Extinctions not asteroid after all, and dino protein real after all...

[BananaSlug]

No, trusting God is the only way to go. It worked for Noah. If we are under His protection, nothing will happen to us unless He allows it. And if it is time to go, we have a wonderful place prepared. Win, win.

Yeah it worked for Job too.

 

[Nathan Poe]

No, trusting God is the only way to go. It worked for Noah. If we are under His protection, nothing will happen to us unless He allows it.

N.B. -- God allows everything.

And if it is time to go, we have a wonderful place prepared. Win, win.

And when you're wrong, you won't come back to whine about it. Win, win indeed.

 

[BananaSlug]

He didn't. There was no science back then. It is a creature of the recent past, and jumped into the fray wrong from the getgo.

However, we are using "same state" science to study past phenomena. The only one who could have changed the state of the universe would be God. Why would God want to confuse us?

Have you seen an olive tree grow from a seed to produce fruit in that time?

Can you give me a quote from the Bible that explicitly says such an event happened?

Nothing says it was the same. God indicates major differences. Noo reason from science to doubt.

Please provide the verses that indicate these major differences.

It doesn't. The dendrochronological age stops at 4500 rings, or so, whenever this state started.

No. The dendrochronological age goes all the way to 12,000 years. For some trees, including bristlecone pine, ponderosa pine, and douglass fir, double rings are rare and easy to spot with a little practice. A bigger problem is missing rings; a bristlecone pine can have up to 5 percent of its rings missing. Thus, dates derived from dendrochronology, if they are suspect at all, should indicate ages too young.

We were talking radioactive decay. Can you prove 1% there was any at all? No. You can't.

Can you prove it wasn't?

All we know is that there is decay now, and has been fro the recent past. We also know that the materials in some rocks, and etc, are now produced by decay. The assumption is that all materials of that sort were produced by decay, and at the present decay rate we can measure. But if the materials were already here before the decay state started, that assumption is null and oh, so void.

So when did this "decay state" start? The Bible doesn't specifically say there was no radioactive decay. Can you provide a verse?

I have no reason to assume they were not here, involved in whatever process would exist in a created state universe.

But you cannot provide any evidence can you?

Coming from the man who cannot provide any evidence for his same state past either. Again, can you provide any phenomena that cannot be explained using a pre science, "different state" past? No. You can't.

The evidence for the "same state" past is the fact we have not found anything to suggest a "different state" past. I could name some phenomena that wouldn't be explainable:
1. C14 age calculations vary widely after the 4500 mark.
2. All radioisotope dating methods vary widely after the 4500 year mark.
3. Finding any geologic phenomena that we cannot explain using present observations.

You are the one saying the past was different. We have not found any evidence that cannot be explained using "present state" science. Would you care to provide some phenomena thay cannot be explained? I really don't think you can do it.

I have evidence galore for a different state past. The Sumers, and all early history of man, and the very word of God to booot. It doesn't get any better than that.

Then let us see it.

Carbon dating cannot support anything beyond where this state can be proven to exist. It becomes ratios, and levels. Not time units. The fast tree growth, pre split, means that no amount of rings matter in the least, whether they overlap, underlap, or do a lap dance with a willow.

Again, can you provide the Bible verse that says there was no radioactive decay? Can you provide evidence against the use of C14 dating?

All evidence beyond the baby grasp of present scienvce supports it. Bible, history, etc.

Then provide the links to some.

Too late. Science cannot wait till others provide non science based evidence for claims, to support it's very foundation. This is news?

So you are admitting that your scenario is not supported by science. That is all I need to hear! That is why you refuse to do formal debates!

You were asked to show us the pre 4500 ring level pics, because you made claims about them. Lurkers, behold, the lack of simple evidence for so called science claims.!!!!!

Versus the lack of evidence on your part for the entirety of the conversation?
The Uniformitarian Principle

​

This principle states that physical and biological processes that link current environmental processes with current patterns of tree growth must have been in operation in the past. In other words, "the present is the key to the past," originally stated by James Hutton in 1785. However, dendrochronology adds a new "twist" to this principle: "the past is the key to the future." In other words, by knowing environmental conditions that operated in the past (by analyzing such conditions in tree rings), we can better predict and/or manage such environmental conditions in the future. Hence, by knowing what the climate-tree growth relationship is in the 20th century, we can reconstruct climate from tree rings well before weather records were ever kept! For example, the graph above shows a long-term precipitation reconstruction for northern New Mexico based on tree rings (click on the image to see an enlarged version of the graph). The reconstruction was developed by calibrating the widths of tree rings from the 1900s with rainfall records from the 1900s. Because we assume that conditions must have been similar in the past, we can then use the widths of tree rings as a proxy (or substitute) for actual rainfall amounts prior to the historical record.
Can you give a specific reason why using such methodology is wrong?

