Tree Rings a Problem for 6,000 Year Old Earth

[NW82]

NW82,

The problem is that many conservative churches are teaching that there is nothing between creationism and atheism. I have heard this from the pulpit at churches within walking distance of my home. There is nothing but creationism and atheism, the pastor says, liberal Christianity is a sham. I have talked to people who were raised this way, found out that creationism doesn't work, and severed their last link with Christianity, becoming atheists, agnostics, or humanists or something, but not Christians. I have heard the same pastor who preach this dangerous doctrine complain that they can't figure out what is happening to their young people. That is, youth raised in the church just disappear one day and never come back.

I wish you could convince the creationists that this is "a moot point."

I am a creationist. I have no problem believing that the earth is 6K years old, but even if I'm wrong it changes nothing about what Christ did on the cross. The trouble with the OP argument is that it presupposes that God's sovereignty is in question, it isn't. Is it possible that what we see though "science" is true and that the world is billions of years old, yes. However the reverse is also true, it is entirely possible that God spoke into being creation as it is right now, and we only see what we see through a limited human viewpoint. Nothing in that stops God from being who he is. God can do what he wants, when he wants, how he wants by definition; before it's said yes there are caveats, e.g. God cannot lie, but my point is clear.

 

[Dale]

I am a creationist. I have no problem believing that the earth is 6K years old, but even if I'm wrong it changes nothing about what Christ did on the cross. The trouble with the OP argument is that it presupposes that God's sovereignty is in question, it isn't. Is it possible that what we see though "science" is true and that the world is billions of years old, yes. However the reverse is also true, it is entirely possible that God spoke into being creation as it is right now, and we only see what we see through a limited human viewpoint. Nothing in that stops God from being who he is. God can do what he wants, when he wants, how he wants by definition; before it's said yes there are caveats, e.g. God cannot lie, but my point is clear.

NW82: << The trouble with the OP argument is that it presupposes that God's sovereignty is in question >>

No it doesn't. I never intended to question God's sovereignty, which isn't what this thread is about. I'm sure that God knows all about tree rings.

NW82: << it is entirely possible that God spoke into being creation as it is right now, >>
and
<< God cannot lie >>

I have pointed out in the past that we are seeing light from stars that took millions of years to get here, and if you count distant galaxies, billions of years. Creationists have told me that God created the universe with that light already in motion. Huh? If so, God designed the entire universe to dupe us. Why would God lie to us about the age of the universe? It's odd that you would say "God cannot lie" in your post when it looks like that is exactly what you are suggesting.

I pointed out the significance of tree rings precisely because it is so simple. It doesn't depend on nuclear decay and other things that ordinary people have trouble visualizing.

 

[salt-n-light]

What is dead, at what point in time can you say someone is dead? Science has a funny way to lose things that does not line up with what they believe. They want things to look nice and neat and tidy and they are willing to adjust the evidence so everything lines up the way they want it to.

Usually 3 days is what it takes for the body to rot. So not only dead, but dead to the point where it would be impossible to revive.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Usually 3 days is what it takes for the body to rot. So not only dead, but dead to the point where it would be impossible to revive.

So what would happen if they were able to revive them after two days? Does that mean they would have a zombie. Someone that is alive but their body is rotted away? I remember at Halloween one year I put up a: "beware of zombie" sign. It really did scare one of the little kids and his brother had to tell him not to worry that it was just a joke. My son wanted to dress up like a zombie that year with a gas mask wearing some sort of a ragged suit.

Jesus friend Lazarus was dead in the tomb for four days. People were very concerned about his body being rotted. Still the resurrection power of God / Jesus was able to rise him up and restore his body. So it is a good thing to be a friend of Jesus. If we are going to have our part in the resurrection then the resurrection power of God should already be at work in us.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Creationists have told me that God created the universe with that light already in motion. Huh?

