• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

AiG says "Global Flood happened at about 2304 BC"

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
51
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
Originally posted by Duane Morse
If it is possible, then why not probable?
And you know, Life itself is possible, though not probable.
What are the odds of Life forming on it own strictly through evolution?
Possible, but unlikely.

The most possible and probable in my estimate is that God created everything, but much of it evolves through time. So then when we look back on things from our perspective today we see evidence for both, but proof for neither.

Most possible things are highly improbable. Winning the lottery, getting struck by lightning, giving birth to quadruplets.

Improbable things happen all the time, just not very often. That's what makes them improbable.

Life forming was an extremely improbable event, but it happened. Was the hand of a divine creator involved, or did we simply beat the odds? I'll go with Occam's Razor on this one and bet on the latter. Do we need the supernatural to explain natural processes?

I honestly don't know how we got here, and I'm comfortable with that. I don't need to invent a supernatural world to explain away the mysteries of the universe.
 
Upvote 0
It is an ice-core from Greenland.
If placed on a 6000 year timeline versus the 110,000 year timeline that the scientists put on it, it clearly shows the pole-shift event and others that confirm that the dating is correct.
Other events include an event at the exact time of the last passing of Hale-Bopp comet in 2209 B.C. - 105 years before the flood and right around the time Noah began building the ark, the eruption of Krakatoa in 535 A.D., Vesuvius in 79 A.D., and the warming and calming of the planet from around 1200 A.D..

The Krakatoa eruption is the largest eruption in known history that is known to have caused a worldwide climate change. And this event is the second tallest spike on a graph showing the relative dust content in the atmosphere. The tallest spike happens just after that, and current tree ring studies suggest that the dust event of 535 A.D. was actually a double dust event. Also confirmed in this ice-core.

The ice-core itself is thought to be rather unique in that it is thought to have never gone through a melt cycle. It means that this particular ice-core is a continuous record in ice of the climatic conditions of the planet from the time the ice began to accumulate at this location.
 
Upvote 0
The dating put on it by the scientists is a choice between three best guess choices. And who said I was a young-earth creationist?
I said I assigned a time period of 6000 years for the ice-core, not for the earth.

And these scientists with their "best guess" theories do not include a guess for a shorter time period.

They are GUESSING as to the dating. So I am changing nothing, I am just interpreting it differently, and in a way that lines up with RECORDED events in our more recent history.

You asked for scientific evidence, not just from the Bible.
I gave it to you and you discount it offhand without even looking at it. I will e-mail it to you in whatever format you desire so you can see exactly what I did. That is IF you want to CONSIDER an alternative viewpoint that makes just as much sense as what is currently accepted.

And I will be back Monday, I just came in today for a bit of overtime.
 
Upvote 0
scientists referred to above maybe able to explain stratigraphy, especially the example of varves in short time history.Or perhaps a dendochronologist can explain why he believes a Huon pine is 40 000 years years old Then we go to the other extreme;potassium-argon dating.Please explain why you can't accept this.Anybody with linear accelerator can make gold from tungsten.Do you believe that is possible?
 
Upvote 0

Freedom777

Active Member
Oct 8, 2002
327
4
57
iowa,usa
Visit site
✟23,022.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Originally posted by seesaw
There isn't any real scientific evidence of a global flood.  But there is scientific evidence of a mediterranean sea into the black see area.
umm what about the fossil record for one.or do you actually believe the fossils were buried slooowllyy over millions of years,now to me thats crazy.
 
Upvote 0

Smilin

Spirit of the Wolf
Jun 18, 2002
5,650
244
59
Appalachia, The Trail of Tears
Visit site
✟30,906.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Originally posted by Duane Morse
You were there, Ocean?

Duane, weak argument.  Noone has responded to you in this manner on your dating methods.  Were YOU there when God created the Great Pyramid as you claimed? :rolleyes:


Originally posted by Duane Morse

And I have evidence for the pole-shift, a PHYSICAL pole-shift at that precise time.

You're referring to a 180 degree inversion of the Earth?....Good luck on proving that one. :help:
 
Upvote 0

Smilin

Spirit of the Wolf
Jun 18, 2002
5,650
244
59
Appalachia, The Trail of Tears
Visit site
✟30,906.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Originally posted by ocean
All that would be evidence for your theory, except the ice core is 110,000 years old, not 6000 years old. Why do young-earth Creationists always have to change the age of something to get it to work with their "theory"?

It's simply altering the science to fit a theory.  The data, ages, and accepted scientific explanations threaton their beliefs, so they just alter the facts.  Who else has been guilty of this throughout history? and for what purpose?  hmmmm...think for a moment. 
 
Upvote 0
I am altering no science to fit my theory. I simply apply a different timescale.
That is NOT altering the data, and the timescale originally put to it is merely one of three best guess methods they use.
BEST GUESS. They do not KNOW either, they are just guessing.
And tree ring evidence supports it also.

You people keep saying you want PROOF. Well, you have no PROOF with any method, only evidence that is interpreted in certain ways.

I interpret it differently, and the data fits. You can check it out further or ignore it, I do not really care. I know the Truth while you are still trying to find it.
 
Upvote 0