Quote: I never, and never will say, that anyone not believing is stupid. I respect everyone's right to believe what they want to.
They aren't stupid, they are just lost.
God is real.
I figure it this way. If Phil is right....we just die and that's that, then that is how it is and i have lost nothing in believing.
If Phil is wrong, then not believing will cost me much, so just from a potential loss standpoint, it makes sense to believe.
Right, the idea has been around for many hundreds of years if not longer. Pascal's Wager.
What about the idea that if you believe in one specific god, you may be offending one of the thousands of other gods that humanity has invented throughout history?
In all honesty, I am a Christian, but I am not a condemning Christian.
In other words, I think God is all powerful, and can manifest in many ways, so in the end, my God is the Buddhists God.
He can be anything He wants and makes sense to whoever He wants.....Christ may be my Salvation to heaven, but it doesn't have to be the only way.
The only problem i have is with those who say God doesn't exist or those who try to avoid the issue and say they have no opinion....that's just avoiding a decision.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
Phil ... you are walking proof that one doesn't need religion to hoist one's own morals and beliefs over everyone else, be filled with hate and disdain, or hold biggoted beliefs against an entire group of people.
I find it odd, that you seem to quote the Bible more than any Christian on this board. And it's usually the Old Testement, which isn't even central to Christian belief. There is a reason that only the first four books of the New Testement are called "gospel". The old testement is mainly there to lay the ground work for the new testament, showing the several hundred prophesies that came true in the new testament.
Speaking of "crazy beliefs" ... how about the one where there was a whole lot of nothingness ... and suddenly a whole lot of mass just sort of materialized out of nowhere, then exploded into complete order. Sounds just about as crazy as "creation" doesn't it? There are the concepts of infinite space and time and creation, that the human brain will never fully comprehend. I'd like to file "God" under that one as well.
Speaking of other weird beliefs, have you ever heard of the "Miracle of the Sun" or Miracle of Fatima? Some crazy kids said that Mary came to them in a vision and told them a bunch of stuff. One of which being that a "visible miracle" would come three months from then and be on display for everyone in that area to see. Three months later, right on to the day predicted ... a strange "meteroligical/astrological" event occured for as many as 30,000 to 100,000 people, that can't even be explained by modern science. Sure, science has tried to grasp at straws and explained that several different rare phenomina might have occured at the same time to possibly show that kind of display ... but that still wouldn't explain how the kids predicted the exact day 3 months earlier. And this didn't occur in the Bible, it was documented less than 100 years ago, by many people who weren't even Christian.
Quote: Speaking of "crazy beliefs" ... how about the one where there was a whole lot of nothingness ... and suddenly a whole lot of mass just sort of materialized out of nowhere, then exploded into complete order. Sounds just about as crazy as "creation" doesn't it?
Quote: Speaking of "crazy beliefs" ... how about the one where there was a whole lot of nothingness ... and suddenly a whole lot of mass just sort of materialized out of nowhere, then exploded into complete order. Sounds just about as crazy as "creation" doesn't it? There are the concepts of infinite space and time and creation, that the human brain will never fully comprehend.
I call myself an athiest (although I don't go around insulting someone's religious beliefs, like some phil's we know.
But the above helps demonstrate something I've always said: There are too many unanswered questions for me to say there is absolutely no creator.
When did time begin?
Was there ever a time when there was just.... nothing? If so, what got the ball rolling?
Where did everything come from? If you are an atheist or not, good luck answering those.
Quote: (although I don't go around insulting someone's religious beliefs, like some phil's we know.
How is in insulting to state an opinion?
Honest question -- what do the Christians here think about the fact that the story of Christ was a plagarization from an Egyptian tale that occurred 4,000 years before the time of Christ?
For those who don't know, I'm referring to the Egyptian story of Horus, who - long before the story of Christ came to be - was born by an immaculate conception that was marked by a star and a visit from three men bearing gifts. He was a child teacher in the temple and was baptized by a figure named 'Anup the Baptizer' when he was thirty years old. He had twelve disciples and performed miracles such as feeding bread to the multitude and walking on water. He was crucified, buried in a tomb and resurrected.
This could hark back to Peen's philosophy that 'God' comes in many forms and stories...but is it the least bit troubling that the story of your faith was stolen from a different ancient faith? Are Horus and Jesus the same person? Was Horus the original, while Jesus was the spruced up contemporary? Was the story of Horus a prophecy of what would happen 4,000 years down the road?
Seriously...honest question. Obviously, my answer is that it's all fairy tale fiction, but I'm curious.
Could you please provide a link to this assertion? I'm not talking about some silly conspiracy theory site that serves only to compare the two (Horus and Jesus) with pure conjecture but a site that details the life and times of Horus, from actual Egyptian historical texts, be it papyrus scroll or hieroglyphs or some other form of written Egyptian history that in fact describes the similarities in his life you mention.
With that said, this kid knew what he was getting into when he signed that contract. Yes, it is ridiculous, but he agreed to it, and he has no room for complaint.
Technically any contract a minor, without parental signatures, signs is null and void . Also an interesting piece of this is that the principle in fact gave the kid permission...That's like me being your boss giving you Super Bowl tickets when the Browns are playing in it and telling you if you go, you will not have a job.
Quote:
God is real.
Awfully strong accusation when you have no tangible proof.
Quote:
I figure it this way. If Phil is right....we just die and that's that, then that is how it is and i have lost nothing in believing.
If Phil is wrong, then not believing will cost me much, so just from a potential loss standpoint, it makes sense to believe.
So wait are you believing to believe or believing to save your ass?
Quote: The only problem i have is with those who say God doesn't exist or those who try to avoid the issue and say they have no opinion....that's just avoiding a decision.
Or it could be a person is waiting for EVIDENCE or trying to come to an informed decision as opposed to my parents did it so I will...Religion is a big decision and should be one that you make for yourself..no matter how long it takes you to feel one way or another.
Quote: When did time begin?
It didn't....it has always been..it neither ends nor begins...Just because we have quantified it doesn't mean it is actually quantifiable. To insinuate that time has a beginning insinuates that it has an end. If you really want wrap your head around something look up Einstein's Theory of Relativity. (Basically the perception of time changes from your relative position)
Quote: Then you are really "agnostic" rather than "atheist".
Yes, some people have said that, when I get into religious discussion and my own beliefs.I understand that, but I think of death as a long sleep, & deep down, I don't believe in heaven and hell. So I refer to myself as an atheist.
When the state of Ohio allowed me to get a drivers license, I agreed to abide by the rules governing that......I did not have to like them, or agree with them, I just needed to abide by them.