I have no issue with YEC when properly understood. But the universe is a lot older then a few thousand years. Bishop Ussher only looked at the last 6,000 years. He basically has NOTHING to say about what happened before that because they had very little information to work with at the time. I have his book and his 2,000 page book begins with written history around 6,000 years ago. No one has ever proven any of Usshers book to be wrong. We should all read and study and learn as much as the good bishop so we could write a book with that much information. Even if people only use his book for reference. Ie when was Noah's flood. When did Adam and Eve live and so on.

As far as the stars there is a lot more to it than just the light. We are made out of star stuff. We are a carbon based life that was formed in the furnace of a star. So a star had to live it's life and explode to create some of the elements that we are made of. Also we are an oxygen based life and it takes millions of years for all of that oxygen to be created.

Every element burns at a different color. So you can use a spectroscope to tell what elements are in any star you want to examine. Also you can measure the red shift which is a lot like the police equipment they use to give people a speeding ticket. The math is pretty easy and a fifth grader should be able to understand.

Another example is the spindown rate of the Earth and the receding rate that the moon is moving away from the earth. Clearly the Earth and the Moon were planets that had a collision at one point in time and now they are a duel planet system that have an effect on each other. The best computer model is that there was not so much a direct hit as the moon bounced off of the earth and gravity put them into the duel system we see today.

Today we have Heaven and Earth, day and night, land and sea, good and evil. We live in a dual system even though God is a singularity. Some people call this a synergy. Just like there is a direct connection between the spin-down rate of the earth and the receding rate of the moon. The energy from one is transferred to the other. This does not even get into the butterfly effect where a minor cause can have a profound effect.

The astronauts left more then their footprints on the moon. They also left a Retroreflector that can be used to get very accurate measurements. I remember an episode on the Big Bang program where they did an experiment on that. I am not sure how the experiment came out because someone was using the telescope to check up on a guy and his wife.

 

[Dale]

What calls itself science stands against God. There are all sorts of tricks they use to try to convince people that they are genuinely discrediting what the Bible says. But, the reality is they are deceived and trying to force that deception on those who should understand the games being played.

If God is real and God, in fact, created everything out of nothing (which defies scientific reason), then God is fully capable of starting with a tree that had already defied the assumptions that science would later put upon it.

I love what Chinchilla said in comparing with Adam and Eve. There is no suggestion that God created them as babies.

Why do you believe that science is at war with Christianity?
Why do you believe that Christians should be at war with science?
I don't get it.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Why do you believe that science is at war with Christianity?
Why do you believe that Christians should be at war with science?
I don't get it.

There is a lot of discussion as to what goes into the text books we give our students. A lot of parents esp parents from the Bible belt are very involved with their PTA groups and School boards to make sure that their children are not being taught something that conflicts with their religious beliefs. This purification process does provide our students with very accurate science books based on all the latest information & research on the subject.

 

[gideon123]

Thank you for the reminder about the Bristlecone pines. They are quite close to my house. My wife and I need to go and visit them. They are such a wonderful blessing from God!

It is appalling that people will even argue over trees. My thought is that we need to fire all of the world's leaders and take away their jobs. Instead, put the humble Bristlecone pine in charge of everything. After all ... one of these trees lived for 10,000 years ... without ever declaring war on anyone, never stealing any possessions, and never belittling its neighbors. Clearly, their wisdom exceeds ours. And no doubt God is aware of it.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Instead, put the humble Bristlecone pine in charge of everything.

Isaiah 55:12 "You will go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and hills will burst into song before you, and all the trees of the field will clap their hands."

Romans 8:19 "For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed."

 

[joshua 1 9]

Thank you for ignoring the entire rest of my post, where the rationale of the first sentence is made.

Just what is it that you are wanting to have a conversation on or what do you want me to comment on?

