Why did God make Different Aged Rocks

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I read this. Jesus Christ is called the Rock and the cornerstone. He has been here since the beginning. He is the oldest Rock.

So would an U-Pb isochron date on Jesus come up with 4.55 billion years?

 

[bloodbought09]

I am a Professor, what is your profession?

Now back to the subject of this thread, do you believe that God created a 4.5 billion year old earth 6,000 years ago and that this newly created earth had age but not maturity? That is AV's belief as far as we can tell. Do you agree with AV? What is you opinion of "embedded age"?

I profess Christ. I think scientists have a fair estimate of how old a certain thing is, whether the way they analyze it is accurate, their calculation are surly accurate. The scientists can do their math. Whether they have floated into imaginary numbers suspended in time somewhere is something else.

As for the bible, I have heard that the earth is about 10000 years old and people try to reconcile the difference between scientists numbers and what is written in the bible. One day with the Lord is 1000 years. Well, the Lord was present in the creation of 6 days, so that comes to 6000 years, do not forget on the 7th day He rested. So I guess that would be 7000 by that calculation, and then Adam walked with the Lord in the garden. Is this a day of the Lord? Was Adam's days before the fall 1000 years each?

Have we reduced ourselves to the old earth and the new earth philosophies directly opposed one to another like different sides of a coin? I do not hold to either. I do not know how old the earth is. I do not think it is my purpose on this planet to explain everything.

I am ignorant of a lot of things. To quantify what I do not know, is impossible. I do not know what is not known, or what I am ignorant of. Why don't you ask God? He is said to be omniscient, meaning all knowing, so if you give Him a ring, maybe He will answer you.

Do I lose any sleep over what I do not know? No.

I do not know all of what AV knows. I am sure we would differ in many ways. He is my brother and I love those of the household of faith. On the otherhand I care about people, but am not impressed with your credentials. I would rather stand in awe of a creator that knows everything when my knowing fails. I am noone compared to Him, but when His work is done I will be like His Son Jesus Christ, and you will have only your self-appointed, prideful commendations of man.

I have said before that it is good to get under tutorship as a professor in science, but I also warn about hanging out with fools. You could not teach me anything of any merit, and the things you teach as a professor that are the things of my ignorance are worthless and rubbish to me.

Whoever exhalts himself will be humbled and those who humble themselves will be exhalted. You do not stand as still as you think on your merits. I will stand upon the Rock.

Bless.

 

[bloodbought09]

If you read that from this



you may need to read this then.

Reading Rockets: Text Comprehension

That is funny.

 

[bloodbought09]

So would an U-Pb isochron date on Jesus come up with 4.55 billion years?

What are you a professor of?

 

[AV1611VET]

That is AV's belief as far as we can tell.

As far as you can tell???

What's keeping you from fully understanding?

Laughter? ad hominems? jokes? automatic disagreement? presuppositions?

Now back to the subject of this thread, do you believe that God created a 4.5 billion year old earth 6,000 years ago and that this newly created earth had age but not maturity?

And fyi -- it's 'maturity without history'.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I profess Christ. I think scientists have a fair estimate of how old a certain thing is, whether the way they analyze it is accurate, their calculation are surly accurate. The scientists can do their math. Whether they have floated into imaginary numbers suspended in time somewhere is something else.

As for the bible, I have heard that the earth is about 10000 years old and people try to reconcile the difference between scientists numbers and what is written in the bible. One day with the Lord is 1000 years. Well, the Lord was present in the creation of 6 days, so that comes to 6000 years, do not forget on the 7th day He rested. So I guess that would be 7000 by that calculation, and then Adam walked with the Lord in the garden. Is this a day of the Lord? Was Adam's days before the fall 1000 years each?

Have we reduced ourselves to the old earth and the new earth philosophies directly opposed one to another like different sides of a coin? I do not hold to either. I do not know how old the earth is. I do not think it is my purpose on this planet to explain everything.

I am ignorant of a lot of things. To quantify what I do not know, is impossible. I do not know what is not known, or what I am ignorant of. Why don't you ask God? He is said to be omniscient, meaning all knowing, so if you give Him a ring, maybe He will answer you.

Do I lose any sleep over what I do not know? No.

I do not know all of what AV knows. I am sure we would differ in many ways. He is my brother and I love those of the household of faith. On the otherhand I care about people, but am not impressed with your credentials. I would rather stand in awe of a creator that knows everything when my knowing fails. I am noone compared to Him, but when His work is done I will be like His Son Jesus Christ, and you will have only your self-appointed, prideful commendations of man.

I have said before that it is good to get under tutorship as a professor in science, but I also warn about hanging out with fools.

So now you insult me and the other members of my profession, many of whom are devout Christians. Thanks a lot. You better hope the "fools" I hang out with know what they are doing assuming you ever need any medications from a pharmacy.