One way or another, this kid has not abided by the rules the school put forth. He doesn't need to agree with them, he doesn't need to like them. He just needs to follow them. Period.
I see more and more of this: okay, the rules are "this", and then someone feels they can break the rules because in their mind it is "just".
Uh uh. Follow the rules. That's why they are there.
If I drive 90 mph down the road and get pulled over and ticketed, is it okay for me to say "no one else was on the road, I've driven in thousands of times" and get out of the ticket? No.
When the state of Ohio allowed me to get a drivers license, I agreed to abide by the rules governing that......I did not have to like them, or agree with them, I just needed to abide by them.
One way or another, this kid has not abided by the rules the school put forth. He doesn't need to agree with them, he doesn't need to like them. He just needs to follow them. Period.
I see more and more of this: okay, the rules are "this", and then someone feels they can break the rules because in their mind it is "just".
Uh uh. Follow the rules. That's why they are there.
If I drive 90 mph down the road and get pulled over and ticketed, is it okay for me to say "no one else was on the road, I've driven in thousands of times" and get out of the ticket? No.
In this case I'd put the blame squarely on the parents for making (or even letting) their kid go to a school with a lunatic principal and that clearly will leave their kid ill-prepared for life in the REAL WORLD.
edited to add: And shouldn't school-related discipline be reserved for when the kid is actually at school, or a school function directly related to the school (for example, a sporting event)?
I'm not even seeing how this should be in the school's jurisdiction. I'd say it should be in the realm of the police department, but clearly he is not breaking any law.
When the state of Ohio allowed me to get a drivers license, I agreed to abide by the rules governing that......I did not have to like them, or agree with them, I just needed to abide by them.
One way or another, this kid has not abided by the rules the school put forth. He doesn't need to agree with them, he doesn't need to like them. He just needs to follow them. Period.
I see more and more of this: okay, the rules are "this", and then someone feels they can break the rules because in their mind it is "just".
Uh uh. Follow the rules. That's why they are there.
If I drive 90 mph down the road and get pulled over and ticketed, is it okay for me to say "no one else was on the road, I've driven in thousands of times" and get out of the ticket? No.
In this case I'd put the blame squarely on the parents for making (or even letting) their kid go to a school with a lunatic principal and that clearly will leave their kid ill-prepared for life in the REAL WORLD.
I disagree so vehemently it is beyond belief!!!! What does going to prom do to "prepare" someone for the real world? What?
What does dancing do to prepare someone for the " real world"?
How does that prepare someone for the real world?....this dancing thing, or going to prom thing......You say someone that can't go to prom due to the restrictions put in place by the school they attend is harming them in "the real world". Please expound on that....it will be interesting, and laughabal, really.
I have a bro in law that was homeschooled. Strict upbringing. No dancing. (if that can be considered "strict"). He's one of the finest people you could ever imagine meeting. Honest, straightfoward, someone you'd be more than happy to call a friend. Someone you could trust with your lifesavings.
He never went to a "prom".
What the hell does going to a prom or not going to a prom (due to reasons a person agreed to ) have to do with the "real world".?????
Perhaps your version of "the real world" is skewed and unbalanced.?
When the state of Ohio allowed me to get a drivers license, I agreed to abide by the rules governing that......I did not have to like them, or agree with them, I just needed to abide by them.
One way or another, this kid has not abided by the rules the school put forth. He doesn't need to agree with them, he doesn't need to like them. He just needs to follow them. Period.
I see more and more of this: okay, the rules are "this", and then someone feels they can break the rules because in their mind it is "just".
Uh uh. Follow the rules. That's why they are there.
If I drive 90 mph down the road and get pulled over and ticketed, is it okay for me to say "no one else was on the road, I've driven in thousands of times" and get out of the ticket? No.
In this case I'd put the blame squarely on the parents for making (or even letting) their kid go to a school with a lunatic principal and that clearly will leave their kid ill-prepared for life in the REAL WORLD.
I disagree so vehemently it is beyond belief!!!! What does going to prom do to "prepare" someone for the real world? What?
What does dancing do to prepare someone for the " real world"?
How does that prepare someone for the real world?....this dancing thing, or going to prom thing......You say someone that can't go to prom due to the restrictions put in place by the school they attend is harming them in "the real world". Please expound on that....it will be interesting, and laughabal, really.
I have a bro in law that was homeschooled. Strict upbringing. No dancing. (if that can be considered "strict"). He's one of the finest people you could ever imagine meeting. Honest, straightfoward, someone you'd be more than happy to call a friend. Someone you could trust with your lifesavings.
He never went to a "prom".
What the hell does going to a prom or not going to a prom (due to reasons a person agreed to ) have to do with the "real world".?????
Perhaps your version of "the real world" is skewed and unbalanced.?
You are misunderstanding my broader point.
I think we can deduce with near certainty that Heritage Christian School (HCS) does not have a prom. That's.... totally fine. No problems with that from me. So clearly, that isn't the issue.
And I know the phrase "Real world" to you has a very strong meaning of work, responsibility, etc. I think we'd find a lot of common ground there. Maybe it wasn't the best choice of words by me.
My point is this: HCS is not doing this kid any favors. If you hold hands with a girl or *gasp* kiss them, your soul will be thrown into a firey hell for all eternity. Or whatever the case may be-- you know how the extreme religious types are.
Even in the context of the ideal Christian life.. love, marriage, family, etc., how would you even MEET a girl in the real world with the views instilled upon by this school? Social events, out. Any hint of normal courting, out. Go to a dance and do nothing wrong and get suspended or expelled.. that is NUTS to me.
So I stand by my point that this school is not preparing this kid for the real world. No way, no how. Even if he's getting a great education (which I severely doubt, but that's not relevant now), he is missing any sort of a social dynamic that applies in our society.
And what about the issue of how this school is even in their right to control what a kid does on his own time, while not breaking any laws or doing anything immoral (in mine and general society's opinion)-- it's ridiculous.
It's not about going to the prom or not. It is a good microcosm of the situation and it's also about the kid's freedom's (or clearly, the lack thereof) and integrating into the real world.
Regarding whether my version of reality is skewed and unbalanced, that's not for me to say. I'm 23 years old and have run a successful business for 4 years now though, if that means anything to you.
Quote: I still would like to know if it's being ignored, or the reading comprehension on the board is this bad. The principle signed a permission slip.
Quote: "I expected a short lecture about making the right decisions and not doing something stupid," Frost said. "I thought I would get his signature and that would be the end."
England acknowledged signing the form but warned Frost there would be consequences if he attended the dance. England then took the issue to a school committee made up of church members, who decided to threaten Frost with suspension.
