The earth is only 6000 years old.

[grannymh]

Redshift and blueshift involves measuring the shift of spectral lines given off by a moving object. This does not apply to how far away a thing is, just how fast it is moving towards or away from us. It is still highly arguable whether anything can travel faster than light, and if anything is superluminal, we wouldn’t see it at all.

My question was, why it is necessary for Catholics to believe that the earth is between 6,000-10,000 years old? Why could we not allow for evolution, stellar formation, etc. which is scientifically verifiable, but still hold that there were two main *human *ancestors in whom God implanted a soul?

To answer your questions. There is no Catholic doctrine requiring belief in the age of the earth because this is in the scientific realm. The doctrine related to the earth is that God is its Creator. However, the Catholic Church has always encouraged inquiry and exploration of the natural world. You know the saying – where two or more scientists are gathered, there will always be a debate.

Regarding, the two sole parents of the human species, known as Adam and Eve, there is a difficulty with any scientific theory. As you know by definition, empirical science is limited to the material and physical world. What we learn there gives glory to God. But there are some scientific theories which cannot be applied to human nature. We are a unique, intimate unification of spirit/matter, rational/corporeal, soul and body. Scientific theories cannot touch our immaterial, immortal, eternal souls.

A scientific theory such as evolution can be explored and tested in the natural world.
But humans, being body and soul, are in both the natural and supernatural worlds.
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 355); therefore, natural science cannot explain the complete human being. The Catholic Church does explain the complete human being because this is in the Church’s realm of faith and morals. The doctrine is that the individual humans, Adam and Eve, are real.

Blessings,
granny

Divine Revelation trumps.

 

[edwest2]

Redshift and blueshift involves measuring the shift of spectral lines given off by a moving object. This does not apply to how far away a thing is, just how fast it is moving towards or away from us. It is still highly arguable whether anything can travel faster than light, and if anything is superluminal, we wouldn’t see it at all.

My question was, why it is necessary for Catholics to believe that the earth is between 6,000-10,000 years old? Why could we not allow for evolution, stellar formation, etc. which is scientifically verifiable, but still hold that there were two main *human * ancestors in whom God implanted a soul?

There is a relationship between redshift and distance.

laserstars.org/news/3C345.html

Regarding your question. I think the true and correct answer here is to create a linkage between concepts accepted by secular humanists and events that can properly be called miraculous. In a vain attempt to link science to Biblical events, God is constrained to work only as man has decided He can. Science becomes the way to filter Biblical information even though:

A. There are no peer reviewed papers analyzing Genesis for “scientific” data, and
B. I am told that science cannot study God or the supernatural.

For example, Jesus literally raised people from the dead, cleansed lepers and gave sight to the blind. And the scientific data regarding all of this is what? If you were a scientist standing next to Him while a boy was being carried past in his own funeral and He brought him back to life, what would your scientific explanation be? For any of it?

According to the purely secular humanist worldview, there were no two individuals which we call Adam and Eve. Second, Catholics are required to believe that Eve was formed from Adam’s side. Which is something God can do. The soul is something they can easily discard.

So the goal is not to follow Catholic teaching but to replace it with science while ignoring the fact that God, being God, can perform miracles.

God bless,
Ed

 

[StAnastasia]

My question was, why it is necessary for Catholics to believe that the earth is between 6,000-10,000 years old? Why could we not allow for evolution, stellar formation, etc. which is scientifically verifiable, but still hold that there were two main *human * ancestors in whom God implanted a soul?

Caritasregat, I know the names of my thirty-two great-great-great-grandparents. Which of those sixteen pairs are my two main ancestors?

 

[buffalo]

Caritasregat, I know the names of my thirty-two great-great-great-grandparents. Which of those sixteen pairs are my two main ancestors?

What did your grandmothers mother say?

 

[StAnastasia]

What did your grandmothers mother say?

About what?

 

[StAnastasia]

But humans, being body and soul, are in both the natural and supernatural worlds. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 355); therefore, natural science cannot explain the complete human being. The Catholic Church does explain the complete human being because this is in the Church’s realm of faith and morals. The doctrine is that the individual humans, Adam and Eve, are real.