Same reason I am not formulating tooth fairy age. Carbon decay only applies in the present state.

Evidence?

Because I see the whole picture. The reason the lazy, half blind observer found nothing, was because he looked for nothing.

You just admitted there is no evidence. No matter how hard we look you said, "the evidence of a hose was not detectable, all that was seen was the present hose". If there was no evidence for a different "hose" can you give a decent reason why we should assume there was a different "hose"?

He was more interested in looking clever, and getting a grant. If he did see anything, he would immediatly try to explain it away using present based ideas.

If "present state" ideas can effectively explain past phenomena, there is no reason to assume otherwise. You said it was different, show us the evidence!

If the former state hose was less heavy, it might throw him off, since he may only expect a huge impression in the grass.

The only way the former state hose wouldn't leave an impression would be if:
1. It weighed nothing.
2. Somebody purposely erased the evidence. Somebody had to come up and move the hose and erase their footprints.

Before radiation was, the levels alreasy were doing their thing not knowing or caring about how they one day would be involved in a new job in the decay process.

I would actually love to see you give me a Bible verse that says radiation didn't exist. Go ahead.

Only in the box of this state, and laws and universe fabric. You never considered that a different universe was here, and that the meterials also were already here. You assumed that they all got here as they are now produced. I kid you not.

Because there was no evidence to assume otherwise, unless you can actually provide some...

20. For the invisible things of him from--or "since"
the creation of the world are clearly seen--the mind brightly beholding what the eye cannot discern.
being understood by the things that are made--Thus, the outward creation is not the parent but the interpreter of our faith in God. That faith has its primary sources within our own breast (Ro 1:19); but it becomes an intelligible and articulate conviction only through what we observe around us ("by the things which are made," Ro 1:20). And thus are the inner and the outer revelation of God the complement of each other, making up between them one universal and immovable conviction that God is. (With this striking apostolic statement agree the latest conclusions of the most profound speculative students of Theism). "

Then why would God hide the evidence of the "past state"? You have claimed there is no evidence of this "past state" so we cannot "understand through what has been made" because God hid it.

So, we need that inner spiritual life (inside us, or as the commentary puts it 'our breasts') to interpret or have it (creation) become intelligable. That means godless science is out of the loop!

So can you look at a mountain and see evidence for this "past state"? If you say "yes" you are contradicting yourself!

And, if we intelligenly look at creation, that goes back to Adam, and the garden, we will see a lot of differences twixt then and now! Lifespans, groth rates, spuirits walking in the realm of men, etc etc. Hec, there was even a big change in creation at the curse!

Where does the Bible specifically say plant growth was sped up?

Does that verse to you mean that Adam saw the same world from creation week after the curse!!!? Impossible.

Yes. All God did was curse Adam by making him toil the ground for food and cause brambles to grow, curse Eve by giving her childbearing pains, and cursed the serpent. I don't see anything else about cursing all of creation.

Come to thinkk of it, that is biblical proof of hyper evolution! Ask anyone if moasquitos, or venomous snakes, etc are part of the curse. They therefore had to change awful fast! Same with some plants becoming weeds, etc. The evidence mounts.

So are you saying the Bible is wrong about God resting on the seventh day from creating?

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. 2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done. Genesis 2:1-2

The Bible says God rested from creating, you say he continued creating.

Since what you want the opposite to can't be supported in the first place, no need exists to support the opposite of it! Elementary.