"In life, we constantly make decisions whether we are going to please self or please God. (Frost) chose one path, and the school committee chose the other," England said.
Quote: The teen, who is scheduled to receive his diploma May 24, would be suspended from classes and receive an "incomplete" on remaining assignments, England said. Frost also would not be permitted to attend graduation but would get a diploma once he completes final exams. If Frost is involved with alcohol or sex at the prom, he will be expelled, England said.
So basically he signed the form, but the kid would be suspended if he actually went.
It didn't....it has always been..it neither ends nor begins...Just because we have quantified it doesn't mean it is actually quantifiable. To insinuate that time has a beginning insinuates that it has an end. If you really want wrap your head around something look up Einstein's Theory of Relativity. (Basically the perception of time changes from your relative position)
I know this isn't the point of the debate....but that's really a misstatement of Relativity.
Defining the "beginning" of time as the moment of the big bang (or, if you dislike the terminology, the moment at which the present inflation of the universe would imply that the universe was contained at a point), you make several misstatements.
Quote:
It didn't....it has always been..it neither ends nor begins...
I guess you could reduce this to a philosophical question of "what was time before the big bang", but there is quite a bit of evidence that the universe began about 13 billion years ago.
Quote:
To insinuate that time has a beginning insinuates that it has an end.
No. Depending on the relative strengths of the currently unknown baryonic (matter), dark matter, and dark energy components in the total energy density of the universe, a universe with a beginning could either recollapse (big crunch), expand at a constant speed, or continue to expand at an increasing rate. Currently the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, and it is believed that it will continue to do so.
Quote:
Einstein's Theory of Relativity. (Basically the perception of time changes from your relative position)
Kind of true, but your it's quite a bit more nuanced than that. I think the two effects that you are pointing at are:
1.) Violations of simultaneity - If two observers A and B are in different spatial locations and both observe two events, they may not agree on which order the events occurred in. (For realistic observer velocities, you have to be talking about events which occurred at more or less the same time. There are stringent mathematical laws about how close the events must be.
2.) Time dilation - Observers which are in motion relative to each other, will both see the other's clock running slower than their own.
~Lyuokdea
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 05/09/0907:50 PM.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
Horus was very violent, and upon resurrection vowed revenge, rather than Christ's proclaimation that he was dying for the sins of man.
Thank you for the links.
You're right Horus was violent.
Quote: What was this combat?
It was the combat which took place on the day when Horus fought with Set, during which Set threw filth in the face of Horus, and Horus crushed the genitals of Set.
Not exactly a Christ like image but if someone threw filth in my face... maybe I would too.
The closest thing to a resurrection I could find was this quote.
Quote: Who is this [slaughterer of souls]?
"It is Shesmu, the headsman of Osiris. "[Concerning the invisible god] some say that he is Aapep when he riseth up with a head bearing upon it [the feather of] Maat (Truth). But others say that he is Horus when he riseth up with two heads, whereon one beareth [the feather of] Maat, and the other [the symbol of] wickedness. He bestoweth wickedness on him that worketh wickedness, and right and truth upon him that followeth righteousness and truth.
As far as your original question goes however...
Quote: Honest question -- what do the Christians here think about the fact that the story of Christ was a plagarization from an Egyptian tale that occurred 4,000 years before the time of Christ?
For those who don't know, I'm referring to the Egyptian story of Horus, who - long before the story of Christ came to be - was born by an immaculate conception that was marked by a star and a visit from three men bearing gifts. He was a child teacher in the temple and was baptized by a figure named 'Anup the Baptizer' when he was thirty years old. He had twelve disciples and performed miracles such as feeding bread to the multitude and walking on water. He was crucified, buried in a tomb and resurrected.
This is completely baseless and without merit. Not one of the likenesses to Christ's story you mentioned were referenced or from what I read even hinted at in the link you provided.
Horus was very violent, and upon resurrection vowed revenge, rather than Christ's proclaimation that he was dying for the sins of man.
Phil I have to chime in on this, as your assertions concering Jesus and Horus are very flawed, in fact they are an outright lie.
1st my background, I was 1 16 hour "meaningless" internship away from being a full-fledged historian, before I realized i would be forced to teach falsehoods and outright lies to others.
to set the record straight, don't believe what you see on Wikipeida, Wikipedia is "community maintained" web site...I could create an account on Wikipedia and write an article about pigs flying i new zealand, that doesn't make it real.
to set the story straight(the short version)
according to Egyptian Mythology, Isis and Osiris were husband and wife, they bore a child and they named that child Horus. After this, Set the Egyptian God of evil plottoed against Osirus, tricked him, and killed him. Set them took the body parts of Osirus and scattered them all over the land of Egypt to prevent Osiris from coming back to life.
Horus, vowing revenge sought out Set. Set in the form of a Giant Crocodile attacked Horus and Horus killed Set.
Later Horus with the help of his mother Isis eventually got all of Osiris parts back and Osiris was brought back to life. Anubis(the former Egyptian God of the dead) became Osiris's heraled and ferry the dead to the underworld where Osiris ruled supreme.
That is the "true story" straight from the Egyptians.....i see no relevence in that story to Jesus Christ whatsoever......
As for if God exists or not, very simple to prove.
The Hebrews wrote of the plagues God punished the Egyptians with for not freeing the Isrealites....well guess what...the Egyptians did too!
They wrote about the horrows God layed down on them for Pharaohs disobedience....
ever heard of the IPUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344....I am sure you haven't, because most of the atheist community of scientists don't want you to know this....the Egyptians themselves wrote about the horrors God inflicted upon them, How the Israelites walked out of Egypt with Gold, how they plundered them after God put his wrath on that nation for refusing to listen to Moses......read it for yourself. let look at it shall we? Lets compare Ipuwar, a Egyptians account of the plagues to the Bible....
Quote: IPUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344 In the early 19th Century a papyrus, dating from the end of the Middle Kingdom, was found in Egypt. It was taken to the Leiden Museum in Holland and interpreted by A.H. Gardiner in 1909. The complete papyrus can be found in the book Admonitions of an Egyptian from a heiratic papyrus in Leiden. The papyrus describes violent upheavals in Egypt, starvation, drought, escape of slaves (with the wealth of the Egyptians), and death throughout the land. The papyrus was written by an Egyptian named Ipuwer and appears to be an eyewitness account of the effects of the Exodus plagues from the perspective of an average Egyptian. Below are excerpts from the papyrus together with their parallels in the Book of Exodus.
Quote: Waters Turn to Blood PUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344
2:5-6 Plague is throughout the land. Blood is everywhere.
2:10 The river is blood.
