Evidence of a worldwide flood

[BPPLEE]

Yes. Scientific theories do change since all of them are intentionally presented as a web of collected evalulations wherein each strand of data is provisionally held in connection with all of the others and is continuously open to further revision. The same goes, though for our understanding of the Bible.

And that's okay since the reality of God's existence or of the nature of His Creation doesn't depend upon our human level understanding to "make it true."

No one "understands" God.

 

[BPPLEE]

Are those the only two options you know about?

a guess, a lie, a hypotheses, a belief, an explanation, a statement based on a theory?

 

[BPPLEE]

OK, fine. But remember: it's a feature not a bug and it shows science is alive and healthy.

A bug can be turned into a feature simply by documenting it

 

[Platte]

So it would seem, but he keeps dodging that and similar questions. I want to hear it from Platte.

There is no gotcha. Whats missing for me from carbon dating and radiometric dating are simply examples that show me that they actually work. I have not been able to secure the examples. In lieu of real life examples then I have to rely on scientists describing how they work and how they should work.
Would be cool to see a You Tube video where they excavate soft tissue of something that died 120 years ago and then do a carbon dating excercise to show the result and let us all see that indeed the carbon dating is showing an age of 120 years. That would give me confidence that carbon dating indeed works and is a valid dating method.

 

[Estrid]

Yeah well it made me be open to more than one possibility but it's kind of funny how all the theories change when a jawbone or a tooth is found.

Then you should be able to give us an example.
( you cant)

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

There is no gotcha. Whats missing for me from carbon dating and radiometric dating are simply examples that show me that they actually work. I have not been able to secure the examples. In lieu of real life examples then I have to rely on scientists describing how they work and how they should work.
Would be cool to see a You Tube video where they excavate soft tissue of something that died 120 years ago and then do a carbon dating excercise to show the result and let us all see that indeed the carbon dating is showing an age of 120 years. That would give me confidence that carbon dating indeed works and is a valid dating method.

Soft tissue is incredibly rare to find since it can only be sustained under really specific circumstances.

Also... if you want to know, why don't you go look for it yourself?

 

[Estrid]

Seems like they would want more to go on, but I'm not a paleontologist.

Finally a fact.

 

[BPPLEE]

Then you should be able to give us an example.
( you cant)

I already did.

 

[Estrid]

I already did.

Oh? I say you did not and cannot

 

[BPPLEE]

Finally a fact.

It may only be a theory

 

[BPPLEE]

Oh? I say you did not and cannot

Theories developed from previous discoveries about our ancestors change when new discoveries are made.

 

[BPPLEE]

Oh? I say you did not and cannot

Then you weren't paying attention.

 

[AV1611VET]

I was referring to the developing news about the SBC. And I'm sure one can find some heretics in regard to the book of Genesis and Flood geology somewhere among their ranks.

HA! You can find them all over outside of our ranks!

Especially among the atheists.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Then you weren't paying attention.

No, you playing fast and loose with words does not count as giving an example. You're posting in a science forum where scientific definitions are the ones used.

So, do you have an example of a theory (scientific definition) changing, or are you just posturing?

 

[AV1611VET]

What is a "rock of known age"?

I'm more interested in the Rock of Ages, than I am the age of rocks.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's how science works. Scientists don't do absolute truth.

That's how lies work too.

 

[BPPLEE]

No, you playing fast and loose with words does not count as giving an example. You're posting in a science forum where scientific definitions are the ones used.

So, do you have an example of a theory (scientific definition) changing, or are you just posturing?

Conclusions made about our ancestors change when new discoveries are made. If you're not going to call them theories then you can just call them wild guesses.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I'm more interested in the Rock of Ages, than I am the age of rocks.

Then haunt another forum.

 

[BPPLEE]

No, you playing fast and loose with words does not count as giving an example. You're posting in a science forum where scientific definitions are the ones used.

So, do you have an example of a theory (scientific definition) changing, or are you just posturing?

Evidence of a worldwide flood is a scientific forum?

 

[Estrid]

Conclusions made about our ancestors change when new discoveries are made. If you're not going to call them theories then you can just call them wild guesses.

As noted, you have no examples.