40% of Americans-earth 10K years old

[Lonestar_logic]

Aparently you are not sure at all, and did not read my post. From my post:

Police said the ring forged what were presented as perhaps the two biggest biblical discoveries in the Holy Land in recent years — the purported burial box of Jesus' brother James and a stone tablet with written instructions by King Yoash on maintenance work at the ancient Jewish Temple.

Yes I did read your post and I still managed to answer your question. BTW your post makes accusations but offers no definitive proof. The four men maintain they're innocent. Besides even if the burial box isn't authentic. it doesn't take away the hundreds of other artifacts that were found that indeed support biblical history.

As I said before biblical history yes. Existence of God no.

And yes you answered my question in the same manner as most right wingers seem to do.

Who said anything about the existence of God? That is something that cannot be proven or disproven, that is where faith comes in. Believing in something greater than yourself. I would argue that it takes greater faith to believe that man was created from some primordial soup.

 

[Harry Dresden]

How does a country move forward and compete in a world market when so many shun science and trust in myths to make our decisions?

geez like these people have never existed before?.....how in the hell have we gotten to the Technical level we are at now,WITH these types of people around?.....

 

[uscitizen]

Yes I did read your post and I still managed to answer your question. BTW your post makes accusations but offers no definitive proof. The four men maintain they're innocent. Besides even if the burial box isn't authentic. it doesn't take away the hundreds of other artifacts that were found that indeed support biblical history.

As I said before biblical history yes. Existence of God no.

And yes you answered my question in the same manner as most right wingers seem to do.

Who said anything about the existence of God? That is something that cannot be proven or disproven, that is where faith comes in. Believing in something greater than yourself. I would argue that it takes greater faith to believe that man was created from some primordial soup.

Your faith in god does not seem to be as strong as you faith in you nerver being wrong
Yes you are a stereotypical right wing Texican.

 

[Gadawg73]

I'm not sure what dating method was used, if any.

Aparently you are not sure at all, and did not read my post. From my post:

Police said the ring forged what were presented as perhaps the two biggest biblical discoveries in the Holy Land in recent years — the purported burial box of Jesus' brother James and a stone tablet with written instructions by King Yoash on maintenance work at the ancient Jewish Temple.

Yes I did read your post and I still managed to answer your question. BTW your post makes accusations but offers no definitive proof. The four men maintain they're innocent. Besides even if the burial box isn't authentic. it doesn't take away the hundreds of other artifacts that were found that indeed support biblical history.

I thought they would have stated they were guilty on the spot.

 

[Gadawg73]

Yes I did read your post and I still managed to answer your question. BTW your post makes accusations but offers no definitive proof. The four men maintain they're innocent. Besides even if the burial box isn't authentic. it doesn't take away the hundreds of other artifacts that were found that indeed support biblical history.

As I said before biblical history yes. Existence of God no.

And yes you answered my question in the same manner as most right wingers seem to do.

Who said anything about the existence of God? That is something that cannot be proven or disproven, that is where faith comes in. Believing in something greater than yourself. I would argue that it takes greater faith to believe that man was created from some primordial soup.

It does take greater faith but my faith does not interfere with science.
They go hand in hand.
My faith is just that strong.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

As I said before biblical history yes. Existence of God no.

And yes you answered my question in the same manner as most right wingers seem to do.

Who said anything about the existence of God? That is something that cannot be proven or disproven, that is where faith comes in. Believing in something greater than yourself. I would argue that it takes greater faith to believe that man was created from some primordial soup.

Your faith in god does not seem to be as strong as you faith in you nerver being wrong
Yes you are a stereotypical right wing Texican.

And you're a stereotypical left winger that assumes too much. Oh and it's Texan or Texian not Texican.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

As I said before biblical history yes. Existence of God no.

And yes you answered my question in the same manner as most right wingers seem to do.

Who said anything about the existence of God? That is something that cannot be proven or disproven, that is where faith comes in. Believing in something greater than yourself. I would argue that it takes greater faith to believe that man was created from some primordial soup.

It does take greater faith but my faith does not interfere with science.
They go hand in hand.
My faith is just that strong.

Nor does it interfere with mine. The Bible isn't a science book yet it is scientifically accurate. Case in point, dinosaurs are referenced in several books of the Bible, for instance Job chapter 40 verse 15 and then again in chapter 41.

There are statements in the Bible that are consistant with astronomy, meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and physics. Hydrothermal vents are described in two books of the Bible written before 1400 BC, more than 3000 years before their discovery by science. Gen. 7:11, Job 38:16

 

[NYcarbineer]

Not pissing on anything, just providing the facts.