2:10 Men shrink from tasting - human beings, and thirst after water
3:10-13 That is our water! That is our happiness! What shall we do in respect thereof? All is ruin.
The Bible says below:
Quote: WATER TURNS TO BLOOD TORAH - EXODUS
7:20 …all the waters of the river were turned to blood.
7:21 ...there was blood thoughout all the land of Egypt …and the river stank.
7:24 And all the Egyptians dug around the river for water to drink; for they could not drink of the water of the river.
Quote: IPUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344 FIRE AND HAIL
2:10 Forsooth, gates, columns and walls are consumed by fire.
10:3-6 Lower Egypt weeps... The entire palace is without its revenues. To it belong [by right] wheat and barley, geese and fish
6:3 Forsooth, grain has perished on every side.
5:12 Forsooth, that has perished which was yesterday seen. The land is left over to its weariness like the cutting of flax.
The Bible says:
Quote: TORAH - EXODUS FIRE AND HAIL
9:23-24 ...and the fire ran along the ground... there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, very grievous.
9:25 ...and the hail smote every herb of the field, and broke every tree of the field.
9:31-32 ...and the flax and the barley was smitten; for the barley was in season, and flax was ripe.
But the wheat and the rye were not smitten; for they were not grown up.
10:15 ...there remained no green things in the trees, or in the herbs of the fields, through all the land of Egypt.
Quote: IPUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344 DIESEASE AND CURSE ON CATTLE AND LIVESTOCK
5:5 All animals, their hearts weep. Cattle moan...
9:2-3 Behold, cattle are left to stray, and there is none to gather them together.
The Bible says:
Quote: TORAH - EXODUS DIESEASE AND CURSE ON CATTLE AND LIVESTOCK
9:3 ...the hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle which is in the field... and there shall be a very grievous sickness.
9:19 ...gather thy cattle, and all that thou hast in the field...
9:21 And he that did not fear the word of the Lord left his servants and cattle in the field.
Quote: IPUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344 PLAGUE OF DARKNESS ON EGYPT
9:11 The land is without light
The Bible says:
Quote: TORAH - EXODUS PLAGUE OF DARKNESS ON EGYPT
10:22 And there was a thick darkness in all the land of Egypt.
Quote: IPUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344 - GOD SMITES THE FIRST-BORN OF EVERY FAMILY IN EGYPT
4:3 (5:6) Forsooth, the children of princes are dashed against the walls.
6:12 Forsooth, the children of princes are cast out in the streets.
6:3 The prison is ruined.
2:13 He who places his brother in the ground is everywhere.
3:14 It is groaning throughout the land, mingled with lamentations
The Bible says:
Quote: TORAH - EXODUS GOD SMITES THE FIRST-BORN OF EVERY FAMILY IN EGYPT
12:29 And it came to pass, that at midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive that was in the prison.
12:30 ...there was not a house where there was not one dead.
12:30 ...there was a great cry in Egypt.
Quote: IPUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344 - GOD APPEARS AS A PILLAR OF SMOKE AND FIRE IN THE SKY
7:1 Behold, the fire has mounted up on high. Its burning goes forth against the enemies of the land.
The Bible says:
Quote: TORAH - EXODUS - GOD APPEARS AS A PILLAR OF SMOKE AND FIRE IN THE SKY
13:21 ... by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night.
Quote: IPUWER PAPYRUS - LEIDEN 344 - ISRAELITES PLUNDER THE EGYPTIANS LEAVING WITH GOLD AND SILVER.
3:2 Gold and lapis lazuli, silver and malachite, carnelian and bronze... are fastened on the neck of female slaves.
The Bible says:
Quote: TORAH - EXODUS - ISRAELITES PLUNDER THE EGYPTIANS LEAVING WITH GOLD AND SILVER.
12:35-36 ...and they requested from the Egyptians, silver and gold articles and clothing. And God made the Egyptians favour them and they granted their request. [The Israelites] thus drained Egypt of its wealth.
So as we can see, an Egyptian that was on the "receiving end" of God's Plagues on Egypt actually wrote about them. Do notice the Egyptian did not refer to God as God...instead he wrote of how everything was being destroyed...how disaster had struck, how a great pillar of fire appeared in the sky....
Right there is documented, verifiable, and provable historical fact. The IPUWER PAPYRUS, written by a different culture, the one on the receiving end, DOCUMENTED IT which means it is a verifiable historical FACT.....that document is something you can touch, you can grab it, feel it, read it, and see it for yourself in a museum. It also can be cross-referenced with another culture which strengthens its validity.
The proof is in the historical record....research it for yourself...actually anyone who knows anything about the historical record laughs at most of these crackpot scientists....like when they dated the Egyptian King's list to be 17,000 years old when its known to be only 3000 B.C
yes did you know the "oldest" date that has ever been accurately verified is the Time of the First Dynasty of Egypt...everything else they say about this being 15,000 years old, or a million years old, etc are all "guesses" As a matter of fact, the BristleCone Pine Tree(the oldest living thing on this planet) is used to develop a "correction curnve" for Radio dating can only be accurate back to 6200 BC...anything older than that CAN NOT BE ACCURATLY DETERMINED They simply guess how old something is
It was hilarious when they dated the Egyptian Kings list to be 17,000 years old, when we knew it only dated to 3000 B.C....because they dated their kings list LOL!
and folks that believe that nonsense....its very humorous indeed.
I know a man with a PHD in history, he is an atheist/gnostic, but he will tell you those dates are utter nonsense and laughable....as a matter of fact, he will tell you that Dinosaurs probably are not millions of years old, but probably only a few thousand. this is coming from a hardcore atheist and agnostic. A very well educated man...a man that has forgotten more about this historical record them I or anyone else will probably ever know. I have arguments with him from time to time and we get very heated in them, but we are still very good friends.
He used to give speeches on this sort of thing, except he would actually bring copies of the historical documents with him and gave everyone a copy to read and see for themselves instead of spouting theories with no verifiable facts to back them up. He wanted everyone to research for themselves and bring away truth as truth can be different to everyone, but the underlying facts remain the same.
He doesn't agree with there being a God, but he doesn't discount the existence of some higher power....furthermore, he states that Problematica...don't know what that is?
It is where daily, human bones and remains are found on the same sediment levels asd dinosaurs, in many instances, human bones are mixed in with dinosuar bones...geee how did this happen? I mean after all, dinosaurs were here way before us right? how did they all get mixed in the same sediment levels then? of course scientists evade and walk around the issue and never answer the question because they "can't" answer the question, because if they did, it would just prove there little geological time chart isn't worth the paper they wrote it on.