Granny, are you contending that Adam and Eve did not have DNA?

 

[grannymh]

Caritasregat, I know the names of my thirty-two great-great-great-grandparents. Which of those sixteen pairs are my two main ancestors?

Maybe I can help.

You are a human being and I am a human being which means that we share the same two first parents of the human species. Granted that you could choose any two ancestors as your main ones; however, I like to go way, way back to our first ancestors, Adam and Eve, and call them the main ones.

Blessings,
granny

Human nature is a gift from God.

 

[StAnastasia]

You are a human being and I am a human being which means that we share the same two first parents of the human species. Granted that you could choose any two ancestors as your main ones; however, I like to go way, way back to our first ancestors, Adam and Eve, and call them the main ones.

Granny, let me refresh you on the math of genealogy. I have two parents, four grandparents, eight great-grandparents, etc. I could call two of my eight great-grandparents the “main ones” but all my other great-grandparents would still remain great-grandparents. I could call “Adam” and “Eve” my two main ancestors, but all the other ancestors would still remain ancestors.

Got it? Quiz tomorrow!

 

[Philipp]

There is another factor to this posting beyond being a pre-scientific concept of the universe. Since it is a graphic representation of the Hebrew conception of the world, please note the heading, “Heavenly Seat of the Divinity” placed above the world. The black area is captioned “Sheol”. This is the home of the dead (also called the nether world) in the depths of the earth.

When looking at this drawing from the point of view of a theistic culture, one sees God present in the prime position. There is the relationship of God, the Creator, to all the known world.

What is even more interesting is the inclusion of Sheol on the vertical line extending from the “Heavenly Seat of the Divinity.” The Catholic Bible Dictionary, Scott Hahn, General Editor, ISBN: 978-0-385-51229-9 says that God’s power extended over Sheol which was considered a place where the dead dwelt in gloom. Yet, there was the hope that God would not abandon His people and would bring redemption. (Scripture references include: Psalm 139: 7-8;
Proverbs 15: 11; Job 26:6; Wisdom 16:13; Psalm 16:10; Psalm 49:16; 1 Samuel 2:6)

This drawing demonstrates the ancient belief that the first human, Adam, was both mortal and immortal. His body and subsequently that of his descendents would return to the earth, but Adam would not disappear. God continued to watch over the dead because of their immortal souls. Our spiritual immortal soul enables us to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 355 - 421)

The connection between God, the world, and us as descendents of Adam, is still a vertical line.

Blessings,
granny

Human life is meant for eternal life with God.

Thank you grannymh for a more precise interpetation of that drawing. Everyone on this thread should know that accurate interpretation of scripture, such drawings and science are important to understanding our origins and we have an inalienable right to know to the best of our abililties where we came from, how we got here and where we are going and NOT just the teaching of one unprovable hypothesis that we come from a common ancestor - perhaps something like one of the ancient BC mythical religions such as the Mithras religion of Greece and Rome - from a rock comes to mind.

Only now days are belief system is a little more complicated. We are products of a “big Bang” where in our atoms came from stars over billions of years as opposed to creation in situ “at once” by a intelligent designer we call The hOly Trinity.

 

[larkin31]

First, what I would rather have is a list of the researchers of that web site you posted the link to. No names or credentials are given, not even whose instruments are used (that I can remember).

Secondly, I would like you to answer rossum’s point, which basically is that C-14 couldn’t give you an older date even when the carbon is older than that.

So I asked, why are you not using the other methods to determine whether the samples are older? And, usually, samples are cross-dated by stratification, other evidence in proximity, other fossils of the same species, geological processes and known time markers, etc. When an object is found to be a gross anomoly, the entire process is usually redone to check all the samples (for contamination) and all the proceeedures and dating methods for accuracy. I don’t see this happening in the description on that web-page, but maybe I missed something.

Phil?

 

[larkin31]

Please show why the following alternate hypothesis to the one the “saint” promotes can not be used as a valid hypothesis for origins for the sake of discussion as proposed by the aforementioned popes at least among Catholics?

