verysincere
Exegete/Linguist
It makes no logical sense to ANYONE. Those who promote it do so because of religious dogma based upon an individual's much cherished traditional interpretation of Genesis.
Upvote
0
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.
Sorry, I had to say the last two words, the whole idea of embedded age makes no logical sense to me.
Sorry, I had to say the last two words, the whole idea of embedded age makes no logical sense to me. If you create something with maturity, there is no need to embed age.
It makes no logical sense to ANYONE.
Nope, embedded age is neither mentioned nor implied in the Bible. Much like flood waters coming from Pluto.
Anasema wewe.Nope, embedded age is neither mentioned nor implied in the Bible.
Who says that?Much like flood waters coming from Pluto.
Nope, embedded age is neither mentioned nor implied in the Bible. Much like flood waters coming from Pluto.
Who says that?
You too, Rocky.Nope, embedded age is neither mentioned nor implied in the Bible. Much like flood waters coming from Pluto.
Yeah man... it is Neptune, not Pluto. Pluto got Plutoed in a rigged vote that AVET didn't like. Keep it straight, dude!
I have never seen a believing tare?One of the problems of having "tares among the wheat" is that the tares are always trying to blame their illogical fantasies on the Bible---even though the Bible is in no way to blame for their nonsense.
I have never seen a believing tare?
So people who were burned at the stake for heresy were burned "In Love"?Dear Dad, Amen. Tares are unworthy of anything but to be gathered, and separated from the wheat, and burned.
In Love,
Aman
There are many more articles about the flood here. Every one a different line of evidence falsifying the idea of a recent global flood.Pretty much all of you have seen this graph:
It's commonly used to support various dating methods by showinga strong correlation between them, which would be extremely hrd to explain if they were flawed in some major way.
However, there is something else that struck me about it:
Assuming that a global flood happened, all these varves and coral layers elsewhere would have to have formed after that flood. We have things which could not possibly be pre-flood or mid-flood which give very old C14 readings.
In other words, anything which puts off C14 dating would have to have happened after the flood, the flood itself is not a valid explaination for this anymore at all (it never really was...but anyway).
However, this also has strong implications regarding what we should see if we date things of known age. As long as the mysterious process which oddly put both C14 and the lake varves off to the same degree
was still going on we should consistently get too old readings for things of known age - i.e. anything that is 3700 years old should give a ~20,000 years reading if the process took until about 3000 years ago. However, that is not what we observe. E.g. egyptian mummies come up with nice dates.
And tree ring counts (of individual old trees, not sequences patched together from several trees!) indicate that no major changes ocured for a very long time either.
This means that it would have to have happened very rapidly after the supposed flood but before a significant chunk of recorded history and tree ring data began.
So...question to the YECs: How long did it take for the varves to form after the flood?
How many varves formed in the year after the flood?
How many in the year 5 post flood?
Year 10?
Year 20?
Year 50?
Year 100?
...
Please be specific. Any higher resolution of years would be welcome.
Ha...maybe our last too
Great, so much for them preaching then.Dear Dad, Amen. Tares are unworthy of anything but to be gathered, and separated from the wheat, and burned.
In Love,
Aman
Pretty well condemns himself as a monster out of his own mouth, eh?Great, so much for them preaching then.
The lake in Japan is not apparently right in an area where the rapid continental separation would have changed the terrain all that much if I recall. If I recall right, that would explain why a lot of layers could accumulate in an undisturbed way.Pretty well condemns himself as a monster out of his own mouth, eh?
The varve count its correlation with carbon isotope ratios is anything but imaginary.The lake in Japan is not apparently right in an area where the rapid continental separation would have changed the terrain all that much if I recall. If I recall right, that would explain why a lot of layers could accumulate in an undisturbed way.
But in any case, the time is imaginary.
So?? Like anyone expects otherwise?The varve count its correlation with carbon isotope ratios is anything but imaginary.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?