Don't believe in the Flood of Noah?
why is EVERY fossil ever found been put into its place by flood waters? there has NEVER been a fossil found that wasn't put where it is by flood waters....isn't this just convient....what are the oddds of every fossil found in every circumstance, in every place, on the entire planet being put into place by flood waters? the asnwer that question is 1 in ....the number of zeros i would have to write would crash this entire forum and it still wouldn't be enough zeros.
take it for what you will, if you wanna believe theories based on nonsense with no facts to back them, fine...but the Bible has historical records to back its validity....theories do not...
I don't know much about egyptian scrolls, but honestly, your ideas on the fossil record may as well have been written by L Ron Hubbard considering how outright ridiculous they are:
Quote:
It is where daily, human bones and remains are found on the same sediment levels asd dinosaurs, in many instances, human bones are mixed in with dinosuar bones...geee how did this happen? I mean after all, dinosaurs were here way before us right? how did they all get mixed in the same sediment levels then? of course scientists evade and walk around the issue and never answer the question because they "can't" answer the question, because if they did, it would just prove there little geological time chart isn't worth the paper they wrote it on.
The academic response would be..."you're wrong", because dinosaur fossils and human fossils are not found side by side. They are never found side by side. Going from the deepest rocks up to more recent rocks always creates the same pattern of moving from simple life forms and moving towards more complex and recent life forms. It is great evidence AGAINST creation science, in fact, that this fossil record is the same throughout all locations on the planet, and that the same order is preserved everywhere: http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton.html
why is EVERY fossil ever found been put into its place by flood waters? there has NEVER been a fossil found that wasn't put where it is by flood waters....isn't this just convient....what are the oddds of every fossil found in every circumstance, in every place, on the entire planet being put into place by flood waters? the asnwer that question is 1 in ....the number of zeros i would have to write would crash this entire forum and it still wouldn't be enough zeros.
Again...they aren't. In fact, from above, Bones posited from <10k years ago, wouldn't be called fossils.
If a flood created all fossils, there would be absolutely no distinction between depths, everything would be at the exact same place (whatever height it was at when the flood added). This is definitively not true, and your arguments would be based upon some conspiracy theory where all scientists of the world have been making up their entire field for 400 years.....haha.
In fact Leonardo Da Vinci first posited the problems with the flood narative in explaining the fossil record:
Quote: "If the Deluge had carried the shells for distances of three and four hundred miles from the sea it would have carried them mixed with various other natural objects all heaped up together; but even at such distances from the sea we see the oysters all together and also the shellfish and the cuttlefish and all the other shells which congregate together, found all together dead; and the solitary shells are found apart from one another as we see them every day on the sea-shores.
And we find oysters together in very large families, among which some may be seen with their shells still joined together, indicating that they were left there by the sea and that they were still living when the strait of Gibraltar was cut through. In the mountains of Parma and Piacenza multitudes of shells and corals with holes may be seen still sticking to the rocks..."[10]
A couple more questions, if you're trying to defend the earth as being <10k years old, and having fossils of humans and dinosaurs together:
1.) The speed of light is fixed, and we see stars at more than 10,000 light years away (we can use simple geometry to prove this, parallax), how does the light from these stars reach us?
2.) South america and Africa couldn't have moved apart in only 10k years, why do their coastlines match with such precision? If they did move apart in 10k years, their movement today would be much faster than we see.
3.) Where did the water from the flood come from, and where did it go back to?
4.) Why does all radiometric dating give an age for the earth that is ~4.5 billion years old
~Lyuokdea
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
A couple more questions, if you're trying to defend the earth as being <10k years old, and having fossils of humans and dinosaurs together:
1.) The speed of light is fixed, and we see stars at more than 10,000 light years away (we can use simple geometry to prove this, parallax), how does the light from these stars reach us?
2.) South america and Africa couldn't have moved apart in only 10k years, why do their coastlines match with such precision? If they did move apart in 10k years, their movement today would be much faster than we see.
3.) Where did the water from the flood come from, and where did it go back to?
4.) Why does all radiometric dating give an age for the earth that is ~4.5 billion years old
~Lyuokdea
It is probably an effect of the turtles in which the Earth lies on.
Quote: The way you are attempting to invalidate science is laughable.
I feel bad for physicist//astronomist types. You could make some awesome discovery, be one of the brightest people in the world, and still have your life's work invalidated by a large segment of the population because a several thousand year old book says something different.
I feel bad for physicist//astronomist types. You could make some awesome discovery, be one of the brightest people in the world, and still have your life's work invalidated by a large segment of the population because a several thousand year old book says something different.
It's kind of a big debate within the scientific community right now. How do you approach the (surprisingly large) segment of the population which doubts the legitimacy of your field.
Obviously, on one side, you could always just ignore their existence, and stay wrapped in the academic sphere. The government is still supporting science, at large, and even those in the anti-science crowd recognize the need for science in the fields of medical issues/technology etc. This is definitely the less frustrating way to approach the problem.
On the other hand, part of the job of the scientific community, I believe, is to attempt to convey the field of science to the general public. But it's hard to communicate say, the technical details of star formation, to a population that believes that stars are 6,000 years old.
I think that at this stage there is a disconnect. The scientists are partly at fault because they all want to convey the interesting details that they are responsible for, without first spending the time explaining the basics which they consider trivial. On the other hand, there are some real problems with the leadership of the religious right, which props up belief in a global conspiracy of the scientific movement.
To me, it's always been kind of weird how some individuals can "doublethink" so quickly between science which is useful to them, and science which endangers their beliefs.
For instance, a very deep technical knowledge of radioactive decay (as well as quantum theory) is necessary for MRI machines to be constructed. The majority of the religious right would have no problem stepping in an MRI machine, confident that they will get a legitimate diagnosis. However, as soon as that same knowledge of radioactive decay is used to state that the earth is billions of years old, the religious right says that the scientists are fools and liers. Of course, the knowledge cannot be true in one situation (when it is convenient) and false in the other (when it happens to be inconvenient).
As another example, the speed of light must be known to pretty great accuracy in order for a GPS to work. However, when our models of the propagation of light say that some stars are billions of light years away, and thus must have been created billions of years ago, the religious right calls bunk.
I'm not really sure how to argue points like that....but the lack of communication between the two parties is definitely a problem.
~Lyuokdea
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 05/10/0902:02 PM.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
I gotta say, this has turned into one of the more interesting conversations I've seen on here in a very long time. Bravo for those who are participating and not taking offense and getting their panties in a wad. This is quite a good debate.
KeysDawg
The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. - Carl Sagan
Man why does it have to be OHIO, don't we already get enough bad press and discrimination nationally.