This sentence is hard to understand. You want a reaction to this next quotation?

“Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on Earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have obviously been created AT ONCE by the One and the same Creator by variation in the DNA structure of each life form. [Simul in Latin meaning “at once” in English, from Lateran IV, AD 1215] The bolded part does not at all follow as a logical necessity. Genetic “relatedness” has nothing to do necessarily with simultaneous creation, nor that it be supernatural.

 

[buffalo]

About what?

Which of those sixteen are your ancestors?

 

[Caritasregat]

To answer your questions. There is no Catholic doctrine requiring belief in the age of the earth because this is in the scientific realm. The doctrine related to the earth is that God is its Creator. However, the Catholic Church has always encouraged inquiry and exploration of the natural world. You know the saying – where two or more scientists are gathered, there will always be a debate.

Regarding, the two sole parents of the human species, known as Adam and Eve, there is a difficulty with any scientific theory. As you know by definition, empirical science is limited to the material and physical world. What we learn there gives glory to God. But there are some scientific theories which cannot be applied to human nature. We are a unique, intimate unification of spirit/matter, rational/corporeal, soul and body. Scientific theories cannot touch our immaterial, immortal, eternal souls.

A scientific theory such as evolution can be explored and tested in the natural world.
But humans, being body and soul, are in both the natural and supernatural worlds.
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 355); therefore, natural science cannot explain the complete human being. The Catholic Church does explain the complete human being because this is in the Church’s realm of faith and morals. The doctrine is that the individual humans, Adam and Eve, are real.

Blessings,
granny

Divine Revelation trumps.

Well said. I think that’s the main problem in debates between “scientists” and “theists”: Quite frankly, you can’t put a soul under the microscope…

 

[Caritasregat]

Granny, let me refresh you on the math of genealogy. I have two parents, four grandparents, eight great-grandparents, etc. I could call two of my eight great-grandparents the “main ones” but all my other great-grandparents would still remain great-grandparents. I could call “Adam” and “Eve” my two main ancestors, but all the other ancestors would still remain ancestors.

Got it? Quiz tomorrow!

This seems to me to be somewhat fallacious: Supposing human lineage simply kept broadening as we traced it back through our ancestors; would there not have to be ten thousand times more people on earth some one hundred generations ago?
I suppose there is a kind of slippery slope which goes along with this: How many amoebae did it take to spawn life? Trillions mutated at once?
Regarding actual Catholic teaching, I think Pius XII’s Humani Generis, A.36-37, addresses the issue of human ancestory.

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

…the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin…

 

[Philipp]

(1) First, what I would rather have is a list of the researchers of that web site you posted the link to. No names or credentials are given, not even whose instruments are used (that I can remember).

(2) Secondly, I would like you to answer rossum’s point, which basically is that C-14 couldn’t give you an older date even when the carbon is older than that.

(3) So I asked, why are you not using the other methods to determine whether the samples are older? And, usually, samples are cross-dated by stratification, other evidence in proximity, other fossils of the same species, geological processes and known time markers, etc. When an object is found to be a gross anomoly, the entire process is usually redone to check all the samples (for contamination) and all the proceeedures and dating methods for accuracy. I don’t see this happening in the description on that web-page, but maybe I missed something.

(1) WHO WE ARE [from the web site www.dinosaurc14ages.com]

We are a group of consultants in geology, paleontology, chemistry, engineering, and education who perform research on fossils. We are affiliated with no church or university. We are open to ideas concerning the past history of the earth especially anomalies of science. We do not receive any funding from any government foundation. Therefore we do not have to hold fast to certain ideas or paradigms for fear of losing our funding or our tenure. We are not all of any particular creed or denomination. We welcome scientific information that may not be published in respected journals due to its controversial nature. We participate in excavations, arrange for radiocarbon dating of fossil material at licensed laboratories, work with museums and prepare reports for publication world-wide. We have investigated fossil material from all over the world.​

      WHAT WE ARE DOING

FOSSIL COLLECTING AND ANALYSIS: We collect samples of fossils of various species from the United States including Alaska , the Arctic region, and locations world-wide while working with other teams of scientists. We have performed analysis using various equipment and methods. We have examined exact elemental composition, carbon content, collagen content, bioapatite content and carbon 14 content as examples.

