• 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.

Tree Rings a Problem for 6,000 Year Old Earth

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,403
3,194
Hartford, Connecticut
✟357,491.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Show me the research, not an hour long youtube video, not a random webpage on creation.com. I want to see research where someone observed rates of mutation or rates of speciation.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature24287

These scientists have been watching e.coli for decades now and for over 60,000 generations and they havent speciated. But you think that in a mere 3,000 years, millions of species could be produced by 8000.

https://phys.org/news/2018-05-gene-survey-reveals-facets-evolution.html

Here ^ genetic studies suggest speciation in 100,000-200,000 years, but you believe it happened thousands of times, perhaps many times in a single year? As if tigers were giving birth to lions and pumas and bobcats in back to back years. You know just as well as I that tigers do not breed distinctly different species in a single generation. Nor any other animal.
 
Upvote 0

BroRoyVa79

Active Member
Aug 16, 2018
252
124
Virginia
✟35,221.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Show me the research, not an hour long youtube video, not a random webpage on creation.com. I want to see research where someone observed rates of mutation or rates of speciation.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature24287

These scientists have been watching e.coli for decades now and for over 60,000 generations and they havent speciated. But you think that in a mere 3,000 years, millions of species could be produced by 8000.

https://phys.org/news/2018-05-gene-survey-reveals-facets-evolution.html

Here ^ genetic studies suggest speciation in 100,000-200,000 years, but you believe it happened thousands of times, perhaps many times in a single year? As if tigers were giving birth to lions and pumas and bobcats in back to back years. You know just as well as I that tigers do not breed distinctly different species in a single generation. Nor any other animal.

Man, I've given you the links and names to go find it for yourself. Not going to hold your hand on this one and if you keep repeating, "Show me" when I've lead you to the water, but can't make you drink. Oh well.

Send you to articles with scientific research and theories in it - not good enough.
Send you to a lecture from a geneticist talking about genetic variation - not good enough.

As I said in the beginning, I wasn't expecting you to agree. You don't, that's your perogative. You asked a question, I provided source material to help with an answer. You didn't like that material, I'm moving along.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,403
3,194
Hartford, Connecticut
✟357,491.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Man, I've given you the links and names to go find it for yourself. Not going to hold your hand on this one and if you keep repeating, "Show me" when I've lead you to the water, but can't make you drink. Oh well.

Send you to articles with scientific research and theories in it - not good enough.
Send you to a lecture from a geneticist talking about genetic variation - not good enough.

As I said in the beginning, I wasn't expecting you to agree. You don't, that's your perogative. You asked a question, I provided source material to help with an answer. You didn't like that material, I'm moving along.

You gave me a link to creation.com and you gave me a youtube link. These arent resources. What research paper have you written in school, where you have gotten away with sourcing creation.com and youtube?

youre making extraordinary claims and you dont have research to back it up, just conjecture and your imagination.
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,593
Northern Ohio
✟314,607.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There are 200 thousand genus of animals, 30, thousand genus of plant.
You could fit the DNA from every animal on the planet in a tea spoon.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Job 33:6
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,490
1,319
72
Sebring, FL
✟832,912.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
No it's not , you take a bone and do few tests via carbon dating for example . One will show the same bone being 200k years old and the other 20k for example . One of them will be rejected according to what previous datings were from previous experiments .
It still shows that there is at least 1000% error but who cares right .


I've seen creationists cite reports of carbon dating being wrong. The only time this happens is when a creationist orders a test that isn't appropriate for the sample or submits a sample that is not been treated properly. Radio carbon dating only goes back about 50,000 years. For samples reasonably believed to be older than that, it is simply not the right test to order. This is one thing creationists don't understand. The age of the earth isn't determined by radiocarbon dating. Creationist sources go on and on and problems with C14, but that has nothing to do with the age of the earth anyway. There are about forty different methods of radioisotope dating, and other methods that don't use radioactive isotopes.

If someone submits a dinosaur bone for a radiocarbon test, the lab will do the test the customer pays for, but the results are meaningless. A dinosaur bone is too old for a radiocarbon test to be meaningful. Any carbon that is present, or any C14 that is present, is simply contamination. Any responsible researcher would know this.

