Methods Of Dating Rock & Fossils

[RocksInMyHead]

You're seeing the weakness here?

No, not really.

 

[razeontherock]

No, not really.

Very well then, carry on.

 

[dad]

Gibberish.

Your only basis for saying that is some fantasy. There is absolutely no evidence for your suppositions. The sizes, distances and composition are known.

Nonsense. Stargazers were a dime a dozen even back in Babylon. They probably were better at it than you as well. The fantasy universe that you fabricate based on not knowing is of no value. The sizes distance and composition are not known. Oh, you may know some atoms of hydrogen or whatever exist...but you only see a small part of the picture! They even admit they can't see most of what 'must' be out there! So they invoke the magic dark elephant stuff to try to explain why what we do see cannot be all there is!

The bible indicates that spirits live in space. There is also a connection to the stars with spirits. God knows the name of every star. No accidents. The blasphemous way that so called science looks at creation results in a horrible nightmare of utter absurdity.

 

[AV1611VET]

God knows the name of every star. No accidents.

Yup -- God had Adam name the animals, but He named the stars, Himself.

Psalm 147:4 He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.

 

[Michael]

Yup -- God had Adam name the animals, but He named the stars, Himself.

Psalm 147:4 He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.

Even still, he named most of them, include our sol, BILLIONS of years ago.

 

[Michael]

Nonsense. Stargazers were a dime a dozen even back in Babylon. They probably were better at it than you as well.

Um, not to interrupt or anything, but doesn't that sort of shoot your own argument in the foot?

If they too could map and measure the alignment of stars and galaxies that are now known to be MILLIONS of light years away (if not billions), how was that light able to reach them in less than few THOUSANDS of years?

Doesn't that sort of lay waste to your claim about the age of the Earth and the universe we live in?

 

[RickG]

Hey I am not too old to learn.
Try and make me

I never said you were, but so far all you have done is criticize and ridicule everything presented to you rather than listening and trying to understand.

Distance....not known. Decay...possibly an interior fishbowl feature that we see as the info comes our way?

Distances to far away stellar objects are well known and measured by several methods. A willingness to examine those methods and trying to understand them is admirable, chastising and ridiculing them without a shred of supporting scientific evidence is childish.

After all gamma rays are known to be caused by things other than decay! What if that includes different state space stuff?

That is is incorrect. Gamma rays are produced when the nuclei of a radioactive element of higher energy decays to a nuclei of a lower energy. The sources of decay may vary but the method does not change.

Actually I touched on some deep stuff there. It went over your head I guess.

You went over my head? I believe you have a touch of Dunning-Kruger effect.

 

[AV1611VET]

Even still, he named most of them, include our sol, BILLIONS of years ago.

C'mon now!

 

[AV1611VET]

If they too could map and measure the alignment of stars and galaxies that are now known to be MILLIONS of light years away (if not billions), how was that light able to reach them in less than few THOUSANDS of years?

Doesn't that sort of lay waste to your claim about the age of the Earth and the universe we live in?

God wrote the plan of salvation in the stars; but the Greeks came along and messed everything up.

By way of example, Gemini are twins to the Greeks; but Gemini is one and the same Person to the Hebrews: King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

Aries is a ram to the Greeks, but to the Hebrews, Aries is the Lamb of God [slain from the foundation of the world].

Now you know why it went dark from noon to three on the day Jesus' was crucified, don't you?

 

[RickG]

Yup -- God had Adam name the animals, but He named the stars, Himself.

Psalm 147:4 He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.

Don't you mean constellations?

 

[AV1611VET]

Don't you mean constellations?

Good question.

The book I'm going by, God's Voice in the Stars, by Kenneth C. Fleming, says that almost every civilization on the face of the earth recognizes the same constellations.

The Chinese are an exception, as someone here once pointed out.

Fleming says that the names of the individual stars, in the Hebrew, not the Greek, further lend credence to the constellation, and that each constellation is a word picture of some aspect of the life of Christ.

 

[NGC 6712]

Good question.

The book I'm going by, God's Voice in the Stars, by Kenneth C. Fleming, says that almost every civilization on the face of the earth recognizes the same constellations.

The Chinese are an exception, as someone here once pointed out.

Fleming says that the names of the individual stars, in the Hebrew, not the Greek, further lend credence to the constellation, and that each constellation is a word picture of some aspect of the life of Christ.

That is not true. Cultures all over the world had vastly different constellations with different legends associated with them.

 

[RickG]

Good question.

The book I'm going by, God's Voice in the Stars, by Kenneth C. Fleming, says that almost every civilization on the face of the earth recognizes the same constellations.

The Chinese are an exception, as someone here once pointed out.