We do not see any evidence to assume the laws of physics were drastically different in the past as compared to now. Your statement automatically states that you have absolutely no evidence to back up your claims.
We know pillow lava forms underwater. They are created when magma reaches the surface but, as there is a large difference in temperature between the lava and the water, the surface of the emergent tongue cools very quickly, forming a skin. The tongue continues to lengthen and inflate with more lava, forming a lobe, until the pressure of the magma becomes sufficient to rupture the skin and start the formation of a new eruption point nearer the vent. This process produces a series of interconnecting lobate shapes that are pillow-like in cross-section. The skin cools a lot faster than the inside of the pillow, so it is very fine grained, with a glassy texture. The magma inside the pillow cools more slowly, so is slightly coarser grained than the skin, but still classified as fine grained.

Here is an example of recently formed pillow lava.

Here is some pillow lava from the Giant's causway in Ireland. This pillow lava is 50-60million years old.
So we know that modern pillow lava is formed underwater. Can you give any reason for us to assume ancient pillow lava formed any differently? We know that the extreme heat of volcanic activity "resets" the radioisotope clock. Can you give any reason to assume it was different in the past?

Tell you what, you wow me by supporting your pre 4500 tree ring claims, with a good photo of them, and I might consider it. If you can't do it here, why pretend you can somewhere else!?

I can use more than just tree rings. I've been trying hard to find a photo of the Methuselah tree ring core. I also realized that the core sample is probably over 3 feet long!

The bioological rapidity by with which waste was broken down, indeed may have been fast. The rate also, on a similar vein, that plancton, or bacteria could grow, would have affected many aspects of life on earth.

Here we call them algal blooms and lead to huge dieoffs of fish due an extreme depletion of dissolved oxygen. If God cursed creation after original sin, would the effect be the same? Why would the curse before the "split" be less harsh than what we are cursed with now?

 

[AV1611VET]

Here is some pillow lava from the Giant's causway in Ireland. This pillow lava is 50-60million years old.​

​

This looks like an ending to one of my favorite sci-fi movies!

 

[BananaSlug]

[/left]

This looks like an ending to one of my favorite sci-fi movies!

[/center]

Tarantula (1955)? I enjoyed The Giant Gila Monster (1959), although they used a beaded lizard. I'm an old sci-fi movie fanatic. Do you like all of Ray Harryhausen's movies? The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (1953) was a classic and actually predated Gojira (1954). It was also the first movie that Lee Van Cleef starred in (he was Angel Eyes in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly). Harryhausen was a stop-motion genius!

 

[corvus_corax]

The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (1953) was a classic

LOVE that movie!

~Sigh~ I miss the Saturday afternoon "Monster Movie" slot that came on after saturday morning cartoons

 

[BananaSlug]

It was one of the first movies where the giant monster was actually a metaphor for nuclear warfare. Almost all of the American movies from the late 40's to late 50's were metaphors for nuclear warfare and/or communism.

 

[AV1611VET]

Tarantula (1955)?

Yup --- if you look closely at the pilot at the end of the movie --- it's Clint Eastwood!

 

[BananaSlug]

Yup --- if you look closely at the pilot at the end of the movie --- it's Clint Eastwood!

A lot of actors started in "bad" movies. Man I can't believe how off topic I've allowed myself to get...

 

[AV1611VET]

A lot of actors started in "bad" movies. Man I can't believe how off topic I've allowed myself to get...

I'm guilty of disliking some high-profile actors because they got their start in B-movies.

I couldn't stand Nicholas Cage for awhile, nor could I stomach Jeff Goldblum at first.

And that bald guy on CSI: Miami --- I still can't appreciate him --- (after seeing him on Cliffhanger).

And I won't even watch CSI: New York --- since the head of it is that guy who shook his fist at God in Forest Gump and issued a string of blasphemy and foul language.

On the other hand, I like Mark Harmon, who stars in NCIS, as he played Ted Bundy years ago, and I'm fascinated with serial killers.

Eye of the beholder, eh?

 

[BananaSlug]

Not as bad as Tim Robbins in "Howard the Duck" (admittedly it was an awesome movie when I was 6). He made up for it in "The Shawshank Redemption". He was also in "Jacob's Ladder", which was a pretty cool/weird movie.

 

[BananaSlug]

Ok, now back on topic...

 

[dad]

Yeah it worked for Job too.

True, I don't recall a comet killing all life and hitting Job. Nothing happened to him that God didn't allow.

 

[Gracchus]

True, I don't recall a comet killing all life and hitting Job. Nothing happened to him that God didn't allow.

That's right. God allowed the adversary to all but kill him. With friends like that, who needs enemies.