Do you have any 'facts' that bring the origin of the human race down to 10,000 years ago?

No, but that burden of proof does not rest on me. I'm not the one making a claim one way or the other. I'm simply pointing out the fact that carbon dating as well as isotope dating is flawed therefore should not be considered as definitive proof.

I will say that Dr. Henry M. Morris concluded an in-depth study of the archeological evidence concerning the Bible with these words. "It must be extremely significant that, in view of the great mass of corroborative evidence regarding the Biblical history of these periods, there exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point" (Henry M. Morris, The Bible and Modern Science, [Chicago:ÿMoody Press, 1956]).

No archaeological discovery has ever proven wrong a Biblical reference. On the contrary, the accuracy of the Bible has been substantiated by archaeological discoveries.

That the Bible may in part be a historical record of some ancient cultures has absolutely nothing to do with the how when and where the origin of the human species occurred.

 

[Sallow]

No, but that burden of proof does not rest on me. I'm not the one making a claim one way or the other. I'm simply pointing out the fact that carbon dating as well as isotope dating is flawed therefore should not be considered as definitive proof.

I will say that Dr. Henry M. Morris concluded an in-depth study of the archeological evidence concerning the Bible with these words. "It must be extremely significant that, in view of the great mass of corroborative evidence regarding the Biblical history of these periods, there exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point" (Henry M. Morris, The Bible and Modern Science, [Chicago:ÿMoody Press, 1956]).

No archaeological discovery has ever proven wrong a Biblical reference. On the contrary, the accuracy of the Bible has been substantiated by archaeological discoveries.

its not flawed, its accurate to between 300 and 30,000 year back. after that its accuracy rate falls. 30,000 years still disproves the idea that the earth is only 10,000 years old.

BBC - h2g2 - Radiocarbon Dating

I haven't heard anyone suggesting the earth was only 10,000 years old, other than the idiot Sallow.

LOL It isn't flawed but it's not accurate after 30,000 years.

Hmm..

I've never suggested the earth was only 10k years old. Feel free to find a post in this thread that alludes to that..

 

[Common Sense]

Who said anything about the existence of God? That is something that cannot be proven or disproven, that is where faith comes in. Believing in something greater than yourself. I would argue that it takes greater faith to believe that man was created from some primordial soup.

It does take greater faith but my faith does not interfere with science.
They go hand in hand.
My faith is just that strong.

Nor does it interfere with mine. The Bible isn't a science book yet it is scientifically accurate. Case in point, dinosaurs are referenced in several books of the Bible, for instance Job chapter 40 verse 15 and then again in chapter 41.

There are statements in the Bible that are consistant with astronomy, meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and physics. Hydrothermal vents are described in two books of the Bible written before 1400 BC, more than 3000 years before their discovery by science. Gen. 7:11, Job 38:16

the bible is not "scientifically accurate"

Job 40:15
"Behold now, [a]Behemoth, which (A)I made as well as you;
He eats grass like an ox. "
not exactly a dinosaur

no mention of a "dinosaur" in chapter 41 either.

Genesis 7:11 - In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

translation - Noah was 600 years old (not actually possible), a gas bubble came up from the ocean and it rained

Job 38:16 - Have you entered into the springs of the sea Or walked in the recesses of the deep

translation - have you ever gone into the ocean or underwater

not exactly an explanation of physics, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology or physic. its more like physics, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and/or physics can now explain why all of these things exists.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

its not flawed, its accurate to between 300 and 30,000 year back. after that its accuracy rate falls. 30,000 years still disproves the idea that the earth is only 10,000 years old.

BBC - h2g2 - Radiocarbon Dating

I haven't heard anyone suggesting the earth was only 10,000 years old, other than the idiot Sallow.

LOL It isn't flawed but it's not accurate after 30,000 years.

Hmm..

I've never suggested the earth was only 10k years old. Feel free to find a post in this thread that alludes to that..

You alluded to it when you made your accusation on post 31.

 

[Sallow]

It does take greater faith but my faith does not interfere with science.
They go hand in hand.
My faith is just that strong.

Nor does it interfere with mine. The Bible isn't a science book yet it is scientifically accurate. Case in point, dinosaurs are referenced in several books of the Bible, for instance Job chapter 40 verse 15 and then again in chapter 41.

There are statements in the Bible that are consistant with astronomy, meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and physics. Hydrothermal vents are described in two books of the Bible written before 1400 BC, more than 3000 years before their discovery by science. Gen. 7:11, Job 38:16

the bible is not "scientifically accurate"

Job 40:15
"Behold now, [a]Behemoth, which (A)I made as well as you;
He eats grass like an ox. "
not exactly a dinosaur

no mention of a "dinosaur" in chapter 41 either.