Look, you wouldn't hire a garbageman to do an ultrasound on your body. Likewise, don't hire a creationist to test the age of a sample.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,490
1,319
72
Sebring, FL
✟832,912.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
First, if the stars are far away, we do not know how distant starlight travels through space. It could be super insanely faster than we can imagine. We have not truly measured it. We are only guessing. Second, the stars could also actually be closer than we actually think and not farther away (Seeing we have not actually traveled these distances to confirm the actual location of these stars exactly). Scientists are making observations based here on Earth and not out in space.

Anyways, God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth," (Genesis 1:14-17).

These words by God do not sound like the light had to travel over millions or billions of years here. It says God made the stars also (like it was an afterthought or something easy for God) and he set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth. So God sets them in heaven to give light upon the Earth. There is no mention or hint that God set the stars in heaven to give light upon the Earth waaaaaaay later here. I just do not get that impression when reading the text here.

The days here in Genesis are clearly 24 hour periods because it is defined by an evening and a morning. Nowhere in the Bible is a long period of time referred to as a day with the word evening and the morning attached. Yes, the "Day of the Lord" is a period of time in the Tribulation. But no mention is made about how the "Day of the Lord" (A period of time) is attached with an evening and a morning. It would destroy the metaphor if such a thing were so.

If your version of what see in the Bible was true, it would read like this:

"he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to [eventually] give light upon the earth," (Genesis 1:17).
(The word "eventually" has to be added to the text in order to give us the impression that lots of time could have transpired here between God creating the stars and the light actually reaching the Earth).

"...[This is] the fourth day."
(Genesis 1:19).
(Instead of: And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.").




<< First, if the stars are far away, we do not know how distant starlight travels through space. It could be super insanely faster than we can imagine. We have not truly measured it. We are only guessing. Second, the stars could also actually be closer than we actually think and not farther away (Seeing we have not actually traveled these distances to confirm the actual location of these stars exactly). Scientists are making observations based here on Earth and not out in space. >>


I think you are underestimating what modern science can do and exaggerating what you know. Here's an example of why I tend to trust what science believes about the speed of light, and radio waves. I hate to tell you how old I am, but when I was a kid, no one had landed on the moon. I did read a lot of science fiction. In SF stories, people on the moon talked on the phone with people on earth and there was a 1.4 second delay. That's how long it takes radio waves to get from the earth to the moon or vice versa. Guess what--when astronauts landed on the moon, there were no surprises in that area. There was a 1.4 second delay in communication caused by the speed of light. In the same way, we have sent automated spacecraft to visit every planet in the solar system, and the delay in radio communication has always been exactly when science predicted from experiments performed on earth.


Jason: << The days here in Genesis are clearly 24 hour periods because it is defined by an evening and a morning. Nowhere in the Bible is a long period of time referred to as a day with the word evening and the morning attached. >>

I believe I quoted this earlier but I'll do it again.

3 You turn people back to dust,
saying, “Return to dust, you mortals.”
4 A thousand years in your sight
are like a day that has just gone by,
or like a watch in the night.


--Psalm 90: 1-4 NIV


Traditionally, this Psalm is attributed to Moses, just like Genesis. It makes it clear that a day in the Scripture is not always a literal day. As some have pointed out, in the Six Days of creation, the sun isn't created until the fourth day, so how can days be measured before that?

The Psalm said thousands, but it could be millions or billions.
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,593
Northern Ohio
✟314,607.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It could be super insanely faster than we can imagine.
We do not know the exact speed of light, but we do know that you can not travel faster then the speed of light without a proportionate amount of decay. They test this with the double slit experiment. I see the effect from this show up in photos all the time. I was actually a theater student in college and I worked for the state ballet company as an electrician on the lighting crew. So we studied the physics of light quite a bit. Of course it is just a theory but it is a theory that we use all the time to produce a lot of neat effects with the lighting. Also I do photography where we photograph the light that bounces off of an object. An object that absorbs and reflects light. In heaven things will be a lot more translucent and light will pass though them more. This is why they all it the crystal sea because all the stones at the bottom of the sea are made of a crystal that allows the light to pass through it. Here on Earth we consider these to be precious stones and they are expensive.
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,593
Northern Ohio
✟314,607.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Anyways, God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament
God is doing a work in the firmament. This is our atmosphere and the way the atmosphere deals with light. This was on the fourth day.
 
