God

[mushroom 12,352]

 

The stories in the bible have been proven to come from much much older stories from across the world. From Spain to south east Asia, none prior to the beggining of the Torah years mentioned a God as being the catalyst. The first that we know to write them down were Sumerians in the epic of Gilgamesh.... So with just these facts alone it proves the bible is not what it is portrayed to be.

 

How can anyone believe it?

You keep giving more evidence for the bible mate.

 

There's thousands of flood stories in every culture in the world, people wrote it down obviously; an it's the same story there all

 

The oldest book in the bible is job 4500 years old.

What drugs are you smoking? The Indians have their own stories (the vedas) which describe GodS (plural) and deities have a ruck. Others in Asia don't even mention God or gods being involved...

 

The oldest book in the bible, whatever next ? don't tell me it was originally written in cuneiform and was the reason man invented writing.

[Francie 6,362]

 

 

Francie believes just that!

Well can you refute my age of the earth question mate?

well you answer my question in relation to the age of the universe if organic matter can turn into rock in under 6000 years why can't rock turn into organic matter in billions?

Yeah ORGANIC matter can turn into coal oil Tec but non organic, well it's dead, you work it out mate

 

A bit of rock is dead, it can't just turn in organic living material,no matter how long you give it, but organic matter can be squished under pressure.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Francie

[Francie 6,362]

Yes I can with proven methods (Uranium/lead) that are accurate to within 200,000 years, which in the geological terms is a blink of an eye.

 

When these dates are found, the fossil remains in that layer are dated using other methods. Which are then combined with the U/Pb results and there you have a age

So your saying now their accurate, an that carbon in the atmosphere is a constant?

 

You an i know your porking, it's flawed an based on assumptions.

[Francie 6,362]

Yes I can with proven methods (Uranium/lead) that are accurate to within 200,000 years, which in the geological terms is a blink of an eye.

 

When these dates are found, the fossil remains in that layer are dated using other methods. Which are then combined with the U/Pb results and there you have a age

Fossils are dated by which layer there in, an the layers are dated by which index fossil they find, if that's not circular reasoning then I don't know.

 

There's nothing in the world to calibrate millions of years is there, so it's not accurate, now wood or something that has a known factual age, like a bit of wood in a grave, we know for fact so you can try carbon dating then to see what results are, an there still miles off.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Francie

[mushroom 12,352]

 

Yes I can with proven methods (Uranium/lead) that are accurate to within 200,000 years, which in the geological terms is a blink of an eye.

 

When these dates are found, the fossil remains in that layer are dated using other methods. Which are then combined with the U/Pb results and there you have a age

So your saying now their accurate, an that carbon in the atmosphere is a constant?

 

You an i know your porking, it's flawed an based on assumptions.

No carbon in the atmosphete is not constant... carbon's half life is constant. Same as with uranium and lead

[mushroom 12,352]

Get carbon out of your head your head you fool.

 

Carbon dating is not the only tool in the box ????

 

There are several different methods to date different materials..

[Francie 6,362]

If it's not a constant, do you agree the dating model isn't up to scratch?

[Francie 6,362]

Get carbon out of your head your head you fool.

 

Carbon dating is not the only tool in the box ????

 

There are several different methods to date different materials..

 

Let's hear them then... lol

[walshie 2,804]

Perhaps carbon dating isn't 100% but i doubt it would be millions of years off the mark.

[Francie 6,362]

Perhaps carbon dating isn't 100% but i doubt it would be millions of years off the mark.

Well go an have a look at things that's been dated, yes they sent away two parts of a mamoth an got wildly different ages, of the same animal, a LIVE SEAL dated to 20,000 years old, lol

 

I wouldn't be arsed to list them there's hundreds if not thousands of examples.

 

When they date things, if it don't match there preconceived notions, that do it again, an in the end up they don't use it at all if it conflicts with there timing.

 

Think about it, how can you measure something when it's not calibrated, plus its core is based on assumption.

 

Back to aliens or something kanny lol

[The Seeker 3,048]

Carbon dating is flawed its pretty much a fact, below excerpt from an Internet science site

 

"Therefore, radiocarbon dating of marine organisms yields apparent ages that are older than true ages, but by an unknown and possibly variable amount. Therefore, the several radiocarbon ages determined for the mummified seal carcasses cannot be accepted as correct. For example, the apparent radiocarbon age of the Lake Bonney seal known to have been dead no more than a few weeks was determined to be 615 +/- 100 years. A seal freshly killed at McMurdo had an apparent age of 1,300 years.".

 

There is an argument from pro carbon dating people to say that the seal has consumed ancient minerals from the sea but who knows eh?

[WILF 44,204]

I honestly don't know why we are having this discussion......like radio carbon dating or some scientists theory mean anything in terms of faith and spirituality........it just has no meaning to me.

 

If you really want to make people of no faith think then all you need to say is, have a look at the bible and its passages, think about the meanings, have a look at your own life and the life of those around you........look at old beliefe systems, other faiths.....look at the links.

If you don't think they are there then fair enough, if you can see no relation to your life or others from passages in the bible then fair enough........think and ask question......of your self first and foremost and hardest !, of the world and the actions of men, accept that events have no reason beyond those which men create.

 

God forbid, some child gets cancer......easy to say gods fault.......not so easy to say it's all the crap in the environment put there because of our greed for "products"

 

Man kind was like a pebble at the top of the hill, it got a push and after that it steered its own course......

 

You can't explain shit like that with science.

 

Question........everything........then look with open eyes at if you think faith and gospels from every religion is balony.........some things can't be measured

[j j m 6,480]

very well said and put wilf

[paulsmithy83 567]

Science is great yes there prob was a big bang yes there is has been evolution but where did that first molecule or particle or atom come from, that very first piece of exsistance. Interesting thought.

[gnasher16 29,624]

Personally i dont think its hard to believe both creation and evolution have an element of truth to them......God creating life that evolved into what we see today isnt too difficult to believe.