A Question Rgarding Embedded Age

[PsychoSarah]

Ha. Careful before spouting the bravado next time.

Actually, I looked at another thread, and RickG did actually already show you them, and you, in quick fashion, completely disregarded them without really showing valid evidence to back that outlook.

 

[ob77]

Because they are older than 6,000 years. The days in Genesis are not 24 hour periods of time , but eons. The Assyrian empire was here long before Adam - see Ezekiel chapter 31 -
The Assyrians kept records of the King lines as well as other information regarding their movements and family records, They have thousands upon thousands of papyrus scrolls as well as thin highly baked clay plates, stacked rack upon rack upon rack in the British Museum to this day. Their histories are recorded in "everlastings", which are in 12,000 year periods. So, from one everlasting to another everlasting is 12,000 years. Counting back six everlastings, they come the the "Mantavera" which was the great upheaval and devastation of the great battle of the "Chaos monster" Lucifer and the great God of the universe "Murdock". This jives with the war in heaven between Michael and his angels against Satan and his angels and Satan did not prevail. This was recorded as being 72,000 years ago. Unless your thinking is out of whack, you must then re-evaluate things you have been taught.

 

[dad]

Actually, I looked at another thread, and RickG did actually already show you them, and you, in quick fashion, completely disregarded them without really showing valid evidence to back that outlook.

He would need more than a cheap attempt at tossing out big words that might fool the uninitiated to make a case. Ever wonder why he didn't flesh out one or two for us there? It is just pious baloney.

 

[dad]

Because they are older than 6,000 years. The days in Genesis are not 24 hour periods of time , but eons. The Assyrian empire was here long before Adam - see Ezekiel chapter 31 -

So each day for Assyria was eons? How about Jesus being dead 3 days? How about a morning and evening?

The Assyrians kept records of the King lines as well as other information regarding their movements and family records, They have thousands upon thousands of papyrus scrolls as well as thin highly baked clay plates, stacked rack upon rack upon rack in the British Museum to this day. Their histories are recorded in "everlastings", which are in 12,000 year periods.

Pagan ramblings.

So, from one everlasting to another everlasting is 12,000 years.

Some everlasting!

Counting back six everlastings, they come the the "Mantavera" which was the great upheaval and devastation of the great battle of the "Chaos monster" Lucifer and the great God of the universe "Murdock".

Poppycock. Murdock smurdock.

This jives with the war in heaven between Michael and his angels against Satan and his angels and Satan did not prevail.

No. The war in revelation was something yet to come. Not ancient history.

This was recorded as being 72,000 years ago.

In your dreams maybe.

Unless your thinking is out of whack, you must then re-evaluate things you have been taught.

You reevaluate what you were taught! It needs it something fierce.

 

[PsychoSarah]

He would need more than a cheap attempt at tossing out big words that might fool the uninitiated to make a case. Ever wonder why he didn't flesh out one or two for us there? It is just pious baloney.

Would it have killed you to have perhaps plugged those terms in a search engine? I will give you a chance to do that and investigate them for yourself, but if you won't I will define them and you are going to feel like such a tool for disregarding them so quickly.

 

[bhsmte]

BTW AV, do you know where creationist get the information about problems in dating methods? They get them from dating method textbooks, which with every method discussed is a section that specifically that points out problems that can be encountered and how to avoid them, as well as limitations of the method. That is the section creationists like to "quote mine" and misrepresent.

I think the question you and all creationists need to be asking is, "Why do they deliberately misrepresent information concerning dating methods?" Really! It is so obvious to those of us who have the training and experience with them.

Why do they do it?

Denial, confirmation bias and selective reasoning. All driven by, cognitive dissonance.

 

[dad]

Would it have killed you to have perhaps plugged those terms in a search engine? I will give you a chance to do that and investigate them for yourself, but if you won't I will define them and you are going to feel like such a tool for disregarding them so quickly.

How do you think I grabbed two things he listed, and slew them on the altar?

 

[bhsmte]

Actually, I looked at another thread, and RickG did actually already show you them, and you, in quick fashion, completely disregarded them without really showing valid evidence to back that outlook.

What else is new?

 

[dad]

Why do they do it?

Denial, confirmation bias and selective reasoning. All driven by, cognitive dissonance.

Bah...sour grapes. Just because God's people won't swallow your religion is no reason to get nasty!

