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.
Oh, yes, I can.
Adam was [physically] 30.
Adam was [existentially] 1.
Same with the earth.
That sure narrows it down, doesn't it?
Excuse me, but I don't consider Omphalos 'scholarship and real knowledge.'That's been your attitude all along you just don't WANT to know anything. You're obviously far more interested in proselytising, with your head in a bucket, than in any scholarship and real knowledge.
Ya --- and I got a Sacagawea dollar coin --- but it's not 205 years old.There is chiness pottery from 6000 bce with writing on it. I guess thats embedded age right?
Remember my formula, that I have posted twice?
PA - UD = EA
What this simple formula says, is that, to compute the amount of age God embedded into the earth, simply take the object's Physical Age, subtract Ussher's Dating (6012 years) from it, and there you have the minimun age that God embedded.
You guys found it with your radiometrics.
Believe me, if He didn't want you to find it, you would never find it.
What tells me that, is the fact that you guys critique it before you even understand it.Again, embedded age melds science (specifically the age of the earth) with the Scriptures.
But unfortunately, instead of accepting that, you guys want no part of God in cosmology.
But the geologic record is based on an interpretation called 'uniformitarianism', not 'catastrophism',
and therefore I don't trust what scientists claim the geological record tells them.
Ya --- and I got a Sacagawea dollar coin --- but it's not 205 years old.
Ussher didn't give us the 6012 number --- more like the 5653 number.Thank God the humans who wrote the bible got all the lists right and thank God Bishop Ussher came along and gave us the 6012 number!
It's what you call history; I won't dispute that.Actually what we guys found with our radiometrics is precisely what you say isn't there: history.
Uh-huh --- as long as they're official scientific catastrophies.Do keep in mind that geologists also allow that catastrophes do occasionally occur.
I have just two more questions for you, AVET:
1. Is it possible that your Embedded Age model is wrong?
2. If your answer is yes, then how would you determine that it is wrong?
We've found thousands of Smilodon fossils as well as many other species.
It would violate the Prime Directive: Never let science override Scripture.
Good.
You guys built that test yourselves.
You built it, tested it, and implemented it; and it runs on uniformitarian principles.
I'm under no such obligation to accept it, especially since it violates the Prime Directive.
It's only causing you guys confusion --- not me.
I think you guys need to learn what Embedded Age actually is.
If Smilodon's skeleton is 15,000 years old, that doesn't mean Smilodon himself lived that long ago.
What if I died tomorrow and my skeleton was dated at 30,000 years?
Would that bust your theory?
I use Boolean logic to determine what I think is right, and what I think is wrong: 158.If you don't really care about science, why bother with "embedded age"?
God would not embed age into a fossil.Why would God "embed" age into all of these fossils?
Ya --- and I got a Sacagawea dollar coin --- but it's not 205 years old.
If you found a fossil and dated it as 10,000 years old, I won't dispute it.Then how would you take into account the age of the fossils based on the radioisotope dating, even when the dating of the rock around the fossil also correlates with the age of the fossil itself? Why do you accept one method but not the other especially since they both use the same concept?
My cut-off point is well-known here.
Place a Bible on the table, now all the science that disagrees with that Bible can be placed to the left of that Bible, and all the science that agrees with that Bible can be placed to the right of that Bible.
I think you'll find that very, very, very, very, very little science will be placed to the left of that Bible.
If you found a fossil and dated it as 10,000 years old, I won't dispute it.
What I will dispute, is saying the plant or animal or man that belonged to that fossil lived 10,000 years ago.
This is where I would leave the realm of science and switch over to the realm of faith, as I would have to violate the Prime Directive by agreeing with what a machine is telling me.
And I won't do that --- no how, no way, no thanks.
Would it be possible for you to show some science that AGREES with the Bible?My cut-off point is well-known here.
Place a Bible on the table, now all the science that disagrees with that Bible can be placed to the left of that Bible, and all the science that agrees with that Bible can be placed to the right of that Bible.
I think you'll find that very, very, very, very, very little science will be placed to the left of that Bible.
If you found a fossil and dated it as 10,000 years old, I won't dispute it.
What I will dispute, is saying the plant or animal or man that belonged to that fossil lived 10,000 years ago.
So, the only way you could be wrong about E.A. is if YEC is correct? Could that be wrong also?1. Absolutely --- I'm about two pixels away from becoming a YEC.
Hmmm... So, what exactly is keeping you from telling radiometric dating to "take a hike?" In any case, my question was concerning E.A., not radiometric dating. Is the only way you can tell that E.A. is wrong by becoming convinced that radiometric dating is wrong?2. When I decide (or am convicted) that radiometric dating can take a hike.
Mike Elphick said:That's been your attitude all along — you just don't WANT to know anything. You're obviously far more interested in proselytising, with your head in a bucket, than in any scholarship and real knowledge.
Excuse me, but I don't consider Omphalos 'scholarship and real knowledge.'
I've already made it clear that I am not Omphalos, and want no part of it, or its disciples.
If Gosse came to our church and started spreading that Omphalos stuff, and refused to stop, he'd find himself escorted out.
And I would hold the door open.
I don't need [whatever-his-first-name-is] Gosse ... rubbed in my face.
And I'm not just any old Fundamental Baptist --- I'm an Independent Fundamental Baptist.
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?