Genesis 7:11 - In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

translation - Noah was 600 years old (not actually possible), a gas bubble came up from the ocean and it rained

Job 38:16 - Have you entered into the springs of the sea Or walked in the recesses of the deep

translation - have you ever gone into the ocean or underwater

not exactly an explanation of physics, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology or physic. its more like physics, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and/or physics can now explain why all of these things exists.

It's kind of like the Nostradamus nuts..that think he was some sort of prophet..

He made alot of very vague predictions that people point too and go LOOK! ITS COMING TRUE!!

 

[Sallow]

I haven't heard anyone suggesting the earth was only 10,000 years old, other than the idiot Sallow.

LOL It isn't flawed but it's not accurate after 30,000 years.

Hmm..

I've never suggested the earth was only 10k years old. Feel free to find a post in this thread that alludes to that..

You alluded to it when you made your accusation on post 31.

That I said there I people that believe the earth is 10K old means I am suggesting it is??



And you have the word LOGIC in your handle???



Careful about calling people "idiots"..

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It does take greater faith but my faith does not interfere with science.
They go hand in hand.
My faith is just that strong.

Nor does it interfere with mine. The Bible isn't a science book yet it is scientifically accurate. Case in point, dinosaurs are referenced in several books of the Bible, for instance Job chapter 40 verse 15 and then again in chapter 41.

There are statements in the Bible that are consistant with astronomy, meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and physics. Hydrothermal vents are described in two books of the Bible written before 1400 BC, more than 3000 years before their discovery by science. Gen. 7:11, Job 38:16

the bible is not "scientifically accurate"

Job 40:15
"Behold now, [a]Behemoth, which (A)I made as well as you;
He eats grass like an ox. "
not exactly a dinosaur

no mention of a "dinosaur" in chapter 41 either.

Genesis 7:11 - In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

translation - Noah was 600 years old (not actually possible), a gas bubble came up from the ocean and it rained

Job 38:16 - Have you entered into the springs of the sea Or walked in the recesses of the deep

translation - have you ever gone into the ocean or underwater

not exactly an explanation of physics, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology or physic. its more like physics, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and/or physics can now explain why all of these things exists.

You ignorance is astounding.

The Bible refers to many the common animals we know today. The list includes lions, wolves, bears, sheep, cattle and dogs along with various kinds of birds, rodents, reptiles, and insects. What is interesting is that this extensive list includes three animals that we no longer recognize. These three are (in the original Hebrew language) tanniyn, b@hemowth (yes, it’s spelled correctly—at least as close as we can get in Roman characters), and livyathan.

Although we alter the spelling of behemoth and Leviathan slightly, we still use those same words in bibles today. However, tanniyn is always translated into another word when we write it in English. Tanniyn occurs 28 times in the Bible and is normally translated “dragon.” It is also translated “serpent,” “sea monster,” “dinosaur,” “great creature,” and “reptile.” Behemoth and Leviathan are relatively specific creatures, perhaps each was a single kind of animal. Tanniyn is a more general term, and it can be thought of as the original version of the word “dinosaur.” The word “dinosaur” was originally coined in 1841, more than three thousand years after the Bible first referred to “Tanniyn.”

Read more here...

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Hmm..

I've never suggested the earth was only 10k years old. Feel free to find a post in this thread that alludes to that..

You alluded to it when you made your accusation on post 31.

That I said there I people that believe the earth is 10K old means I am suggesting it is??



And you have the word LOGIC in your handle???



Careful about calling people "idiots"..

You can argue semantics all you want, you are still an idiot.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Nor does it interfere with mine. The Bible isn't a science book yet it is scientifically accurate. Case in point, dinosaurs are referenced in several books of the Bible, for instance Job chapter 40 verse 15 and then again in chapter 41.

There are statements in the Bible that are consistant with astronomy, meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and physics. Hydrothermal vents are described in two books of the Bible written before 1400 BC, more than 3000 years before their discovery by science. Gen. 7:11, Job 38:16

the bible is not "scientifically accurate"

Job 40:15
"Behold now, [a]Behemoth, which (A)I made as well as you;
He eats grass like an ox. "
not exactly a dinosaur

no mention of a "dinosaur" in chapter 41 either.

Genesis 7:11 - In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

translation - Noah was 600 years old (not actually possible), a gas bubble came up from the ocean and it rained

Job 38:16 - Have you entered into the springs of the sea Or walked in the recesses of the deep

translation - have you ever gone into the ocean or underwater

not exactly an explanation of physics, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology or physic. its more like physics, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology and/or physics can now explain why all of these things exists.