Why does a school, even a Christian school have to try and control something going on not even during school and not even in school. This is not an accepted bad thing, like lying stealing, killing, robbing, not even adultery. The letter of the law, is not good enough to govern men, the Law is not God this was the message described in the Bible in the books Paul wrote. That Jesus' sacrifice was necessary to form a new priesthood one in which there was forgiveness of the letter of the law to provide a greater righteousness, because the law was not righteous enough in itself. Is a message that could have been sent by the principal by forgiving this, but I don't think he gets it.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
Quote: It's kind of a big debate within the scientific community right now. How do you approach the (surprisingly large) segment of the population which doubts the legitimacy of your field.
Great responses Ly. I was reading these posts making a mental tally of what to set straight, but every time you beat me to it! Guess i should've been reading up on this thread.
One thing that Arch said bugged me though. I don't remember the exact quote, but it was something like, "If you want to believe in the Big Bang ..." You can interchange evolution with big bang too. The one thing I always say when someone brings up "Belief" in a scientific theory, is that the theory of evolution, or the big bang, is just the result of many observations being explained and placed into order. A scientific theory is the best fit model that conforms to our current observations. No belief is necessary, the facts are there to make it stand on it's own. We're pretty sure the big bang occurred because of many reasons, the most telling being the observed ubiquitous microwave background and the rapid expansion away from what seems to be a central point.
This is a very easy debate....im not invalidating science at all, I don't have to. They do it for me.
Dinosaur and Human bones have been found together, many times, its just never documented....or talked about...but it happens....granted not all the time, but it does happen. Believe what you want on that one, Im not here to convince you on this issue. Actually personally Dinosaurs are in fact irrelevant to the this equation.
Now first I will get to answering your four questions.
Quote: 1.) The speed of light is fixed, and we see stars at more than 10,000 light years away (we can use simple geometry to prove this, parallax), how does the light from these stars reach us?
Answer: If you read the Bible the Answer is in there. As you know, the Universe is expanding and has been expanding since it was created by God less than 10,000 years ago. When God created the Heavens and the Earth, the Universe was much smaller than it is today.
The Bible states this quite readily:
He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea. Job 9:8
He wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent Psalm 104:2
By wisdom the LORD laid the earth's foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place. Proverbs 3:19
All the stars of the heavens will be dissolved and the sky rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree. Isaiah 34:4
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in. Isaiah 40:22
This is what God the LORD says, he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it... Isaiah 42:5
"This is what the LORD says--your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself... Isaiah 42:44
It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts. Isaiah 45:12
that you forget the LORD your Maker, who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth... Isaiah 51:13
But God made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. Jeremiah 10:12
"He made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. Jeremiah 51:15
This is the word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him. Zechariah 12:1
What a novel concept, Many times in the Bible, Thousands of years before science, God tells us the Universe is expanding because He expanded it....the Bible is very clear stating the universe is expanding, For God "Stretched it out"
The Universe was "much smaller" in the beginning than it is today, and it is still expanding today. Therefore the light that originally came from the stars in the beginning had no where near the distance to travel to reach the earth. Therefore, the light has been a steady trickle since, because the original point of origin the light came from was much shorter compared to today. Therefore...the Universe works exactly as God intended.
Quote: 2.) South america and Africa couldn't have moved apart in only 10k years, why do their coastlines match with such precision? If they did move apart in 10k years, their movement today would be much faster than we see.
Answer: Again if you read the Bible the Answer is very clear. So clear that its literally smacking you in the face and telling you "IM HERE PAY ATTENTION TO ME"
if you read the Book of Genesis it says:
"in the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up and the windows of heaven were opened up. - Gen 7:11
so as we can see God states there was just one big land mass in the beginning
Then God said, let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place and let dry land appear. Gen 1:9
when the Flood of Genesis occured, "Great fountains of the deep" were broken open. In other words God caused the ground to burst up and crack in many places and great deals of water to burst out of those holes like volcanos. It was so violent in fact that it literally broke the Continents apart...it had to be this way in order for the Flood to occur.
After the Fountains from the deep, like thousands and thousands of "huge" volcanic blasts of water burst up out of the inside of the earth all at the same time, causes huge breaks and rips in the Earths crust, So after these breaks and cracks occured, the entire planet was under water, even the tops of the tallest mountains were completely covered. It was during this time that the Continent, after being broken up by the fountains bursting forth, began to drift as the water subsided and drained at a massive rate. The entire earth was covered with water and then drained. The continent was busted apart, and scattered "before" the flood waters overtook them....they were pushed apart and scattered, and then pulled together as the water drained, but since God didn't drain all the water, their drift stopped where they were because there was no more pull from water draining to pull them very much. The natural order then took over again.
Quote: 3.) Where did the water from the flood come from, and where did it go back to?
Answer "in the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up and the windows of heaven were opened up. - Gen 7:11
"Then God said, let there be a firmamanet in the midst of the waters and let it divide the waters from the waters. Thus God made the firmament and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament" - Gen 1:6-7
So as we can see from Gen 1:6-7 BEFORE the flood there was waters "above" the firmament and below the firmament....This in modern terms refers to a "Vapor Canopy" that no longer exists today. The Bible clearly states a great deal of water existed above the clouds and God seperated it from the water below the clouds(the ocean). This is not to be confused with rain, this was a vapor canopy and its job was to warm the Earth and protect the Earth much like our Ozone layer today. This vapour Canopy is part of the reason people lived so long prior to the flood.
So God caused the Waters above the Firmament(this giant Vapour Canopy") to just fall on the earth all at once...probably server trillions of tons of water fell to the earth, also God caused fountains deep inside the earth to burnst forth in a made fury spraying water into the air to keep the rain coming.
Where did the flood water go/drain to?
Again the Bible tells you
"And God made a great wind pass over the Earth and the waters subsided. The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped and the rain from heaven was restrained" Gen 8:1-2
God stopped the rain and closed the fountains, he then caused a great wind to blow over the earth, thus drying the ground and evaporation returned the water to the atmosphere.
Quote: 4.) Why does all radiometric dating give an age for the earth that is ~4.5 billion years old
Answer: because they are all flawed
In June of 1985 the Twelfth International Radiocarbon Conference met in Trondheim, Norway to discuss the flaws in radiocarbon dating. From this conference a correction curve was developed for carbon 14 dates based upon the fairly exact dating method of geochronology (tree ring dating). Unfortunately, there are a limited number of tree types that are suitable for providing an accurate correction curve for carbon 14 dates. The ideal tree is the Bristle Cone Pine which is only found in the buildings of ancient North American Indian sites. The oldest of the Bristle Cone Pines found are only 4600 years old. Using living samples and ancient trunks, scientists were able to develop a correction curve for radiocarbon dates going back 8200 years.20 In other words, radiocarbon dates can only be corrected as far back as 6200 B.C. Any samples that date further back than 6200 B.C. cannot be corrected, and therefore their age cannot be accurately determined.