 

[dad]

However, we are using "same state" science to study past phenomena. The only one who could have changed the state of the universe would be God. Why would God want to confuse us?

Maybe some confuse too easy. Thanks for admitting they use same state science to 'study the past'.

Can you give me a quote from the Bible that explicitly says such an event happened?

God Personally gave the 120 year warning. People have assumed He meant till the flood. I assume it means till the changed universe. The spirit would not always strive with man, and so, apparently, the spiritual was separated. In the same chapter, is where it talks of the sons of god marrying women. Then at the end of the warning we get to the days of Peleg. In those days, it says, the earth was split. (divided) I take that to mean all the usual things as well as the spiritual from the physical, and us being left in the temporary state. We certainly got here somehow, creation wasn't made in a temporary state, it was to last forever.

The veres I referred to are in Genesis, just before, and after the flood.

Please provide the verses that indicate these major differences.

Some of them are in Gen 1 and 2. He planted a garden, and we ate of the fruits days later. Noah also sent out a bird, no trees. A week later, ..a tree with growth. Then there are the life spans, in many many verses. They are real long. Unlike today. Then there was sparating the waters from the land of the planet, and no big heat, because life was created days later. Then there was the spiritual level they saw, and tried to build up to in Babel. And sons of god marrying women. That doesn't go on today. And, of course the curse. Suddenly things changed, and some plants became weeds, and bugs also saw rapid change. For example mosquitos, and other pests are part of the curse. Animals no longer communicated directly to man. They feared and dreaded sinful man. Then there is the fact that the sun and earth and stars are to exist forever. That is impossible in this state. Big differences.

No. The dendrochronological age goes all the way to 12,000 years. For some trees, including bristlecone pine, ponderosa pine, and douglass fir, double rings are rare and easy to spot with a little practice. A bigger problem is missing rings; a bristlecone pine can have up to 5 percent of its rings missing. Thus, dates derived from dendrochronology, if they are suspect at all, should indicate ages too young.

Would it happen to be rings after the 4500 year level??? If not, show us some! As for the so called ages, derived from lots of rings, and nearby dead trees as well, I already covered that. It is meaningless if trees gre fast then.

So when did this "decay state" start? The Bible doesn't specifically say there was no radioactive decay. Can you provide a verse?

The decay state and corruption will end when this state does. No such thing in the new heaven forever state. That means no radioactive decay. It never said that there was any in Eden either. How could there be if Adam was to live forever, and the earth he lived on, and the stars and moon and sun made for us? The time when the spiritual is last recorded as right here, is Babel. That was about the time of Peleg, and the split. That was about right where the Australian astronomer calculated the historical data about changing solstices, and axis of earth, and pinpointed a date. That was about 4400 yrs ago! he used 66 data points of ancient measurements, and temples, to see how the stars and sun reflected a changing axis over time. He made a curve from the data and the time it changed big time was precisely at the time of the split, a bit after the flood (he thought the tilt was the result of the flood). Now, one could argue a few data points, by trying to invoke new dating (so called) tecniques. But that still leaves most of them, and the curve remains intact! If I recall, he concluded that a big change had to have been in 2350 BC. (from memory, but it was close)

The evidence for the "same state" past is the fact we have not found anything to suggest a "different state" past. I could name some phenomena that wouldn't be explainable:
1. C14 age calculations vary widely after the 4500 mark.

There are no age calculations after that time, unless a same state existed, and can be proven to have existed.

2. All radioisotope dating methods vary widely after the 4500 year mark.

Most dating in with things that take billions or millions of years to decay. I expect no great thing 4500 years ago there.

3. Finding any geologic phenomena that we cannot explain using present observations.

Only present observations have ever been used, so no one knows that.

You are the one saying the past was different. We have not found any evidence that cannot be explained using "present state" science. Would you care to provide some phenomena thay cannot be explained? I really don't think you can do it.

You forget it can also be explained using a different past. So??? Unless you do more that use a belief to explain all we see, you have no case at all. Anyone can do that.

So you are admitting that your scenario is not supported by science. That is all I need to hear! That is why you refuse to do formal debates!

Not at all. All evidence agrees, and better than with same state belief based premises. The rapid movement of continents, hyper evolution, historical records, a changed axis,...everything. My case is not based soley on science, but agrees with all we have! Your case needs a certain state universe fabric in the past, and has NO science to prove it! It is not supported by science. The different state is hand in glove with science, and also impervious to any possible actual science opposition!!