Fleming says that the names of the individual stars, in the Hebrew, not the Greek, further lend credence to the constellation, and that each constellation is a word picture of some aspect of the life of Christ.

Sounds interesting, you must expound on that sometime.

 

[keith99]

That is not true. Cultures all over the world had vastly different constellations with different legends associated with them.

Actually that depends a lot on what one means by the same constellations.

Same stars or same name/picture. In the same hemisphere the sets of stars are apt to be the same, or at least considerable overlap. Duh, it is the bright/prominent stars.

Check out the Big Dipper, which has at least 3 other names and has links ot other multinamed constellations.

 

[NGC 6712]

Actually that depends a lot on what one means by the same constellations.

Same stars or same name/picture. In the same hemisphere the sets of stars are apt to be the same, or at least considerable overlap. Duh, it is the bright/prominent stars.

Check out the Big Dipper, which has at least 3 other names and has links ot other multinamed constellations.

I agree. Some prominent groups lend themselves to being lumped together and were.

 

[dad]

Um, not to interrupt or anything, but doesn't that sort of shoot your own argument in the foot?

If they too could map and measure the alignment of stars and galaxies that are now known to be MILLIONS of light years away (if not billions), how was that light able to reach them in less than few THOUSANDS of years?

Doesn't that sort of lay waste to your claim about the age of the Earth and the universe we live in?

I am not even sure I want to call all the little spots we see far far away stars. After all distance isn't known or size. But that wasn't what I meant about the stargazers of old. I meant that they at least seemed to realize that a spiritual connection existed! That is more than their present colleagues. No modern stargazer even knows what a star is! The call the flippin sun a star!! The distances are also not known. All the claimed distances of modern wise men and star gazers are based solely on ignorance. The ignorce of not knowing what is really out there. They admit it. They call it mostly dark unknown stuff. They religiously deny any spiritual connection, while religiously imposing a physical only imaginary model.


The most educated of them are seemingly famous for all that they don't know!

 

[dad]

I never said you were, but so far all you have done is criticize and ridicule everything presented to you rather than listening and trying to understand.

Distances to far away stellar objects are well known and measured by several methods. A willingness to examine those methods and trying to understand them is admirable, chastising and ridiculing them without a shred of supporting scientific evidence is childish.

I have looked at them all. Cosmic ladder, candles, etc etc. None of it can stand up to the light.

That is is incorrect. Gamma rays are produced when the nuclei of a radioactive element of higher energy decays to a nuclei of a lower energy. The sources of decay may vary but the method does not change.

No. According to this site that is very correct.



"Gamma radiation, like X-radiation, can be produced by a variety of phenomena. When high-energy gamma rays, electrons, or protons bombard materials, the excited atoms within emit characteristic "secondary" gamma rays, which are products of the temporary creation of excited nuclear states in the bombarded atoms (such transitions form a topic in nuclear spectroscopy). Such gamma rays are produced by the nucleus, but not as a result of nuclear excitement from radioactive decay."

Gamma ray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You went over my head? I believe you have a touch of Dunning-Kruger effect.

Better than having a touch of pride, or thinking I know it all effect.

 

[dad]

That is not true. Cultures all over the world had vastly different constellations with different legends associated with them.

Different spirits are honored or even called different names in various parts of the world. Since there is a connection with the stars, that then would stand to reason!

One day a third of the stars will fall to earth. How big could they be!?

 

[Elendur]

Different spirits are honored or even called different names in various parts of the world. Since there is a connection with the stars, that then would stand to reason!

One day a third of the stars will fall to earth. How big could they be!?

If you actually think that...

*If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all*

Do you still believe that we're surrounded by a firmament?

 

[RickG]

I have looked at them all. Cosmic ladder, candles, etc etc. None of it can stand up to the light.

No, you are just spewing garbage again. Everyone knows that. This is a science forum, if you can't discuss the science, then don't make childish comments.

No. According to this site that is very correct.

"Gamma radiation, like X-radiation, can be produced by a variety of phenomena. When high-energy gamma rays, electrons, or protons bombard materials, the excited atoms within emit characteristic "secondary" gamma rays, which are products of the temporary creation of excited nuclear states in the bombarded atoms (such transitions form a topic in nuclear spectroscopy). Such gamma rays are produced by the nucleus, but not as a result of nuclear excitement from radioactive decay."

Gamma ray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Better than having a touch of pride, or thinking I know it all effect.

No, you are confusing source with process. That is understandable for a layman. Gamma rays can come from different sources, however the process of their generation is the same in all cases; an unstable nuclei loses energy decaying into a lower energy nuclei.

Try reading beyond wiki.