You could not teach me anything of any merit, and the things you teach as a professor that are the things of my ignorance are worthless and rubbish to me.

You better hope the things I profess are not worthless unless you never get sick or injured.

Whoever exhalts himself will be humbled and those who humble themselves will be exhalted. You do not stand as still as you think on your merits. I will stand upon the Rock.

Bless.

The best scientific estimate is that the earth is 4.55 billion years old. AV says yes it is 4.55 billion years old but that it was created 6,000 years ago. He has said that many times on this board. So do you agree? Do you have anything to say that is not a sermon? Do you have an explanation for Radiometric dates that indicate an earth far older than 10,000 year?
Radiometric Dating
AV claims it is embedded age? What do you think?

 

[bloodbought09]

Radiometric Dating

I do not know much of what is being discussed here, but I might look into it if it does not bore me to sleep. The one thing I noticed was something about a half-life. That would be half way to a chemicals death. As for using anything in half-life to dating the age of the Rock Jesus Christ, I do not think it would be beneficial to use this on His age since He is life. He does not have a half life that is determinable. We know the time of His death was when He gave up the ghost on the cross, but He said "I have the power to lay it down and to take it back up again. He died and was risen about 1990 years ago. Before His death on the cross, who knows how old He was. He is called the ancient of days. Just a brainstorm.

Bless.

 

[AV1611VET]

AV says yes it is 4.55 billion years old...

4.57, professor.

... but that it was created 6,000 years ago.

6014, professor.

 

[bloodbought09]

So now you insult me and the other members of my profession, many of whom are devout Christians. Thanks a lot. You better hope the "fools" I hang out with know what they are doing assuming you ever need any medications from a pharmacy.
You better hope the things I profess are not worthless unless you never get sick or injured.
The best scientific estimate is that the earth is 4.55 billion years old. AV says yes it is 4.55 billion years old but that it was created 6,000 years ago. He has said that many times on this board. So do you agree? Do you have anything to say that is not a sermon? Do you have an explanation for Radiometric dates that indicate an earth far older than 10,000 year?
Radiometric Dating
AV claims it is embedded age? What do you think?

I do not share your unitarian beliefs either. I am more of a christian apologist than a scientist. So if you wanna propose some of your doctrinal errors as well, know that I will not adhere to it.

What is your profession and what are you a professor of? Maybe I owe you and your colleagues an apology, or you just need to learn how to deal with being easily offended. I am sure you can agree that God is awesome. As for devout Christians. I do not even know who you talk about. Are they religious pharisees like yourself?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

As far as you can tell???

What's keeping you from fully understanding?

Laughter? ad hominems? jokes? automatic disagreement? presuppositions?



And fyi -- it's 'maturity without history'.

We can only tell what you post. We can't prove that you actually believe it. At first I had my doubts that you did believe in such an illogical idea but by now I am at least 99% sure that you are sincere.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

What are you a professor of?

Pharmaceutical Sciences. Geology is an avocation not a vocation. So tell us what you think of AV's belief in maturity without history?

 

[Skaloop]

The one thing I noticed was something about a half-life. That would be half way to a chemicals death.

No, it wouldn't. Not even close. Half-life refers to the amount of time it takes a substance to be reduced by half due to decay (radioactive type of decay, not bacterial decay).

So if you have one pound of a material that has a half-life of 10 years, then after 10 years, you have lost half of the material and will have half a pound. The kicker is that after another 10 years, you would have a quarter pound. After another 10 years, an eighth of a pound.

This is a very simple explanation, and since I am no geologist I welcome those who are to correct any major mistakes I made. But if one is to have an actual discussion on the age of rocks, at least some rudimentary knowledge about what the relevant terms is needed.

 

[AV1611VET]

What is your profession and what are you a professor of?

I'm not sure what he is, but it won't keep these guys from "correcting" us in all areas of science.

Here, you'll have geologists freely talking about astronomy; astronomers freely talking about zoology; and zoologists freely talking about geology.

But the Pluto vote of 2006 threw a monkey wrench in their little merry-go-round of knowledge and caught most of them by surprise.

Right in the middle of geologists and whatevers telling me how Pluto should be categorized, a girl (praise the LORD) showed up and showed the Pluto vote to be nothing but rigged in their favor.

QV: 32

Yet they still won't admit it.

 

[Cabal]

I'm not sure what he is, but it won't keep these guys from "correcting" us in all areas of science.

Here, you'll have geologists freely talking about astronomy; astronomers freely talking about zoology; and zoologists freely talking about geology.

But the Pluto vote of 1996 threw a monkey wrench in their little merry-go-round of knowledge and caught most of them by surprise.

Right in the middle of geologists and whatevers telling me how Pluto should be categorized, a girl (praise the LORD) showed up and showed the Pluto vote to be nothing but rigged in their favor.