​

This principle states that physical and biological processes that link current environmental processes with current patterns of tree growth must have been in operation in the past.

yes it talks the talk, but can't walk the walk! Anyone can state things.

In other words, "the present is the key to the past," originally stated by James Hutton in 1785.

Lurkers, hear them admit it!!!

However, dendrochronology adds a new "twist" to this principle: "the past is the key to the future." In other words, by knowing environmental conditions that operated in the past (by analyzing such conditions in tree rings), we can better predict and/or manage such environmental conditions in the future.

False prophesy, based on an imaginary past, and invented ages. They have NO CLUE about the past, so unless they admit that NO CLUE is their key, they have nothing at all but religion.

Hence, by knowing what the climate-tree growth relationship is in the 20th century, we can reconstruct climate from tree rings well before weather records were ever kept!

False! They merely scare people into some imaginary hell, and into their religious, godless fold.

For example, the graph above shows a long-term precipitation reconstruction for northern New Mexico based on tree rings (click on the image to see an enlarged version of the graph). The reconstruction was developed by calibrating the widths of tree rings from the 1900s with rainfall records from the 1900s. Because we assume that conditions must have been similar in the past, we can then use the widths of tree rings as a proxy (or substitute) for actual rainfall amounts prior to the historical record.
Can you give a specific reason why using such methodology is wrong?

Well, if all we do is go back 200 years, I have no problem with it, except, that I am not sure recent past trends are what is expected for man in the last days.

You just admitted there is no evidence. No matter how hard we look you said, "the evidence of a hose was not detectable, all that was seen was the present hose". If there was no evidence for a different "hose" can you give a decent reason why we should assume there was a different "hose"?

There was evidence, a record that recorded it filling the pool! But the guy wanting the credit, and the grant, refused to accept all but his criteria as evidence. So the poor sod was left in the dark.

If "present state" ideas can effectively explain past phenomena, there is no reason to assume otherwise. You said it was different, show us the evidence!

If tooth fairy ideas explain the past, then...? I should buy them too!? Noo. You need to show the basis, and evidence, and etc.

The only way the former state hose wouldn't leave an impression would be if:
1. It weighed nothing.
2. Somebody purposely erased the evidence. Somebody had to come up and move the hose and erase their footprints.

Or, the hose was from a helicopter high above. Not sitting on the grass. Or... the turf was changed that day!!! Or..it was shot on an angle from the next yard! or...etc etc etc.

I would actually love to see you give me a Bible verse that says radiation didn't exist. Go ahead.

Well, would there not be some radiation if we grabbed Asia, and moved it quickly, many hundreds of miles? A lot of heat. Well, the waters and the lands of the planet, were separated. Yet, there was no radiated heat! Life was put here a few days after.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas:


This is so easy.

Because there was no evidence to assume otherwise, unless you can actually provide some...

Nor any evidence to warrant assuming a certain universe state back then. But we do have bible and historical evidence.

So can you look at a mountain and see evidence for this "past state"? If you say "yes" you are contradicting yourself!

I see pushed up mountain ranges, like the one that the old bristlecone pine is growing on. I see that as evidence that they were pushed up.

Where does the Bible specifically say plant growth was sped up?

It was nor sped up, it was the natural growth of the time. Compared to our slow groeth, it is sped up.

Yes. All God did was curse Adam by making him toil the ground for food and cause brambles to grow, curse Eve by giving her childbearing pains, and cursed the serpent. I don't see anything else about cursing all of creation.

Me either. However, later, after the floood, I do see many changes that mean the fabric of the universe was no longer the same.

So are you saying the Bible is wrong about God resting on the seventh day from creating?

No. What gave you that idea?

The Bible says God rested from creating, you say he continued creating.

No.

We do not see any evidence to assume the laws of physics were drastically different in the past as compared to now.

Or that they existed at all!