These methods for dating the earth are flawed for many reason then the the ones stated above.
Time Clocks: A "clock" is any geophysical or astronomical process that is changing at a constant rate. Clocks may be used to estimate how long a process has been going on for. All clocks (including radiometric ones) require the use of at least three key assumptions. These are:
1. The rate of change has remained constant throughout the past. 2. The original conditions are known. 3. The process has not been altered by outside forces.
In each of these cases it is not possible to prove that the above assumptions are true. For example flooding can greatly alter sedimentation rates, and with clocks over 5,000 years old, the original conditions cannot be known with certainty. Therefore scientists must make a guess with regard to what they believe the original conditions might have been. The shorter the time involved, the more likely it is that a specific process has been constant, and unaltered by external influences.
Science has yet to prove without a doubt these 3 key assumptions are are in fact true....if any of them are off, so is everything they think is real.
Since Scientist can't go back in time, they have no way of proving those 3 assumptions are correct. Furthermore, they have no way of knowing what conditions were really like back then for Time Clocks. They cna't prove that the Time Clocks they use have never been altered by outside forces.
Furthermore,
Radiocarbon dating relies on a number of key assumptions, perhaps the most important being that the radiocarbon level — that is, the ratio between carbon 12 and carbon 14 — has remained constant in the earth’s atmosphere. Libby assumed this when developing the method, but we now know that this assumption is not valid. That is, levels of atmospheric carbon 14 have shifted somewhat over the past millennia.17- Dr. David Hurst Thomas of the American Museum of Natural History
So a Dr. and Scientist from the American Mueseum of Natural History Admits that the Carbon Levels in the Atmosphere have shifted significantly, so much so that i makes all radio dating methods useless.....
For example, during the Apollo 11 mission, lunar soil was obtained and was dated using four different radiometric methods. The results produced four different ages. Pb207-Pb206 - 4.6 billion years Pb206-U238 - 5.41 billion years Pb207-U235 - 4.89 billion years Pb208-Th232 - 8.20 billion years
furthermore, "Lunar rocks that were taken from the same location and dated by a potassium-argon dating technique gave an age of 2.3 billion years"Five different dates were produced by five different methods. Which of these methods is the right one, or are any of them right?
If there are questions regarding the accuracy of a dating technique, an excellent way of testing the method would be to date a material of a known age. If the material came up the same age as the known material, then there would be no discrepancy as to the reliability of the method. For instance, The Journal of Geophysical Research reported that "lava rocks formed in 1800 and 1801 in Hawaii were dated by a potassium-argon method and showed an age of formation of 160 million to 3 billion years" This indicates a huge difference between the actual age and the age as determined by a radiometric dating method. This kind of evidence forces one to question the reliability of the radiometric dating methods
I'm gonna respond to this thread before reading any other post.
This situation is essentially no different from the the one I just read about a West Point Grad who wants to be gay, out, and in the military.... with no culpability for his choices.
Lissen up, folks... IF YOU SIGN A CONTRACT, HONOR THE CONTRACT.
If you don't like the terms of the contract, walk away.
It is now, and always has been that simple.
whine, whine, whine.... I need 3 lbs. of cheese and a crate of crackers for a balanced tasting here...
Take the girl to Prom, get your diploma in the mail, and maybe get lucky on prom night.... chances are, the whole experience will be better for you than it will be for all the adults who are now sticking their dix inda mix.
Well, I think your post definitely succeeds in highlighting the differences between our positions.
Quote: This is a very easy debate....im not invalidating science at all, I don't have to. They do it for me.
As one of my friends likes to say: If I chose to write a book that disagrees with you. Then regardless of whether that book is completely false or not, If I chose to define truth by what that book says. Then you and I would be unable to debate the arguments anymore. Because the argment has become strictly semantic, my book is true because it is defined as such.
In that sense, there is really no point in arguing any of the biblical record. If you define the Bible as the infallible truth, then there's really no point in arguing with you.
But on the other hand, I feel a need to respond, not to you, but to anybody who might be reading this and on the fence between the legitimacy of our positions. So I should respond to at least demonstrate the logical absurdity of your claims. That is, I intend to show that nobody who does not begin with the premise "the bible is infallibly true", would have any reason to agree with your statements.
Quote:
Dinosaur and Human bones have been found together, many times, its just never documented....or talked about...but it happens....
So your argument here is that all the worlds scientists (tens of thousands who work on paleontology alone) have collaborated and lied for hundreds of years about the fossils that they are finding. It's amazing that not one person has ever snuck in and documented the deception! This type of thinking is very telling for the rest of your post.
On Argument number 1:
Quote:
He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea. Job 9:8
He wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent Psalm 104:2
By wisdom the LORD laid the earth's foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place. Proverbs 3:19
Of course, the problem with this is that you are in a double bind, depending on your answer to this question: Was the universe stretched out before the stars were formed? Or were the stars formed before the universe stretched out?
If the former is true, then it has not answered my problem. The stars were still formed more than 10,000 light years away, and then the light (moving at a constant speed) managed to reach the earth, then the earth must still be more than 10,000 years old. In fact, in that case, what you have quoted is very similar to the scientifically accepted theory of inflation
If the latter is true, then you would argue that all the stars in the sky were once very close (say, 6000 years ago, the entire universe only had a radius of 6000 light years). In that case, the light emitted from everywhere in the galaxy could get to us in only 6000 years. However, all that we see from stars is the light that was emitted from them. We would only see objects that were up to 6000 years away, and then we would see nothing, because even if the stars were farther away than that now, we would not see them as they were now, we would see them as they were then. This distinction is critical to the working of all GPS units.
Quote:
"in the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up and the windows of heaven were opened up. - Gen 7:11
So, your explanation is that a massive earthquake or something occured, which split an entire continent in two pieces. In fact, it pushed those continents several thousand miles apart. Do you have any idea of how much energy would be released by an explosion of that size?
Let's assume that it was an earthquake. I've added a rather lenghy calculation at the bottom, which shows that the earthquake would have had to release 2.25x10^37 tons of TNT. That is, it would take more energy than if the entire earth were made of TNT and simultaneously exploded. Of course, i'm not even going to go into what an explosion like that would do to life on earth, or to the structure of the coastlines of africa/south america, etc. Any other method has the same problems, you just can't release enough energy to move trillions of tons of rock by thousands of kilometers, without destroying the earth.