CARBON 14 DATING: We have performed carbon 14 analysis of bones, fossils, soils etc. to determine ages of materials found in various locations.

CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE AND PUBLISHING OF REPORTS: We participated several international conferences in Italy and Germany concerning the impossibility of evolution. Several abstracts of our papers have recently been submitted to geological, paleontology, and science journals.

LITERATURE SEARCHING: We are examining Radiocarbon journal and many other technical journals to improve our expertise concerning C-14 dating, its problems, best methods and pre treatment of samples to ensure elimination of possible old and young contaminants.

ANOMALY INVESTIGATION: We are constantly on the alert to anomalies in geology, earth’s history, paleontology, and radiometric dating, as these are often keys to unlocking new knowledge of the earth’s past. For example, carbon 14 exists in coal, diamonds, amber, and dinosaur fossils and none should exist according to evolutionary theory.

**If the above listing of who they on their home page proves unsatisfactory then go to the contact page and join one of the recommended expeditions. There maybe you can ask around while using a shovel or contact the web master if you prefer to just conduct all your research on a computer. **

There are about 20 very interesting topics including science artticles from the media -Great background for those interested in topics on origins.

        FOSSILS     HISTORY     ANOMALIES     CARBON 14 DATING

Kinds of fossils, World Views, Interesting articles, Dinosaurs in History, Dino C-14 dates,
Carbon 14 Dating, Radioactive Decay, Mudstone forming, Oil Formation, Wood to Stone,
Sediments, Worldwide Research, Grand Canyon Research, Conferences, Footprints,
Dinosaur Blood, Contact Us

CONTINUED

 

[Philipp]

CONTINUED

(2) & (3) Mainly because those millions and billions of years do not appear to exist as already mentioned numerous times. Check my previous posts to Rossum and others. Dr. Marie Claire van Oosterwyck tried to convince the users of those radio decay methods to study chronology of the African hominids and the apes by performing experiments but she lost her directorship of a Belgian University lab in 1975 when it appeared that she could blow the whistle on their nefarious activities.
She is a mineralogist and should know what technology is useful and what is not.
These samples were checked and rechecked and we still obtailn concordant C-14 ages. What more do you want out?

There are now many more evidences that make it ludicrous to try and date volcanic materials such as: (1) Radioactive decay rates can change under the influence of ultrasonic cavitation. Recently Fabio Cardone of the Institute per Lo Studio dei Materiali Nanostrutturati in Rome and his colleagues have shown a dramatic increase by a factor of 10,000 in the decay rate of thorium-228 in water as a result of ultrasonic cavitation. Ultrasonic cavitation is commonly known to occur under certain flood and water flow so if you can’t date the fossils with C-14 methods you will not know their ages. From the page on radio decay on www.dinosaurc14ages.com.

(2) The study of stratification is also useless as strata is NOT laid down as a function of time; the dinosaur bones were in the Montana Badlands which are supposedly 65 to 68 M years old by evo assumptions of strata and radiometric dating. I gave those lab and flume references in previous posts as well that show strata is not laid down by function of time or deposited in lakes or as wind blown sand over long periods of time. They apparently were deposted by rapid flowilng water - See Grand Canyon topic on
www.dinosaurc14ages.com

(3) There is no volcanism immediately above or below the dinosaur burial sites for the two femurs sawed and studied for C-14 dating. LIke the Paluxy River TX nothing available for Old Earth dating methods; that’s another great reason for C-14 dating bones like the ones claimed as our alleged hominid ancestors in Africa. Strata, I repeat, is NOT laid down as a function of time.

(4) Cost for performing such ludicrous experiments with K/Ar etc. are quite prohibitive as well but if the funds become available I for one would be happy to paraticipate in such a comparative study between the dates for C-14 vs. other long age methods if samples are available from volcanic materials. What say ye?? Got any money anyone?? if you do or know someone or some foundation who are willing to end this controversy let’s move on beyond this constant yacking?