We know pillow lava forms underwater. They are created when magma reaches the surface but, as there is a large difference in temperature between the lava and the water, the surface of the emergent tongue cools very quickly, forming a skin. The tongue continues to lengthen and inflate with more lava, forming a lobe, until the pressure of the magma becomes sufficient to rupture the skin and start the formation of a new eruption point nearer the vent. This process produces a series of interconnecting lobate shapes that are pillow-like in cross-section. The skin cools a lot faster than the inside of the pillow, so it is very fine grained, with a glassy texture. The magma inside the pillow cools more slowly, so is slightly coarser grained than the skin, but still classified as fine grained.

Here is an example of recently formed pillow lava.

Here is some pillow lava from the Giant's causway in Ireland. This pillow lava is 50-60million years old.
So we know that modern pillow lava is formed underwater. Can you give any reason for us to assume ancient pillow lava formed any differently? We know that the extreme heat of volcanic activity "resets" the radioisotope clock. Can you give any reason to assume it was different in the past?

Can you give me any reason to accept same state dating? Why would I care about water covering stuff? In what way is there some sort of mystery to that pillow lava in Ireland? (silly so called dates aside)

I can use more than just tree rings. I've been trying hard to find a photo of the Methuselah tree ring core. I also realized that the core sample is probably over 3 feet long!

I see. You have been trying. Interesting. Let us know when you succeed or fail

Told you it was a challenge.

Here we call them algal blooms and lead to huge dieoffs of fish due an extreme depletion of dissolved oxygen. If God cursed creation after original sin, would the effect be the same? Why would the curse before the "split" be less harsh than what we are cursed with now?

Algea in the former state, it stands to reason could bloom real fast. But, I fail to see any point in your paragraph. Was there a question in there?

 

[dad]

That's right. God allowed the adversary to all but kill him. With friends like that, who needs enemies.

Well, Job went on to live forever, and lives as we speak. The lessons he learned while here were of great value to him. They also inspired billions since then.

 

[Soul Searcher]

Maybe some confuse too easy. Thanks for admitting they use same state science to 'study the past'.

More accurately they use science to study the past and to date there is absolutely nothing to indicate that this so called "different state past" existed at all. All we have on this is some goolge search that points us to a poster calling himself dad and not finding a single person who seems to agree with him and not one shred of evidence to support such claim. Meanwhile science marches on as it does not work based on bias religous opinions.

 

[BananaSlug]

God Personally gave the 120 year warning. People have assumed He meant till the flood. I assume it means till the changed universe.

So you are assuming a different state past.

The spirit would not always strive with man, and so, apparently, the spiritual was separated. In the same chapter, is where it talks of the sons of god marrying women. Then at the end of the warning we get to the days of Peleg. In those days, it says, the earth was split. (divided) I take that to mean all the usual things as well as the spiritual from the physical, and us being left in the temporary state. We certainly got here somehow, creation wasn't made in a temporary state, it was to last forever.

So you are just assuming this means the physical laws of the past were different...

Some of them are in Gen 1 and 2. He planted a garden, and we ate of the fruits days later. Noah also sent out a bird, no trees. A week later, ..a tree with growth.

That does not mean no trees, just no living trees. Maybe dead trees put out new growth? It doesn't specifically say in the Bible.

Then there are the life spans, in many many verses. They are real long. Unlike today.

So you are assuming a different state past is required for longer lives? What other religions mention longer lives in the past?

And, of course the curse. Suddenly things changed, and some plants became weeds, and bugs also saw rapid change. For example mosquitos, and other pests are part of the curse. Animals no longer communicated directly to man. They feared and dreaded sinful man. Then there is the fact that the sun and earth and stars are to exist forever. That is impossible in this state. Big differences.

Evidence?

Would it happen to be rings after the 4500 year level??? If not, show us some! As for the so called ages, derived from lots of rings, and nearby dead trees as well, I already covered that. It is meaningless if trees gre fast then.

Would you be able to provide some evidence for "super fast" growth?

The decay state and corruption will end when this state does. No such thing in the new heaven forever state. That means no radioactive decay. It never said that there was any in Eden either. How could there be if Adam was to live forever, and the earth he lived on, and the stars and moon and sun made for us? The time when the spiritual is last recorded as right here, is Babel. That was about the time of Peleg, and the split. That was about right where the Australian astronomer calculated the historical data about changing solstices, and axis of earth, and pinpointed a date. That was about 4400 yrs ago! he used 66 data points of ancient measurements, and temples, to see how the stars and sun reflected a changing axis over time. He made a curve from the data and the time it changed big time was precisely at the time of the split, a bit after the flood (he thought the tilt was the result of the flood). Now, one could argue a few data points, by trying to invoke new dating (so called) tecniques. But that still leaves most of them, and the curve remains intact! If I recall, he concluded that a big change had to have been in 2350 BC. (from memory, but it was close)

You didn't answer my question. I asked could you give me a specific Bible verse that says radioactivity didn't exist before the flood. If you can't then you don't even have Biblical evidence to support your "no radioactive decay".