Quote:
3.) Where did the water from the flood come from, and where did it go back to?
Answer "in the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up and the windows of heaven were opened up. - Gen 7:11
So, what I'm getting here, is that, since the whole earth was covered (at least to the height of Mt. Everest), that 4.5 x 10^21 kg of water (about 1/1000 the mass of the earth), randomly appeared, and then disappeared again 40 days later. Where did it go, and why?
Quote:
Answer: because they are all flawed
Couple of points on the radiocarbon dating stuff.
1.) Radiocarbon dating is only used for about 10k years or so, when I talked about radioactive dating, I was refering to lead isotope dating and similar systems which have much longer halflives and are thus used for much older tests.
2.) As you mention, radiocarbon measurements suffer from normalization problems. But these can be corrected for, by using standardization. The errors are less than 10% at 7000 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Radiocarbon_dating_calibration.svg. Extrapolating to more than 10,000 years would be very easy using this method.
Quote:
For example, during the Apollo 11 mission, lunar soil was obtained and was dated using four different radiometric methods. The results produced four different ages. Pb207-Pb206 - 4.6 billion years Pb206-U238 - 5.41 billion years Pb207-U235 - 4.89 billion years Pb208-Th232 - 8.20 billion years
I haven't actually looked at these numbers. But I find it hilarious that we have 4 measurements, 3 of which are off by less than 10%, one of which is off by a factor of 2. And thus, your assumption, is that because there are errors here, the answer must really be that all 4 pieces of data (none of which disagree by more than a factor of 2) must all be wrong by a factor of 10,000...again, because that's what the book says.
So I guess the argument comes down to this: I can't debate right and wrong with you, because you have defined your book as undeniable truth.
However, I have pretty clearly shown here, that unless you start with the assumption that the bible is undeniably true, logic would never push you to any of the answers which you claim. Thus to claim the infallibility of the bible, you must claim the complete and utter fallibility of logic.
Of course, you can always argue that an omnipotent, magical being used his powers to trick us into seeing the world the way he is. Every time scientists look for answers, he messes with the light we see, and the signals we record, and makes it LOOK like the earth is billions of years old, and the continents slowly drifted apart, etc. etc. However, short of that, there is simply no way to justify your arguments in any self-consistent system.
The actual ground motion for, say, a magnitude 5 earthquake is about 0.04 millimeters at a distance of 100 kilometers from the epicenter; it is 1.1 millimeters at a distance of 10 kilometers from the epicenter.
Since the same motion would have to occur over hundreds of miles for the entire land mass of africa/south america to move together. We would need an amplitude of ~1000km at a distance of at least 100km. We'll use both these numbers, though they are underestimates, and things would actually be much worse.
Since the Richter scale is logaritmic with M=k*log(A), where k is a constant. Thus for 5=k*log(40 micrometers) (working in a standard/micrometer, to keep normalizations positive) we get k=3.12. Then for a 10^9 micrometer amplitude, we would get a magnitude of M=3.12*9=27.98. Remember this scale is logarithmic, so that is equivilent to an earthquake 10^17 times as strong as has ever been recorded. In terms of energy released, each increase of 1 in magnitude is about a 31.6x increase in energy.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_magnitude_scale). Thus, this earthquake would be approximately equivalent to 2.25x10^37 tons of TNT. I.e. this earthquake would have to release more than a billion billion times as much energy, as if the entire earth was made of TNT and exploded.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
Quote: God stopped the rain and closed the fountains, he then caused a great wind to blow over the earth, thus drying the ground and evaporation returned the water to the atmosphere.
Exhibit A as to how insane and utterly stupid religion is.
I'm sorry Knight, but this just doesn't work in your argument.
Quote: Dinosaur and Human bones have been found together, many times, its just never documented....or talked about...but it happens....granted not all the time, but it does happen.
Unless you have been there when human and dinosaur bones were discovered together, how do you know this, since it is never documented?
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
Quote: God stopped the rain and closed the fountains, he then caused a great wind to blow over the earth, thus drying the ground and evaporation returned the water to the atmosphere.
Exhibit A as to how insane and utterly stupid religion is.
The entire human race is prone to insane and stupid acts. I think the Bible is a collection of "answers" to the question why we're here. That doesn't mean I am going to dimiss it for being responsible for good, which it is. Alienating sections of humanity that don't believe as you is what is really stupid.
From the flood, one would expect to find a global sedimentary layer that holds ALL of the organisms from that time. Why don't we find that when we look at strata of rock like we do when we see the KT boundary from 65 million years ago?
Also, this:
Quote: The Universe was "much smaller" in the beginning than it is today, and it is still expanding today. Therefore the light that originally came from the stars in the beginning had no where near the distance to travel to reach the earth. Therefore, the light has been a steady trickle since, because the original point of origin the light came from was much shorter compared to today. Therefore...the Universe works exactly as God intended.
Doesn't match up with current observation. In the past week, a new constant has been released stating that the universe is expanding at a 74.2 km/sec/Mpc. Which means for every three million light years (a mega parsec) the universe is swelling 74.2km/sec faster. Needless to say, this finding doesn't match up with a ten thousand year old universe.
This is the problem, KoB. This ten thousand year old earth deal isn't referenced in the bible. It was a number that was "calculated" by a man 300 years ago using only the bible as his foundation. So, to be honest, there is no reason to actually hold to this ill-begotten belief since it isn't referenced therein. Everything in science proves this specific idea to be wrong. It doesn't say God doesn't exist, just that this man had it wrong.
Invoking conspiracy against Christianity by scientists just isn't true, or again, provable. At some point you have to realize that hiding your head in sand and denying certain aspects of science is not just wrong, but illogical. There's no harm in accepting science and religion. The only time there gets to be a problem is when religion tries to push into the domain of science and gets proven wrong and is too proud to admit it.
Also, one last thing regarding the vapor canopy. You say (or rather whomever you're quoting says):
Quote: This is not to be confused with rain, this was a vapor canopy and its job was to warm the Earth and protect the Earth much like our Ozone layer today.
So the ozone layer was created/formed after that? How did this occur? This isn't in the bible! We have evidence of a snowball earth, the poles changing, celestial bodies impacting the earth, yet no evidence for this type of world.
Quote: God stopped the rain and closed the fountains, he then caused a great wind to blow over the earth, thus drying the ground and evaporation returned the water to the atmosphere.
Exhibit A as to how insane and utterly stupid religion is.
I don't know, Phil, this is pretty substantial proof.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/BrowniePoints/AndersonSnowPic.jpg)