It's kind of like the Nostradamus nuts..that think he was some sort of prophet..

He made alot of very vague predictions that people point too and go LOOK! ITS COMING TRUE!!

Educate yourself on biblical translations and perhaps you won't appear so ignorant.

 

[Common Sense]

you just called the bible a scientifically accurate book. the same book that talks about Moses parting the red sea and jesus walking on water. all of which are scientifically impossible. you cant pick and choose random passages out of a book and claim that as scientifically accurate while ignoring everything else. lets also talk about how jesus was resurrected, how about how he turned water into wine.

biblical translations can mean whatever they want to whomever they want. people have been doing it for thousands of years.

educate yourself on the laws of nature. i guess they really do grown them big and dumb in Tex-ASS!

 

[Lonestar_logic]

you just called the bible a scientifically accurate book. the same book that talks about Moses parting the red sea and jesus walking on water. all of which are scientifically impossible. you cant pick and choose random passages out of a book and claim that as scientifically accurate while ignoring everything else. lets also talk about how jesus was resurrected, how about how he turned water into wine.

biblical translations can mean whatever they want to whomever they want. people have been doing it for thousands of years.

educate yourself on the laws of nature. i guess they really do grown them big and dumb in Tex-ASS!

Florida State oceanographer Doron Nof set out to investigate whether the parting of the Red Sea is "plausible from a physical point of view." Using a common phenomenon called wind set-down effect, he found that "a northwesterly wind of 20 m/s blowing for 10-14 h is sufficient to cause a sea level drop of about 2.5m." Such a drop in sea level, Nof speculates, might have exposed an underwater ridge, which the Israelites crossed as if it were dry land. Although the event is plausible, Nof estimated that the likelihood of such a storm occurring in that particular place and time of year is less than once every 2,400 years.

While scientists agree that wind set-down effect could have caused the Red Sea to part as described in the Bible, most biblical scholars and archeologists insist that the Israelites' crossing did not take place at the Red Sea at all. The original Hebrew (yam suph), they contend, should be translated as Sea of Reeds, not Red Sea. So where's the Sea of Reeds? It depends whom you ask. In the somewhat specious History Channel documentary Exodus Decoded, Simcha Jacobovici (aka the Naked Archaeologist) places the Israelites' crossing in the Bitter Lakes, a reedy marshland north of the Gulf of Suez that was subsumed during the construction of the Suez Canal. For his part, Walking the Bible author Bruce Feiler concludes that the Sea of Reeds is Lake Timsah, located halfway between Port Said and Suez. But The Miracles of Exodus author Humphreys argues that while the translation of "the Red Sea" may be incorrect, the Sea of Reeds nevertheless refers to the Red Sea, concluding that "there can be little doubt that the Red Sea crossing was made possible by wind setdown at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba."

Scientific explanations for the parting of the Red Sea, the 10 plagues, and the burning bush. - By Michael Lukas - Slate Magazine

You're free to believe whatever you choose, as I am. Fact: there are statements in the Bible that are scientifially accurate.

Fact: Secular history supports the Bible. (The Antiquities of the Jews by famous historian Flavius Josephus )

Fact: Archeologist findings support the history of events recorded in the Bible.

 

[Common Sense]

Slate Magazine
are you fucking kidding me?

here youre scientific proof and its laughable:

"After using satellite measurements and archaeological records to create a model of local hydrogeography, the researchers ran simulations that found 12 hours of 60-mph easterly winds would have exposed a dry passage, 2 miles long and 3 miles wide, out of Egypt."

12 straight hours of a steady 60 MPH wind in one specific area. hurricanes dont even do that. so while the it is possible under the exact perfect conditions, it is not plausable. and everyone believes that moses parted the red sea not nature. so are you now saying the bible was wrong and that moses had no power?

now try proving the whole walking on water thing and turning water into wine.

and no the bible is still not scientifically accurate. there may some historic significance to the events of the bible, but there is nothing scientific about faith.

 

[uscitizen]

Who said anything about the existence of God? That is something that cannot be proven or disproven, that is where faith comes in. Believing in something greater than yourself. I would argue that it takes greater faith to believe that man was created from some primordial soup.

Your faith in god does not seem to be as strong as you faith in you nerver being wrong
Yes you are a stereotypical right wing Texican.

And you're a stereotypical left winger that assumes too much. Oh and it's Texan or Texian not Texican.

Ahh but you see I have spent quite a bit of time in TX and have relatives there.
I do understand Texicans.

As others on here can verify I am certainly not a stereotypical left winger.
So you are wrong again.