QV: 32

Yet they still won't admit it.

TERMINOLOGY =/= EMPIRICISM

FOR THE N-TH TIME

NO-ONE DISAGREED AT THE TIME BECAUSE A REDEFINITION OF TERMINOLOGY IS NOT A BIG DEAL

Also, you have people of different professions correcting you (correctly so) on various matters because some people aren't inclined to wear ignorance like a badge and actually READ things to increase their knowledge. Get over it.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I'm not sure what he is, but it won't keep these guys from "correcting" us in all areas of science.

Here, you'll have geologists freely talking about astronomy; astronomers freely talking about zoology; and zoologists freely talking about geology.

But the Pluto vote of 1996 threw a monkey wrench in their little merry-go-round of knowledge and caught most of them by surprise.

How many times do I have to tell you that you have the map confused with the territory.

Right in the middle of geologists and whatevers telling me how Pluto should be categorized, a girl (praise the LORD) showed up and showed the Pluto vote to be nothing but rigged in their favor.

QV: 32

Yet they still won't admit it.

I expect to meet Neil Degrasse Tyson in October. I am sure the subject will come up. Unless my plans change I will give you a report. But the name is irrelevant. They are not suddenly claiming the Pluto is made of green cheese, only that, because it is so small, has such and eccentric orbit and other similar sized objects exist in the Kuiper belt that it should not be classified as a planet any longer. I don't necessarily agree but they do have a point. Do we want to name 1,000 or so new planets? Should we have called Ceres a planet? It wouldn't change what Ceres is. Still maybe we should have "grandfathered" Pluto just to keep all the Disney fans out there happy.

 

[bloodbought09]

No, it wouldn't. Not even close. Half-life refers to the amount of time it takes a substance to be reduced by half due to decay (radioactive type of decay, not bacterial decay).

So if you have one pound of a material that has a half-life of 10 years, then after 10 years, you have lost half of the material and will have half a pound. The kicker is that after another 10 years, you would have a quarter pound. After another 10 years, an eighth of a pound.

This is a very simple explanation, and since I am no geologist I welcome those who are to correct any major mistakes I made. But if one is to have an actual discussion on the age of rocks, at least some rudimentary knowledge about what the relevant terms is needed.

I have said before that I do not profess a scientific background. Thank you for an explanation of this. I dealt with some basic things about this in high school but that was back in 1990. We are not asking what age different rocks are, but why did God make different ages of rocks. I know that God made some really big rocks that float around in the universe and they hold a lot more little rocks. Simply put, rocks just seem to carry on making themselves under the earth and above the earth. I do not know how to give them an age. If some of you would like a pet rock, I will sell you one for $5 a pound. I will even go out and find them, load them, and ship them, if you pay for the shipping fee. You can date them and figure out their age since I am not qualified.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

No, it wouldn't. Not even close. Half-life refers to the amount of time it takes a substance to be reduced by half due to decay (radioactive type of decay, not bacterial decay).

So if you have one pound of a material that has a half-life of 10 years, then after 10 years, you have lost half of the material and will have half a pound. The kicker is that after another 10 years, you would have a quarter pound. After another 10 years, an eighth of a pound.

This is a very simple explanation, and since I am no geologist I welcome those who are to correct any major mistakes I made. But if one is to have an actual discussion on the age of rocks, at least some rudimentary knowledge about what the relevant terms is needed.

Your explanation is basically correct for simple methods of dating. Half life is a general term for anything subect to exponential decay. Exponential decay occurs whenever the rate that something decays at depends on the quantity remaining. The link I gave explains it better than I can for radiometric dating

Radiometric Dating

A more accurate method of dating is isochron dating.
Isochron Dating

but it is also much more complicated. My favorite book on the subject is

The Age of the Earth. Dalrymple, G. Brent, 1991 California: Stanford University Press, ISBN 0-8047-1569-6.

 

[AV1611VET]

Unless my plans change I will give you a report.

I'm not interested -- but thanks, anyway.

I get enough reports from you guys.

 

[Doveaman]

No, it wouldn't. Not even close. Half-life refers to the amount of time it takes a substance to be reduced by half due to decay (radioactive type of decay, not bacterial decay).

So if you have one pound of a material that has a half-life of 10 years, then after 10 years, you have lost half of the material and will have half a pound. The kicker is that after another 10 years, you would have a quarter pound. After another 10 years, an eighth of a pound.

Is it possible that significant changes in the earth's temperatures could speed up or slow down this decay rate?

 

[bloodbought09]

Pluto is an eccentric orbit much like a person in pharmeceutics orbiting around a thread talking about the age of rocks.

I used to take some pharmeceuticals and lay on the sidewalk yelling at planes being in my airspace and wondering what would be the trajectory of my spit in space only to have the revelation that if I spat out in space I would asphyxiate.

I am not joking. It really happened.