"Embedded Age" Requires Fake Fossils

[dad]

Yes, the Lord inspired Moses to record for posterity the fact that the sun and the stars were created by God in order to counteract the pagan polytheistic culture.

Nevertheless, God did not dictate the content of the Bible. If the Lord had dictated the Bible, we would have only one official account of the Gospels

False. First of all you made the part about why God wrote what He did. Secondly, God made us all different, so why expect some perfection from man? God worked with the imperfect. Jesus did not worry about the Septuagint, or whatever, He merely affirmed Scripture. Apostles cited many things from the old testament, and alluded to many. That doesn't mean they got it verbatim or wrong!

 

[Nic Samojluk]

You should learn why scientists know that those fossils are millions of years old without radiometric dating.

Circular Reasoning in Evolutionary Biology
by Henry Morris, Ph.D.

Evidence for Creation

"Creationists have long insisted that the main evidence for evolution — the fossil record — involves a serious case of circular reasoning. That is, the fossil evidence that life has evolved from simple to complex forms over the geological ages depends on the geological ages of the specific rocks in which these fossils are found. The rocks, however, are assigned geologic ages based on the fossil assemblages which they contain.

The fossils, in turn, are arranged on the basis of their assumed evolutionary relationships. Thus the main evidence for evolution is based on the assumption of evolution.

A significant development of recent years has been the fact that many evolutionary geologists are now also recognizing this problem. They no longer ignore it or pass it off with a sarcastic denial, but admit that it is a real problem which deserves a serious answer. ..."

 

[dad]

Experts claim that our planet and our sun are approximately five billion years old. I have no problem with that!

I do. I looked into why!

 

[TLK Valentine]

I do. I looked into why!

No you didn't.

 

[dad]

No you didn't.

Did to...nya nya.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Did to...nya nya.

I'm supposed to believe your fantasy stories about something that allegedly happened in the past? ha!

 

[dad]

I'm supposed to believe your fantasy stories about something that allegedly happened in the past? ha!

You could produce substance about the sun and what you spam claim here.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You could produce substance about the sun and what you spam claim here.

Why? nothing I, you, or anyone says can be trusted -- different states, and all that -- and while we think we know this state, do we really?

 

[dad]

Why? nothing I, you, or anyone says can be trusted -- different states, and all that -- and while we think we know this state, do we really?

Zap

 

[TLK Valentine]

Zap

So you admit that you can't know the present either.

 

[dad]

So you admit that you can't know the present either.

No time for mind games. Face total defeat gracefully.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Circular Reasoning in Evolutionary Biology
by Henry Morris, Ph.D.

Evidence for Creation

"Creationists have long insisted that the main evidence for evolution — the fossil record — involves a serious case of circular reasoning. That is, the fossil evidence that life has evolved from simple to complex forms over the geological ages depends on the geological ages of the specific rocks in which these fossils are found. The rocks, however, are assigned geologic ages based on the fossil assemblages which they contain.

The fossils, in turn, are arranged on the basis of their assumed evolutionary relationships. Thus the main evidence for evolution is based on the assumption of evolution.

A significant development of recent years has been the fact that many evolutionary geologists are now also recognizing this problem. They no longer ignore it or pass it off with a sarcastic denial, but admit that it is a real problem which deserves a serious answer. ..."

Sorry, but Morris was a lying idiot. He was not telling the truth about how ages are set. You need to learn what sources are valid and which ones have been refuted thousands of times.

Morris was being dishonest since he did not differentiate between relative dates, estimated dates, and measured dates. Fossils give us the relative dates of strata, they tell us which ones are older than others. Before radiometric dating all we could do were estimated dates based upon minimal estimated times for deposition based upon observation. That still resulted in ages of at least many millions of years. Radiometric dates allowed us to set measured dates for specific strata.

ETA: Also ICR is hardly a valid source. They require their workers to abandon the scientific method.

 

[bhsmte]

Because this is rather a recent discovery. Besides, it may contradict or eventually obliterate the evolutionist’s edifice scientists have struggled so hard to build on thin air. Most experts do not dare to tell the prince that he is naked!

Really?

I hate to break it to you, but one way for a scientist to ruin their career, is to stick with certain opinions, when they have been proven wrong.

 

[bhsmte]

Each hypothesis is built on a different premise. If the premise is replaced, the conclusion must be rejected.

What about theories supported with evidence?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No time for mind games. Face total defeat gracefully.

Sorry dad, you are far beyond the ability to even accept defeat gradually. The best you could do is to name all of the times that you have been shown to be wrong and beg for forgiveness.

 

[HitchSlap]

The Bible has no need for the flood to have been global. Have you read the story of Joseph? It affirms that all the world went to Egypt to buy bread. You do not conclude that the indigenous inhabitants of America made the long voyage to buy bread from Joseph. You have the option of concluding that the flood was global or rather local without destroying the credibility of biblical record.

Except the bible explicitly states that all life upon the entire face of the earth was killed.

 

[dad]

Sorry dad, you are far beyond the ability to even accept defeat gradually. The best you could do is to name all of the times that you have been shown to be wrong and beg for forgiveness.

I will never be defeated. Get over it kid.

All dates of science are embedded age dates! They embed evidence with their antiChrist belief system.

 

[JasonClark]

Big talk for a little poster that says squat. Funny that. Say how I was wrong and learn what humility really means

"Big talk for a little poster that says squat"....if that is the level you are at you can remain on your own.

 

[dad]

"Big talk for a little poster that says squat"....if that is the level you are at you can remain on your own.

That is what you seem to represent looking at your accusatory vacuous posts. Indeed.

 

[Astrophile]

Each hypothesis is built on a different premise. If the premise is replaced, the conclusion must be rejected.

I'm sorry, I don't understand this. What is the premise that is being replaced, and what is the conclusion that must be rejected?

The redshifts of galaxies and quasars, the redshift-distance relation, the cosmic microwave background, the cosmic abundances of hydrogen, deuterium, helium-3, helium-4 and lithium, and the results of the BOOMERanG experiment are observational data, which have to be explained by any theory of cosmology. So far, only the Big Bang theory has succeeded in explaining these data. If the Big Bang is to be replaced by a new theory, that new theory has to explain the same observational data.

You can't say that if you replace the Big Bang (the premise) with some other hypothesis (e.g. Wetterich's), you must reject the galactic redshifts, the microwave background, etc., because these are not conclusions, they are observational data. It's as if you were to say that if one replaces Newton's theory of gravitation by Einstein's theory of general relativity, one must reject the conclusion that planets move in elliptical orbits with the sun at one of the foci. Can you explain your meaning more clearly?