: >49,000. RC years BP
Diamonds, world-wide by several labs: 55,000 to >80,000 RC years BP

CONCLUSION; DINOSAURS, MEGAFAUNA AND MEN LIVED AT THE SAME TIME.
BP means before the present
means that sufficient C-14 was present so that this was the minimum RC age but it could be infinite. The old beta machines could give more reliable old dates if they ran a “long count” but once you reach about 32,000 years most labs using the old Beta equipment would report dates as >32,000 years unless you pay an extra $50 to run a long count which then they could give dates within a +/- range. .
Click to expand...
For instance our team project leader, a Ph.D. in geophysics in the 1980’s obtained ages for carbonized wood in “alleged” 108 Million year old hard-pan clay stratum between Cretaceous limestone along the Paluxy River TX of 37,500 + 2000/-3000 years on the older Beta recording equipment at the University of Arizona thus explaining the age for the excavated fossil human and dinosaur footprints in the same stratum. CONCLUSION: The 108 million years for the Cretaceous rocks in and and along the Paluxy River shelves simply do not exist. there were no sample materials in the clays for dating with K/Ar.

I’ve heard on one AMS machine but no reference yet that obtailned 100,000 RC years BP

The labs are getting more and more confidence in their abilities in eliminating contamination and machine background so I suspect many of the above questionable RC ages will eventually become accepted as some references are hinting at right now.:cool:
 
Justin_Mee said:
In my past life as a protestant, the preacher always said that the earth is only 6000 years old and only heathens believed otherwise. I just could not buy into that and my questions went unanswered. It is one in a long, long line of teachings that led me to the true Church. Can anyone explain how this can be taught with a straight face. The nearest answer I received was that when God made the earth, He made the triobites and cephalopods already formed in the rocks. So, such evidence means nothing.
Click to expand...
What I find strange is the idea that God created the rocks with fossils in them. It would seem that God were whimsical in his decisions. It’s also very curious, considering modern physics, to look out into the universe and see galaxies whose light is estimated to have taken 13 billion years to get to us. Why is it necessary to believe that 6,000-10,000 years is our limit?
 
itinerant1 said:
Mythology was just not in the mix in the 5th century only, as anyone even vaguely familiar with world history would know.

Constellations changed, as especially the Babylonians knew, since they were diligent observers and recorders of cosmological events, but more so for mythological and superstitious reasons, than scientific. That fact of “rotating” stars, as we know from the history of cultures and science, did not preclude belief in a flat earth. It is your knowledge of cultures and science that is devastatingly poor.

How did you ever come up with the idea that the relevant question is what Adam knew? That makes no sense whatsoever from what we know about the Bible, Hebrew culture, and OT cosmology.

And still you have not addressed the issue of the pre-scientific cosmology in the Bible.
Click to expand...
You focus on the Babylonians. Why?

Oh yes it does. Since Adam had infused knowledge it is an interesting question as to what if any cosmology God had shared with him. The thread of knowledge that is present in the Bible is what I care about. Conflating pagans mythologies serves no purpose. We have to ferret out what Adam’s descendants who provided the material for Moses to compile understood. Do we have those drawings?
 
larkin31 said:
Philipp;6409508:
Dinosaurs from Texas to Alaska: 23,000-31,000 RC years BP
Click to expand...
Would you simply focus on this one for us. What is the evidence and data for this dating?
Click to expand...
I’m interested in the abstracts and journal citations, not third-party hearsay. So, citing Answers in Genesis, et al, doesn’t count.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top