 

[John Bowen]

The Problem is modern people think literally.Like lawyers that Jesus spoke about. People in Biblical times didn't think that way . That's why Jesus spoke in parables ( stories ) cause that's how they understood and liked .Ever read Aseop's Tales that has been totally removed from schools today , but was always read to little kids before .We understood animals couldn't really talk , but the moral lessons are still true as they were in ancient times . That's whey people today are throwing out the Bible with the bath water saying this couldn't have happened.Without looking at the higher truths in the Bible that are even more real today.Yeah Noah's world flooded , but his world was as far as he could see. Black and white thinking is the problem true or false , all or nothing .That's why Jesus wanted us to follow the middle way between the two and higher. And all the great scientists Planck , Einstein, Newton , Bacon, Pasteur . Washington Carver, and more than I write , through science saw there was divine intelligence behind everything making all this possible that they couldn't deny .

 

[joshua 1 9]

Only according to a strictly literalist interpretation (which is a relatively recent invention, btw)

Originally published in Latin in the 1650s, Ussher's masterpiece is a literary classic. I would not consider that to be recent. The "literalist interpretation" is almost exclusively based on Usshers book.

 

[joshua 1 9]

but the moral lessons are still true as they were in ancient times

The Greeks understood archetypes and personality types and that is still valid today. Even if you have clay mixed with iron as we read about in Daniel.

 

[NW82]

NW82: << The trouble with the OP argument is that it presupposes that God's sovereignty is in question >>

No it doesn't. I never intended to question God's sovereignty, which isn't what this thread is about. I'm sure that God knows all about tree rings.

NW82: << it is entirely possible that God spoke into being creation as it is right now, >>
and
<< God cannot lie >>

I have pointed out in the past that we are seeing light from stars that took millions of years to get here, and if you count distant galaxies, billions of years. Creationists have told me that God created the universe with that light already in motion. Huh? If so, God designed the entire universe to dupe us. Why would God lie to us about the age of the universe? It's odd that you would say "God cannot lie" in your post when it looks like that is exactly what you are suggesting.

I pointed out the significance of tree rings precisely because it is so simple. It doesn't depend on nuclear decay and other things that ordinary people have trouble visualizing.

And if God spoke trees into existence with the rings already in place? What does that do to your age theory? Are you stating God couldn't do that?

 

[joshua 1 9]

And if God spoke trees into existence with the rings already in place? What does that do to your age theory? Are you stating God couldn't do that?

The story is still there in the rings of the tree. The years of plenty and the years of drought. We also have the layers of the glaciers that goes back millions of years and they have a wealth of information. There is dust and little air bubbles filled with a wealth of information.

 

[drjean]

Many creationists insist that the earth should be no more than 6,000 years old. Apparently the idea is that the Second Coming is imminent, and after that there will be the 1,000 Millenial reign, and then the Final Judgment. The world, from creation to Second Coming to Final Judgment will come out to 7,000 years. By this reasoning, the world began around 4,000 BC (Bishop Ussher?) and Noah's Deluge was about 3,000 BC.

The Bible simply doesn't say how old the earth is or how long God intends the earth's history to be. A 6,000 year old earth is an arbitrary idea.

Science is in constant collision with the notion of a 6,000 year old earth.

Take tree rings, for example. How simple can you get?

"Bristlecone pine wood that has fallen to the ground can remain intact for thousands of years in the cold, dry climate of the White Mountains. Using a cross-dating technique that overlaps tree-ring patterns of living trees with the still intact patterns of dead wood, scientists have assembled a continuous tree-ring chronology extending nearly 10,000 years."


Link
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/inyo/learning/nature-science/?cid=stelprdb5138621

And just how is this possible since the first record of tree rings isn't that old... The Greek botanist Theophrastus (ca. 371 – ca. 287 BC) first mentioned that the wood of trees has rings

so that must be one huge tree from his era they found with 8000 rings! But reading the materials from a few sources shows that scientists are doing what we simply call estimating... and then they have to add through "carbon dating" which is not an exact science. In one article I read it said rings could be as much as 300 years off in count. Huh? Whatever that means. Sounds like jargon to me.

