Taking Questions on Embedded Age Creation

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes, I'm sure the only woman in the world was beautiful. God saw all that He had made and it was very good.

And what does that have to do with AV's claim that the universe was created 6000 years ago with an embedded age and embedded history of 14.5 billion years?

 

[David Lamb]

And what does that have to do with AV's claim that the universe was created 6000 years ago with an embedded age and embedded history of 14.5 billion years?

Sorry, nothing - I do apologise!

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yes, I'm sure the only woman in the world was beautiful. God saw all that He had made and it was very good.

Even if she wasn’t beautiful she’d still be the most beautiful in the world. Lol

 

[Kylie]

If the Flood pulverized 3.5 billion year old rocks into sediment; and if T Rex remains were entrapped in that sediment; and then the sediment solidified; then yes, you would find their fossilized remains in rocks that are dated 3.5 billion years.

And...

You still can't get it right, can you, chief?

It's EMBEDDED AGE, not embedded history.

And if you think my explanation about fossils embedded in 3.5 billion year old rock is "only in my imagination," then test it yourself.

Take a 3.5 billion year old rock, pulverize it down to sediment, put a dog's skeleton in it, let the sediment lithify, then tell me how old that dog's skeleton is.

Or can science take a hike?

You know they do dating on igneous rock, not sedimentary rock precisely because of that problem, right?

The date fossils by being able to say, "The sedimentary rock that contains this fossil is between a layer of igneous rock that is 3.5 billion years and another layer of igneous rock which is 3.4 billion years."

 

[AV1611VET]

And...


You know they do dating on igneous rock, not sedimentary rock precisely because of that problem, right?

The date fossils by being able to say, "The sedimentary rock that contains this fossil is between a layer of igneous rock that is 3.5 billion years and another layer of igneous rock which is 3.4 billion years."

What's your point?

If 3.5 billion year old igneous rock was pulverized by the Flood into 3.5 billion year old sediment, and if T Rex remains were entrapped in that sediment; and then the sediment solidified; then yes, you would find their fossilized remains in rocks that are dated 3.5 billion years.

 

[Kylie]

What's your point?

If 3.5 billion year old igneous rock was pulverized by the Flood into 3.5 billion year old sediment, and if T Rex remains were entrapped in that sediment; and then the sediment solidified; then yes, you would find their fossilized remains in rocks that are dated 3.5 billion years.

And that is why, as I said, scientists do not date sedimentary rock because they know this can give inaccurate results.

If the T rex dies 70 million years ago, and it is buried, the scientists would find it between, for example, a layer of igneous rock that is dated at 70.1 million years old and 69.9 million years old.

They would not date the sedimentary rock that the T rex was buried in, because they know that it would give the age that those particles formed, NOT the date the sedimentary rock was laid down.

You see, the scientists UNDERSTAND the tools that they have, and they know how to use them properly. Which is why they do not use them in a way that they know would produce inaccurate results.

I hope you also understand this now.

 

[AV1611VET]

If the T rex dies 70 million years ago, and it is buried, the scientists would find it between, for example, a layer of igneous rock that is dated at 70.1 million years old and 69.9 million years old.

How did the sedimentary rock get inside the igneous rock?

My point is, that at some time in the past (as in the Flood), rocks were soft enough to house skeletal remains of plants and animals.

If those rocks were a billion years old, then the Flood came and soften them up, then they hardened after the Flood, then we could indeed find T Rexes in billion year old rock.

Sedimentary, igneous, or otherwise.

 

[dlamberth]

How did the sedimentary rock get inside the igneous rock?

My point is, that at some time in the past (as in the Flood), rocks were soft enough to house skeletal remains of plants and animals.

If those rocks were a billion years old, then the Flood came and soften them up, then they hardened after the Flood, then we could indeed find T Rexes in billion year old rock.

Sedimentary, igneous, or otherwise.

I had no idea that water can soften up basalt. How does that work?

 

[AV1611VET]

I had no idea that water can soften up basalt. How does that work?

Fossils are not found in volcanic rock.

 

[dlamberth]

Fossils are not found in volcanic rock.