There are no age calculations after that time, unless a same state existed, and can be proven to have existed.
Most dating in with things that take billions or millions of years to decay. I expect no great thing 4500 years ago there.

You obviously did not get my statements. If some "big alteration" in the laws of physics changed 4500 years ago, such as no radioactive decay, then we wouldn't find any objects over 4500 years of age. Why do we find objects over 4500 years of age?

Only present observations have ever been used, so no one knows that.

If present observations can be used to reliably explain geologic phenomena, why use anything different? Can you tell us what we should look for?

You forget it can also be explained using a different past. So??? Unless you do more that use a belief to explain all we see, you have no case at all. Anyone can do that.

So if radioactive decay did not exist until 4500 years ago, why do we find geologic phenomena older than 4500 years of age. It would stand to reason if radioactive decay did not exist, no rocks would be dated older than when decay came into existence. Can you explain this?

Not at all. All evidence agrees, and better than with same state belief based premises.

Then provide some scientific evidence is support of your scenario.

The rapid movement of continents, hyper evolution, historical records, a changed axis,...everything. My case is not based soley on science, but agrees with all we have! Your case needs a certain state universe fabric in the past, and has NO science to prove it! It is not supported by science. The different state is hand in glove with science, and also impervious to any possible actual science opposition!!

Please give me the science that doesn't support "same state" science. If you say the science exists, please provide the evidence.

yes it talks the talk, but can't walk the walk! Anyone can state things.

Again, can you provide evidence to support the opposite?

Lurkers, hear them admit it!!!

Yes because it has reliably explained past phenomena and has been able to predict what we should find in past phenomena. It has worked and you have not been able to provide an instance when it has not worked.

False prophesy, based on an imaginary past, and invented ages. They have NO CLUE about the past, so unless they admit that NO CLUE is their key, they have nothing at all but religion.

It is not "false prophesy" if it works. If they can use past phenomena and correctly compare it to present phenomena, it doesn't seem too false!

False! They merely scare people into some imaginary hell, and into their religious, godless fold.

It has worked so far!

Well, if all we do is go back 200 years, I have no problem with it, except, that I am not sure recent past trends are what is expected for man in the last days.

You didn't actually answer the question. Since the reconstruction was developed by calibrating the widths of tree rings from the 1900s with rainfall records from the 1900s. Because we assume that conditions must have been similar in the past, we can then use the widths of tree rings as a proxy (or substitute) for actual rainfall amounts prior to the historical record. Why would this method work until the 4500 year mark, then all of a sudden stop working?

There was evidence, a record that recorded it filling the pool! But the guy wanting the credit, and the grant, refused to accept all but his criteria as evidence. So the poor sod was left in the dark.

No, you stated: "The evidence of a hose was not detectable, all that was seen was the present hose". So, no footprints, no signs of another hose, yet we have a book that says it was done. So you are saying Romans 1:20 is wrong!

If tooth fairy ideas explain the past, then...? I should buy them too!? Noo. You need to show the basis, and evidence, and etc.

As stated many times before, if present phenomena can reliably explain past phenomena and past phenomena can reliably predict present phenomnena, why assume otherwise? The only evidence for a "different state" past is a book yet the geologic record contradicts that book, even though a specific verse says "God's invisible qualities are visible in what has been made". You say one moment that science supports your scenario, then in another say the only support is the Bible. It seems the longer we go the more unsure you get.

Or, the hose was from a helicopter high above. Not sitting on the grass. Or... the turf was changed that day!!! Or..it was shot on an angle from the next yard! or...etc etc etc.

So why would God go to such great lengths to deceive us? Doesn't the Bible say God isn't a liar?

Well, would there not be some radiation if we grabbed Asia, and moved it quickly, many hundreds of miles? A lot of heat. Well, the waters and the lands of the planet, were separated. Yet, there was no radiated heat! Life was put here a few days after.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas:

Okay so the Bible never specifically says there was no radiation. Thanks for proving that for me!