 

[itinerant1]

**“Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on Earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have obviously been created AT ONCE by the One and the same Creator by variation in the DNA structure of each life form. [Simul in Latin meaning “at once” in English, from Lateran IV, AD 1215] **

What is the source of this statement?

 

[itinerant1]

Phillip,

Did you make up the foregoing statement? The statement’s English is bad, and its science and theology are questionable.

**“Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on Earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have obviously been created AT ONCE by the One and the same Creator by variation in the DNA structure of each life form. [Simul in Latin meaning “at once” in English, from Lateran IV, AD 1215] **

 

[larkin31]

CONTINUED

(2) & (3) Mainly because those millions and billions of years do not appear to exist as already mentioned numerous times. Check my previous posts to Rossum and others. Dr. Marie Claire van Oosterwyck tried to convince the users of those radio decay methods to study chronology of the African hominids and the apes by performing experiments but she lost her directorship of a Belgian University lab in 1975 when it appeared that she could blow the whistle on their nefarious activities.
She is a mineralogist and should know what technology is useful and what is not.
These samples were checked and rechecked and we still obtailn concordant C-14 ages. What more do you want out?

There are now many more evidences that make it ludicrous to try and date volcanic materials such as: (1) Radioactive decay rates can change under the influence of ultrasonic cavitation. Recently Fabio Cardone of the Institute per Lo Studio dei Materiali Nanostrutturati in Rome and his colleagues have shown a dramatic increase by a factor of 10,000 in the decay rate of thorium-228 in water as a result of ultrasonic cavitation. Ultrasonic cavitation is commonly known to occur under certain flood and water flow so if you can’t date the fossils with C-14 methods you will not know their ages. From the page on radio decay on www.dinosaurc14ages.com.

(2) The study of stratification is also useless as strata is NOT laid down as a function of time; the dinosaur bones were in the Montana Badlands which are supposedly 65 to 68 M years old by evo assumptions of strata and radiometric dating. I gave those lab and flume references in previous posts as well that show strata is not laid down by function of time or deposited in lakes or as wind blown sand over long periods of time. They apparently were deposted by rapid flowilng water - See Grand Canyon topic on
www.dinosaurc14ages.com

(3) There is no volcanism immediately above or below the dinosaur burial sites for the two femurs sawed and studied for C-14 dating. LIke the Paluxy River TX nothing available for Old Earth dating methods; that’s another great reason for C-14 dating bones like the ones claimed as our alleged hominid ancestors in Africa. Strata, I repeat, is NOT laid down as a function of time.

(4) Cost for performing such ludicrous experiments with K/Ar etc. are quite prohibitive as well but if the funds become available I for one would be happy to paraticipate in such a comparative study between the dates for C-14 vs. other long age methods if samples are available from volcanic materials. What say ye?? Got any money anyone?? if you do or know someone or some foundation who are willing to end this controversy let’s move on beyond this constant yacking?

So, no one gets a name or a published article or paper or book other than this anonymous web page?

Something is not right here.

And then you ask for money?

 

[Philipp]

What is the source of this statement?

Very good question. It is a revision of the Saint A.'s quote from a Rome conference to wit:

**“Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism.” ~ Communion and Stewardship (2002) **

It was an attempt on my part to promote a compromise. (1) The first portion was from the above quote. (2) I added the second portion which I think is in full agreement with the church fathers but bringing in a bit of science from todays genetics on the mechansim the Creator used. I think it make a good explanation on how we got here without belittling “The Faith of our Fathers.” to wit is the revised version:

**“Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on Earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have obviously been created AT ONCE by the One and the same Creator by variation in the DNA structure of each life form. [Simul in Latin meaning “at once” in English, from Lateran IV, AD 1215] **

I think both speak to how we on this thread have been interpreting what science is now telling us. I think the latter statement which agrees with the “Faith of our Fathers” makes much more sense as it it provides a mechanism which the one from the Communion and Stewardship simply does not.

What say ye?