Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Rotation Advertisements



We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum.


If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away.


Click here to Register!

If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk


If you're already a member please log in to your account:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
In regards of scientific theories.
Topic Started: Jan 26 2016, 09:19 AM (2,977 Views)
+ Sandy Shore
Default Avatar


It's not about whether they "need" to be that old or not. That's how old they've been dated to be.

You don't believe they need to be that old for the same reason you don't believe it all started with single celled organisms, right? That is, because you wish to inject God in to the matter.
Edited by Sandy Shore, Jan 26 2016, 09:40 PM.
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
Dankness Lava
Member Avatar
Dankness Forever

You've read me like a book.

What if carbon dating is flawed?
Posted Image
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
+ Sandy Shore
Default Avatar


There's no evidence that it is, I'm afraid. There's a margin of error, and that is why it's done over and over by multiple scientists, who review each other's findings, to wane out as much doubt as is possible.

A better question, methinks, is why would you prefer God to genuine knowledge?
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
Dankness Lava
Member Avatar
Dankness Forever

Well plenty of other theories have been thrown out the window, so maybe that'll happen with this as well.

It's because I've seen nothing in the Bible that isn't proven true. But there's been several instances of scientists being wrong. Humans are imperfect by nature, so there's bound to be flaws with science.
Posted Image
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
+ Sandy Shore
Default Avatar


Carbon dating isn't a theory, it's a method. A method that has been proven to be quite accurate.

Quote:
 
It's because I've seen nothing in the Bible that isn't proven true.
Didn't we do this before? The bible says man was formed from the dust on the ground. This is proven to be untrue - evolution.

The bible claims there was a great flood, and yet we have no geographical evidence for this. All the evidence says such a thing never occurred. No remnants of that big ark, either. Nor can even the greatest shipwrights of our time—a time where people have made far more impressive things than a giant boat—can't make such a thing to endure the conditions it supposedly did.

Quote:
 
Humans are imperfect by nature, so there's bound to be flaws with science.
Humans wrote the bible. It is not exempt from human flaw. In-fact, it would appear to be an exemplar of them.

You're going to ask me how I can be so sure, aren't you? Well, you know the names of the those who wrote the four gospels in the New Testament, and you know that they were humans writing, primarily, of Jesus. Some of whom have copied entire parts from the others. There have been plenty of other gospels and passages that have been also omitted over the years, that we know of. There are also four distinct, easily recognisable main authors of the Old Testament: JEDP (Yahwist, Eloist, Deuteronomist, and the Priestly Source, respectively). Most of which borrowing from J and E quite heavily - sometimes exactly.

It's just a collection of writings from various sources, for varying reasons, that have been compiled in to a single work. If it's the work of some divine being, then it ought to be embarrassed, quite honestly.

Just another little tidbit for you: YWHW started his tenure as a storm/war god, very similar to Ba'al. Ever wondered why he's so eager to aid the various tribes in battle, and to coax them in to genocide? I'm sure you haven't.
Edited by Sandy Shore, Jan 27 2016, 06:39 PM.
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
* Yu Narukami
Default Avatar
Izanagi!

If I'm recalling my old psychology lessons correctly, a hypothesis is where somebody puts forward an explanation based on the evidence available to them and, if it survives the rigorous criticism and reviewing of the scientific community, it becomes a theory. The more it's tested and challenged (unsuccessfully), the stronger it becomes.
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
Dankness Lava
Member Avatar
Dankness Forever

I can't touch further on carbon dating. I'm not informed enough on how it works. This can be talked about another day.
I don't believe in everything evolution.
God could've made it so that evidence for the flood can't be found. He did say he wouldn't do it again, so maybe that's tied into that fact.
But humans wrote it with the aid of God, that's what I'm aware of.
I don't know much about the omitted books, but perhaps they were removed because they weren't written with God's aid and therefore flawed.
What are the verying reasons?
I haven't windered about that admittedly. But where do you get the idea of him being a storm/war god? That may be a pagan belief.
Posted Image
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
Tinny
Member Avatar


I always kind of assumed that if there is a God he kind of spun the universe like a top and watch the whole thing get created, only intervening at certain moments. That and I remember some quantum physics stuff where it was possible to have Earth be made in six days, and in billions of years.
Though I barely remember any of it, Basically the center of the universe had Earth formed in a week, but you anyone that would have been there next to Earth, it would have been years.
I'm not gonna pretend I have any evidence or backing or a source to this, I was pretty young when I heard that, and it always stuck with me, just that I didn't watch anything else of it.
Edited by Tinny, Jan 26 2016, 11:04 PM.
Posted Image
Above signature created by Graffiti

Posted Image
Member Online View Profile Goto Top
 
+ Pelador
Member Avatar
Crazy Awesome Legend

You might also be able to argue that six days to a God is roughly what six billion years is to us. To an eternal being it's like nothing.


Posted Image

http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
Gearfried
Member Avatar


I posted this in another thread. but i don't think anyone has been there yet. i think this song sums up how i feel about it. if you don't want to hear the full song skip to 1:27.
http://pixiv.me/hajime87 my tumblr page

Posted Image
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
+ Steve
Member Avatar
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.

Yeah time is a man made concept, why would God use our measurements?

There are trees that are thousands of years old so we know God didn't create everything just a few thousand years ago.

Unless for whatever reason it made it a secret but...why? Why make it a secret and make us a species that would be determined to find out?


If anything maybe God left all this stuff as clues, maybe we're supposed to figure out some grand secret instead of just pretending there's no reason for it. Maybe God felt lonely and wanted proof that other beings of it's own creation could reach it's level.

Despite all our advancements God has never appeared to strike us down so either it doesn't mind or it just doesn't care about us anyway.
Posted Image


Definitely not a succubus, fear not
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
Common2
Member Avatar


Magma Crater
Jan 26 2016, 10:59 PM
I can't touch further on carbon dating. I'm not informed enough on how it works. This can be talked about another day.
Radiocarbon dating seems to be explained reasonably well here: http://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-radiocarbon-dating-and-how-does-it-work-9690. The idea is that organisms have an equal amount of two carbon isotopes (one of which is radioactive): carbon-14 and carbon-12. Once that organism dies, the radioactive isotope is no longer replaced and begins to decay. So using an exponential decay model, one should be able to look at the ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14 to determine how long it's been since that thing died. That's my understanding of it anyways.

It's fine if you aren't aware of how carbon dating works, but what I don't understand is on what grounds you can question the correctness of the method if you don't even have a basic understanding of how it works. You might as well go around questioning anything and everything if your baseline for doubting a scientific method is this low.
Edited by Common2, Jan 27 2016, 12:49 AM.
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
+ Pelador
Member Avatar
Crazy Awesome Legend

They can also look at the layers of the Earth that the fossil was buried in to determine a time period. The deeper you go, generally the older something is. Lets say that a dinosaur dies 80 million years ago. Over that time more and more sediment is piled on top of it. This is why they have terms like the Cretaceous period and the Jurassic. It relates to the geology.


Posted Image

http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
Gearfried
Member Avatar


in my barbaric medieval thoughts, it seems like carbon dating is a man made thing to measure made up things.
http://pixiv.me/hajime87 my tumblr page

Posted Image
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
Goddess Ultimecia
Member Avatar


Gearfried
Jan 26 2016, 11:43 PM
in my barbaric medieval thoughts, it seems like carbon dating is a man made thing to measure made up things.
How can carbon dating be real if dinosaur fossils aren't real?

How can dinosaur fossils be real if our eyes aren't real?
Posted Image

NinjaSushi Colouring
Member Offline View Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »
Locked Topic

Theme Designed by McKee91