But most young earthers give the earth a possible 10k years anyway. But surely not millions like.. well.. nvr mnd. Too many variables to think that way...

God made EVERYTHING with age already... no eggs, no babies, no seed germs only first.... so why not trees too!

 

[Dale]

And just how is this possible since the first record of tree rings isn't that old... The Greek botanist Theophrastus (ca. 371 – ca. 287 BC) first mentioned that the wood of trees has rings

so that must be one huge tree from his era they found with 8000 rings! But reading the materials from a few sources shows that scientists are doing what we simply call estimating... and then they have to add through "carbon dating" which is not an exact science. In one article I read it said rings could be as much as 300 years off in count. Huh? Whatever that means. Sounds like jargon to me.

But most young earthers give the earth a possible 10k years anyway. But surely not millions like.. well.. nvr mnd. Too many variables to think that way...

God made EVERYTHING with age already... no eggs, no babies, no seed germs only first.... so why not trees too!

It has nothing to do with when tree rings were first noticed.
I gave a link in the OP which should answer most of the questions, and it also tells how the use of tree ring data have been used to improve carbon dating.

 

[pat34lee]

There are over 76,000 species of animals, reptiles and amphibians on land. They could not fit in one ark, much less survive in it for 40 days and nights. There are close to a million species of insects. Many of these could not survive global flooding. It took millions of years for life to become established across the globe. Not like these creatures could tread water for 40 days and nights. The story of Noah is not scientific.

No, the Bible isn't scientific. It's historic. Factual just the same.

Life establishes itself very quickly:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/35-years-after-mt-st-helens-eruption-nature-returns/

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

Why do you believe that science is at war with Christianity?
Why do you believe that Christians should be at war with science?
I don't get it.

I don't believe that Christians need to be at war with real science. Real science is about discovery. It is exciting. And, when science begins with the correct starting point, God, and doesn't eliminate God from the possible solution set for things we can't possibly understand, then I love it!

But, I don't bury my head in the sand, either. I see the discrimination against those who won't sign on to evolution. I see the fake methods of dating used to lead to the opposite of what the Bible says. You do realize that the supposed geologic column can be created by a flood, too, right? But, since they don't accept that, they use this as the basis for all their other methods. The methods have been showed by real scientists to be severely flawed. The whole concept of macro evolution (changing of one type into another) has never ever been shown to happen. Yet people who call themselves scientists not only accept it, but lie to support it. The idea of a "big bang" that "produces everything from nothing" randomly happens with no outside cause is the most obnoxiously stupid idea that has ever been posited; yet, that is the foundation of the false science that rests against God and on evolution.

Do you not think that the world is at enmity with God, like Scripture says? And that the carnal mind is at enmity with God, like Scripture says? So, if the carnal mind controls what science says to the future generations, is it helping or hindering real Christians from raising their kids to have faith in God? And, the deception isn't always straight forward. The devil used Truth. He just twisted it.

So, how can kids see untwisted Truth when the starting point of what the world calls science begins without God? Where real science doesn't have to begin without God, nor does real science have to claim and lie about things it has never seen and cannot prove. How many fake missing links have false scientists tried to claim that are still in the textbooks, though proven to be hoaxes? Why is macro-evolution even allowed to be taught when it will never be proven? And why is the best theory, creation, not allowed to be taught?

Have you ever watched the debates of various heads of university science departments and a creationist? Do you really not believe that what calls itself science isn't at war with God?

 

[Monna]

They could eat from this tree it was not forbidden ,

That is true. But there is no evidence given us that they did. If, as you say, they were already immortal physically, why would there be such a tree and such fruit? It would be entirely unnecessary. The statement in Genesis 3 in which God closes the option, is precisely because eating the fruit of the tree of life would have changed their physical (mortal) life duration only (since they were now spiritually dead, it is only their physical life that would be affected). The implication is that they had not eaten it previously and because of their current situation should not (for their own sakes) eat it now.