Upvote 0

Chinchilla

Well-Known Member
May 31, 2018
2,839
1,045
31
Warsaw
✟45,919.00
Country
Poland
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Any carbon that is present, or any C14 that is present, is simply contamination.

You don't know that it's just assumption like many others .
A dinosaur bone is too old for a radiocarbon test to be meaningful. Any carbon that is present, or any C14 that is present, is simply contamination.

So is 300 million year rock .
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
9,403
3,194
Hartford, Connecticut
✟357,491.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
https://ncse.com/library-resource/radiometric-dating-does-work

Screenshot_20180825-075334.png

Multiple independent sources indicate that radioactive dating does indeed give precise results^ using various methods performed by differing labs around the world.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: USincognito
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,593
Northern Ohio
✟314,607.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think you are underestimating what modern science can do
Can they cure the common cold or come up with a diet that really works? Can they cure drug addiction or rehabilitate the common criminal? We can travel faster then the speed of sound and they did cure most childhood diseases.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,490
1,319
72
Sebring, FL
✟832,912.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
But they did not observe that light traveling OUTSIDE our galaxy. Also, just saying we can know a distance by using simple geometry does not really prove anything unless one can actually prove that the star is actually that far away by measuring the distance from the Earth to the actual star. We can make educated guesses, but that does not prove that one is 100% right. What I know is true is what is stated in Genesis 1:16-19. God made the stars and set them in the heaven so as to provide light on the Earth. No mention of lots of time was needed for that light to reach Earth is ever stated; And an evening and a morning define the fourth day. So it is a 24 hour period that this event takes place. I may not be able to explain it, but then again, can you explain how Jesus turned water into wine? It is an act of God. What God does is always miraculous. I prefer to trust God and His Word and not the claims of some men. That is the difference between a Young Earth Creationist vs. an Old Earth Creationist. The YEC looks at the Bible as their lens or worldview when approaching Science. The OEC takes secular Science as their lens or worldview and then tries to cram that into the Bible (and thereby alter the text in an unusual way so as to make the Bible say what they want it to say). That is why most OEC's make Science their primary thrust of their arguments and not the Bible.


Jason: << What I know is true is what is stated in Genesis 1:16-19. God made the stars and set them in the heaven so as to provide light on the Earth. No mention of lots of time was needed for that light to reach Earth is ever stated; >>


The Bible is not a science text. Genesis, in particular, is not a science text. Genesis doesn't say that the earth has a magnetic field but it does. Genesis doesn't mention sunspots but the sun has them. Genesis doesn't mention atoms or molecules but we know that these things exist.

The Bible doesn't mention the Americas but I live there. Think about it.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,490
1,319
72
Sebring, FL
✟832,912.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I am not discounting that the stars MAY be far away (outside our galaxy). But even if they were, I am sure God has the mystery solved in how He gets distant star light to appear instantly for us from so far away. In fact, with God nothing is impossible. He could make the light to travel faster so as to reach us. Or the stars are actually closer (outside our galaxy) and your Science has deceived you. In either case, I am not worried about it. I know God's Word is true in Genesis 1:16-19. God created the stars and he sets them in the heaven for light upon the Earth. This is within a 24 hour period day because an evening and a morning is a 24 hour day and not a metaphorical reference to a long period of time.


Jason: << In fact, with God nothing is impossible. He could make the light to travel faster so as to reach us. Or the stars are actually closer (outside our galaxy) and your Science has deceived you. >>


Your post brings out some things that I've noticed about creationists. First, they don't seem to care what is true. The argument about the age of the earth bores them. Yet the children or grandchildren of creationists can develop an interest in the physical world and when they do, what they have been taught will come crashing down, it won't work.