Nor any evidence to warrant assuming a certain universe state back then. But we do have bible and historical evidence.

Does the Bible specifically say the laws of the universe were fundamentally different from now?

I

see pushed up mountain ranges, like the one that the old bristlecone pine is growing on. I see that as evidence that they were pushed up.

We see evidence they were pushed up too. We also see the evidence that they are older than 4500 years.

It was nor sped up, it was the natural growth of the time. Compared to our slow groeth, it is sped up.

Can you provide a Bible verse that specifically states such a thing?

Me either. However, later, after the floood, I do see many changes that mean the fabric of the universe was no longer the same.

Such as? All I read is now we can eat animals for food, a promise for no more global flooding, and God confusing our language.

No. What gave you that idea?

Did the hyperevolution occur after original sin or after the flood? Either way it meant God created after he supposedly rested.

Can you give me any reason to accept same state dating? Why would I care about water covering stuff? In what way is there some sort of mystery to that pillow lava in Ireland? (silly so called dates aside)

Because if radioactive decay did not exist until 4500 years ago, the oldest rock on earth would only be 4500 years old. Unless you want to say God is purposely lying to us by making rock appear older than what it really is.

I see. You have been trying. Interesting. Let us know when you succeed or fail

Told you it was a challenge.

If it comes down to it, I'll email a dendrochronologist.

Algea in the former state, it stands to reason could bloom real fast. But, I fail to see any point in your paragraph. Was there a question in there?

In our "present state" algal blooms cause massive dieoffs in fish populations because the decay of the algae suck all of the dissolved oxygen out of the water. If God cursed creation after original sin, would the effect be the same? Why would the curse before the "split" be less harsh than what we are cursed with now?

 

[Soul Searcher]

Some of them are in Gen 1 and 2. He planted a garden, and we ate of the fruits days later. Noah also sent out a bird, no trees. A week later, ..a tree with growth.

The logical conclusion if you believe the story to be literal is that the tree was still under the water and a week later the water had receded enough for some of the upper branches to be exposed, or perhaps the bird went to a different place the second time. Either would be totally possible if the story were true and the trees under the least amount of water could have survived. No need to invent these imagionary senarios where trees grow in a week. It just makes you look foolish.

Face it the flood story is at best an extreme exageration based on a much smaller natural event and at worst a total fabrication.

 

[dad]

So you are assuming a different state past.

No choice, why deny history, the spiritual, and the bible for no reason?

So you are just assuming this means the physical laws of the past were different...

No, I am deducing that the physical only laws did not exist. And will not exist. What was and will be in place is also spiritual, and quite different.

That does not mean no trees, just no living trees. Maybe dead trees put out new growth? It doesn't specifically say in the Bible.

One can deduce from the situation, and circumstances that the news of a little growing twig from a tree meant enough to rejoice, and get off the ark! In this day and age, with all life on a big boat, after a full year and change of being on it, and the whole world flooded, and all other life on land destroyed...I would not even much care about a tree growing. Back then it meant something exciting. We can also look at how they fed all the creatures on the ark. Plants are what most things ate. If not almost all things. If there was rapid plant growth in effect, feeders would be simple planting trays! A new crop every day or maybe a few, for grasses, or maybe a few days..etc. Plenty to eat for everyone. Therefore it woulld not be until the plants were known to be growing out on the earth again, that it would be safe to get off.

We do know that the kinds had enough to eat when they got off, and multiplied.

We also can cross check this with the future. The tree of life grows like no present tree could. New fruits every month, 12 kinds. Or, back in Eden, the tree of life was there, too! And, futhermore, the 6 day creation say plants created, or 'planted' only days before we and animals ate them!

So you are assuming a different state past is required for longer lives? What other religions mention longer lives in the past?

Yes! I am. The Sumers mentioned long life spans. They were only, in effect, pagans, however, so I do not look to their record for detailed accuracy, and truth. But the general concepts of a flood, and long lives in their records are significant.

Evidence?

Gotta fly,, will try to respond to reast of post later. The curse involved snakes, with venom, and mosqitoes and all weeds, and pests, etc. They came suddenly, because the earth was cursed before Adam got out the gate of Eden! How long could that be??!