 

[bhsmte]

Bah...sour grapes. Just because God's people won't swallow your religion is no reason to get nasty!

Exactly what I expected.

 

[PsychoSarah]

How do you think I grabbed two things he listed, and slew them on the altar?

By seeing big word, and just calling it rubbish for not real reason nor backing up why.

 

[Tellastory]

AV has an idea regarding embedded age, which he uses to explain how the Earth can be billions of years old while only having existed for 6000 years. Apparently it involves age being something that can be put into an object, somehow.

Now, I have a question about how all this works.

Firstly, AV has said that the embedding of age into the universe happened in creation week.

Secondly, AV has said that fossils came AFTER creation week.

However, that means that age could not have been embedded into fossils because they came about after the process of age embedding had finished.

My question is this: if age has not been embedded into fossils (as per the two points above), why do they date to be much older than 6000 years?

Same reason that a living mollusk has been carbon dated by the C-14 method as 10,000 years old dead. Fallible devices run by fallible men.

 

[dad]

By seeing big word, and just calling it rubbish for not real reason nor backing up why.

I call it rubbish for good reasons....none of those things help his case.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I call it rubbish for good reasons....none of those things help his case.

Elaborate, in a way that shows me you understand the terms.

 

[dad]

Elaborate, in a way that shows me you understand the terms.

Take any one you like and explain it and how it applies to the far universe or past state!

All smoke no fire.

 

[Tellastory]

Either way is an argument of deception. There is no biblical foundation for either scenario. The problem is easily solved when the genesis creation story is viewed as not being literal as most Christians do.

The scientific knowledge we have is what it is. Choosing what one likes and ignoring the rest is an exercise of conformation bias. In the scientific community it is called intellectual dishonesty.

Careful. Judge not les ye be judged. That line of judgment can be said of your side of the discussion.

Christians trying to correct other christians astray in other topics would defer to obstinance and dishonesty as the cause, but Jesus said blessed are your eyes that see and your hears that hear.

Now that we have cleared that up: patience and meekness is the better part of valor here as we should rely on Jesus Christ for help in edifying one another & leave it on God to cause the increase.

One thing as a believer you must contend with is .. is the Bible true or not? Remember that the Jews used scripture to stone a false prophet when they go against the scripture. Jesus said that the scripture cannot be broken. ( John 10:35 )

If you go with assessing that the six days of creation was not literal because of the age of things, thinking God would not be deceptive when we search for Him in our natural surroundings and in science; then we have to keep in mind that there was an age imputed in the created living things; Adam was a full grown man. When plants were created, they were mature and bearing fruits & seeds already on that day it was created. So can science really determine the age of things wiithout any doubt?

By the Carbon-14 dating method, a living mollusks has been dated 10,000 years old "dead".

Now you say that they have developed procedures to prevent such errors. Did they retest that living mollusk or not? If not, how can they claim that they have modified their methods to prevent faulty ratings in regards to that living mollusk? Just on their say so? See the problem?

Now by that line of judgment of choosing what one likes and ignoring the rest is an exercise of conformation bias, and yet you just judged science as doing so in favour of the evolution theory long before your claim of improving these procedures to prevent faulty readings. Now how can one be assured that there is no further exercise of conformation bias being presented yet again by science?

 

[RickG]

Differences in carbon 14 do not mean that the differences resulted from our nature.

Yes it does "dad". Carbon 14 is a cosmogenic nuclide formed formed in the upper atmosphere through the interaction between cosmic ray neutrons from deep space and nitrogen. This involves a neutron capture by the nitrogen (14N) and the loss of a proton to form 14C.

 

[RickG]

Same reason that a living mollusk has been carbon dated by the C-14 method as 10,000 years old dead. Fallible devices run by fallible men.

No one would date a living mollusk other than a creationist sending it to a radiocarbon lab misrepresenting what they have sent. This misrepresentation ignores the marine reservoir effect which would account for the 10,000 year date.

What is fallible is your lack of knowledge of radiocarbon dating methods.

 

[RickG]

Take any one you like and explain it and how it applies to the far universe or past state!

All smoke no fire.

Your past state universe doesn't even qualify as smoke. It is a pure fabricated fantasy backed by zero evidence.

 

[RickG]

Careful. Judge not les ye be judged. That line of judgment can be said of your side of the discussion.

The difference is Tellastory, I have an academic background and experience in that area. The author of that article more than obviously has neither, or has a severe problem with the 9th commandment or both.