Fossils are not found in volcanic rock.

You wrote that the flood softened up igneous rock after it was pointed out that T-Rex bones are dated when sedimentary rock is sandwiched between igneous layers. At least that's my understanding of what you wrote.

 

[AV1611VET]

You wrote that the flood softened up igneous rock after it was pointed out that T-Rex bones are dated when sedimentary rock is sandwiched between igneous layers. At least that's my understanding of what you wrote.

Sorry.

My bad.

 

[dlamberth]

Now I'm really confused. The way I understand it is that embedded age says that God buried the dinosaurs bones. But I just read that it was Satan who buried those bones. Confusion upon confusion.

 

[AV1611VET]

Now I'm really confused. The way I understand it is that embedded age says that God buried the dinosaurs bones. But I just read that it was Satan who buried those bones. Confusion upon confusion.

I'm not surprised.

You have no clue what embedded age is, do you?

 

[dlamberth]

I'm not surprised.

You have no clue what embedded age is, do you?

I think I have a pretty good ides. But the confusion for me is the question of did Satan bury the bones like I just read, or was it God's doing.

 

[oikonomia]

I'll take questions on Embedded Age Creation here.

I define Embedded Age Creation as: maturity without history.

Would you comment on this interesting passage from Ecclesiastes?

What has been is what will be, / And what has been done is what will be done, / And there is nothing new under the sun.

Is there anything of which one can say, See, this is new? / Already it has been, in the ages that were before us.

There is no remembrance of those who were before; / And also those who will come to be afterward, for them there will be no remembrance / With those who come to be after them. (Ecc. 1:9-11)

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm not surprised.

You have no clue what embedded age is, do you?

I think I have a pretty good ides. But the confusion for me is the question of did Satan bury the bones like I just read, or was it God's doing.

Thanks for the QED.

 

[AV1611VET]

Would you comment on this interesting passage from Ecclesiastes?

What has been is what will be, / And what has been done is what will be done, / And there is nothing new under the sun.

Is there anything of which one can say, See, this is new? / Already it has been, in the ages that were before us.

There is no remembrance of those who were before; / And also those who will come to be afterward, for them there will be no remembrance / With those who come to be after them. (Ecc. 1:9-11)

It all boils down to this:

History repeats itself.

History just uses different methods to do it.

For example:

We drive cars today.

Back then, they used animals to ride on.

(Airplanes, submarines, and the like, had to wait until God gave us their inventors.)

 

[Kylie]

How did the sedimentary rock get inside the igneous rock?

A layer of igneous rock was laid down.

Rexy dies on top of the layer of igneous rock, and gets covered by sediment.

Rexy is now embedded in a layer of sedimentary rock that lays on top of a layer of igneous rock.

Another layer of igneous rock is laid down over the top of the whole thing.

My point is, that at some time in the past (as in the Flood), rocks were soft enough to house skeletal remains of plants and animals.

If those rocks were a billion years old, then the Flood came and soften them up, then they hardened after the Flood, then we could indeed find T Rexes in billion year old rock.

Sedimentary, igneous, or otherwise.

Yeah, rocks don't work that way. If you want that idea to have any believability at all, you'd better get some actual evidence to show that rocks can do what you claim they can do.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yeah, rocks don't work that way. If you want that idea to have any believability at all, you'd better get some actual evidence to show that rocks can do what you claim they can do.

Do it yourself.

Under controlled conditions.

Take a bounder and pulverize it to dust.

Find yesterday's newspaper and put it in there.

Let the dust lithify.

There you have it.

Yesterday's newspaper inside a billion year old rock.

 

[Kylie]

Do it yourself.

Under controlled conditions.

Take a bounder and pulverize it to dust.

Find yesterday's newspaper and put it in there.

Let the dust lithify.

There you have it.

Yesterday's newspaper inside a billion year old rock.

Okay, at this point I can only conclude you are deliberately missing my point.

Scientist WOULD NOT DATE the sedimentary rock in the first place.

And they would not date it because they know it would not tell them the age of the sedimentary rock itself, it would only give the age of the little bitty particles that make it up, which could be many different ages.