Second, creationists don't believe in natural laws. They don't believe that God set up orderly rules for the physical world when He created the universe. To creationists, the speed of light isn't constant. The speed of light is where is because that's where God left it the last time He fiddled with it. The same goes for all other constants, creationists don't believe there are physical constants. To creationists, everything is a miracle. If hundreds of miracles are needed to make their view work out, to them, this is normal. To creationists, orderly patterns in the physical world are an illusion, everything is a miracle.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,490
1,319
72
Sebring, FL
✟832,912.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Garden of Eden is there , hidden from us , probably burried in north pole .
I never said it was removed.
It's not like one's salvation depends on the theory of evolution or old earth , but at least one of us will be ashemed when arriving in heaven knowing he was wrong all the time .
When I take it literally at least I have excuse at the Judgement Seat of Christ that I believed what was written , when you put science into God's word you don't have excuse because you believed man rather than God .


The Garden of Eden can't be at the North Pole. There's no land at the North Pole, so for courtesy I'll assume that you meant the South Pole. It actually can't be there either, because Genesis Two says that a river that flows from Eden divides into four major rivers, the Pishon, the Gihon, the Tigris and the Euphrates.

Let's face it, the Garden of Eden can't be just anywhere. I was taught that it should be in modern day Iraq, if it could be found. It can't be found: either God removed it, which is not mentioned in Scripture, or the Garden of Eden is a parable, or a series of parables, not a physical fact.


10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.)13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

--Genesis 2: 10-14 NIV
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,490
1,319
72
Sebring, FL
✟832,912.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
45 Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you--Moses, in whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?" John 5:45-47


As usual, quoting a passage of the Bible without telling us what you think it means leads to confusion. Jesus is addressing the Pharisees here and their attachment to Moses. Are there any Pharisees on this thread?
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,490
1,319
72
Sebring, FL
✟832,912.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Anyone, excepting no one, who puts the arguments of "science" above scripture, is denying BASIC Christian doctrine.

But this means the explicit statements of scripture, not conclusions based upon them.


The Bible makes no statement on the age of the earth. Those who say that Christianity requires a young earth are making complex conclusions based on complex assumptions, as well as reading the Bible.

Like some others on this thread, you seem to think that science is at war with Christianity. I don't see how this is so.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,490
1,319
72
Sebring, FL
✟832,912.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I am a scientist, and have written extensively on the SCIENTIFIC reasons for rejection the theory of evolution. But my MAIN reason for rejecting it is that is contradicts the explicitly stated accounts of Genesis.


I have read many of your posts and you've never claimed to be a scientist before.

What expertise do you claim?

Can you explain what the "theory of evolution" is before you reject it?

Genesis isn't that specific on the origins of animals or plants.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟554,225.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
As usual, quoting a passage of the Bible without telling us what you think it means leads to confusion. Jesus is addressing the Pharisees here and their attachment to Moses. Are there any Pharisees on this thread?
The point of this post was that a belief in what Moses said is essential to a belief in Jesus. for Jesus explicitly said, "if you do not believe his writings, how shall you believe my words?"
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BroRoyVa79
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟554,225.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
The Bible makes no statement on the age of the earth. Those who say that Christianity requires a young earth are making complex conclusions based on complex assumptions, as well as reading the Bible.

Like some others on this thread, you seem to think that science is at war with Christianity. I don't see how this is so.
And neither did I make any statement on the age of the earth.

As I said, I am a scientist, so how could I think that REAL science is at war with Christianity? But there is MUCH that is falsely called science, which is indeed at war with Christianity. One of these pseudo-sciences is evolution, which directly contradicts scripture.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BroRoyVa79
Upvote 0

pat34lee

Messianic
Sep 13, 2011
11,293
2,636
61
Florida, USA
✟89,330.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
If someone submits a dinosaur bone for a radiocarbon test, the lab will do the test the customer pays for, but the results are meaningless. A dinosaur bone is too old for a radiocarbon test to be meaningful. Any carbon that is present, or any C14 that is present, is simply contamination. Any responsible researcher would know this.

Did you think this through?

C14 contamination should be negligible giving
a very old age (for C14 testing, that is.)

What happens when it gives fairly young ages?

Anyway, if contamination is a problem for one,
it is a problem for all dating methods and sources.
 
Upvote 0