In peer-reviewed journals, an author has to provide quality data.
Actually, a scientist can become famous if he/she overturns accepted science with good evidence!
But you can’t use Bible verses or the visions of Ellen White to overturn accepted science. It takes good research and hard work.
Wow, the ghost of Ellen G. White has appeared. Where did she come from? I have no idea what she taught accept Saturday as the Sabbath. So here we are, dragging a red herring across the trail to see if we can get the hounds off the scent of the discussion we are having.
No not using a Bible verse in context? That is a whole different matter. The context includes the world wide flood! That is certainly relevant to discussions about the age of the earth and geology.
Here is that passage quoted again:
I Peter 5 3 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7
I spent a half hour searching the internet for information on girdled rocks. Can you help me find information as to what they are?
I just finished reading about volcanic material here in the Pacific Northwest that is radiometrically dated at about 5 million years. So please help me with this. Based on the discussions in this forum that say that 100 years and 5 million years is well within–I don’t know how you might want me to say it–well, only about a .01% discrepancy over the period of a 4.5 billion year old earth, not worth quibbling about. (But comparing 100 to 5,000,000, it is off by a factor of 50,000.)
So help me here. When I read that this lava flow is about 5 million years old, what am I to think of that date? Obviously, we don’t have any eyewitness accounts for these eruptions and flows that I am aware of, so it has to be more than 3,000 years ago. But since 100 years can read as 5.5 million, then the date could be anywhere between 3,000 years or 10 million years?
What I am learning from this forum is that there is no way, from a deep time perspective, to validate radiometric dating using rocks of known age.
So although in the samples from Novarupta, there is 5.5 million years of the daughter product measured, from your perspective, the assumptions behind radiometric dating are correct even though there is no valid way to corroborate this.
So a scoffer is someone who doubrts anyeone is gifted with the power of inerrant readin’?
A scoffer is someone who says what these verses identify. Peter meant something meaningful by what he wrote.
So scoffers were saying that since Jesus hadn’t returned within their lifetime, that God had not kept his promise. They were also saying that there was something uniform about the history of the world and creation. But there was a deliberate forgetting that God created the world out of water (interesting) and that there was a time that this same creation was deluged and destroyed by water.
So those that were denying this were the scoffers and “deliberate fogetters” that Peter identifies. I suspect that since there are still people with animus towards God, that these same kind of scoffers may be found in the world today speaking similar narratives.
I don’t really care about what Jesus did or did not supposedly say.
Do you figure its scoffing to point out that there was no flood?
Modern young earth creationism/Seventh Day Adventism came from her. Wow!
Here is one non scientific reason why the worldwide flood has no bearing even within theology.
Paul states that the whole world and all of creation has heard the good news in the first century.
Colossians 1:5-6
New American Standard Bible
5 because of the hope reserved for you in heaven, of which you previously heard in the word of truth, the gospel 6 which has come to you, just as in all the world also it is bearing fruit and increasing, even as it has been doing in you also since the day you heard it and understood the grace of God in truth;
Colossians 1:23
New American Standard Bible
23 if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.
Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel* and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages* but has now been disclosed** and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith…”* [Romans 16:25-26]
So was the gospel literally heard by the whole world in the first century? 2,000 years ago was the gospel already in Australia and the Americas? If not then he just have meant something different than our understanding of the whole world.
So many Christians have so many versions of “the flood”.
First time i heard anyone say its irrelevant if it happened or not.
Or if the Bible means what it so plainly says.
I’m sorry you burned up the time. It’s above, in the first link, entitled “The World’s Largest Rock Tumbler…” It would be to your advantage to read and digest what’s presented the first time through (and I have posted that before in your sight, I’m sure, and more than once, I’m quite sure). I think it’s quite wonderful, but YECs won’t.
It would also be worth your time to peruse and grasp the other material there, the last one in particular.
This is pretty much Todd Wood’s position, except, he freely admits the evidence strongly supports the scientific consensus (non yec) position. So, he avoids intellectual dishonesty.
[Quote]Evolution is not a theory in crisis. It is not teetering on the verge of collapse. It has not failed as a scientific explanation. There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well.
…
There is evidence for evolution, and evolution is an extremely successful scientific theory. That doesn’t make it ultimately true, and it doesn’t mean that there could not possibly be viable alternatives. It is my own faith choice to reject evolution, because I believe the Bible reveals true information about the history of the earth that is fundamentally incompatible with evolution
[/quote]
I’m not so sure about that. Saying that black is indeed black, but I’m going to say it’s white anyway is not intellectual honesty. It’s way more like denial, especially if you’re going to claim to understand science, like he does. And the earth is in fact flat.
This seems relevant:
The problem is that the error bars are different: the one for U-Pb dating giving ~5,000,000 on Novarupta is ~± 10,000,000 years. If one used U-He on a different sample and got the same answer, but it has an error bar more like ±50,000 years, then one of those is likely to be between 4,950,000 and 5,050,000 years old, and the other is likely to be between 15,000,000 and -5,000,000 years old.
The original ark has been found…several times in fact. And Ken Ham’s ark replica is not sea-worthy, but hey, it has a gift shop and cash registers…
The “Venus recycling its surface” argument is particularly bad, because the astronomical evidence in question indicates that Venus’ surface is much younger that the surface of the Moon, Mercury, etc. Trying to claim that this shows that Venus is young ignores the rest of the solar system, besides misrepresenting “it has all undergone major change relatively recently” as good proof that it was created recently.
Radiometric dating of a sample is moderately expensive, so you don’t want to waste money on something that won’t be helpful. If you have a general idea of the age, that will simplify the work involved in measuring. But if the values don’t turn out to match what’s expected, that will be discovered. As an analogy, I can make biscuits by adding some milk and some flour and getting the right consistency. But I use measuring cups to get a general idea of how much I need. That doesn’t mean that I don’t rely on the consistency. If I miscounted, I will notice the consistency is wrong and adjust accordingly. And radiometric dating works when you don’t have any idea what the date should be. A century ago, the rocks under me were guessed to be Archean. They are highly metamorphosed and are part of a small terrane, with no useful relationships to rocks that were more easily dated. The map from the mid-1990’s suggests somewhere in the late Proterozoic to earlier Paleozoic. But modern zircon dating techniques give clear ages. The rocks are metasedimentary, so they include a mix of zircons derived from various source rocks. Due to tectonic rearrangements, the particular source rocks were not known for certain, so the dating had to simply try a bunch of zircons and see what ages came out. The result was finding that rocks in the terranes to the east have dates matching source rocks around what is now Paraguay and those to the west have dates matching sources in eastern North America. I’m on the mix of stuff eroded from both sides as the plates collided. The youngest dates give a minimum age of the rocks here.
Similarly, the original development of radiometric dating yielded ages older than expected - the technique proved itself against other ideas, rather than merely matching preconceptions.
She is the modern founder of YEC. You might want to read up on your history. If you are interested she opposed evolution because it would lead to a belief in the old age of the earth which would then get the 6 days of creation thrown out and the sabbath along with it.
Marco Polo commented on a recent discovery of the ark…
The rock formation in Turkey where they collect money from
gullible tourists is called Noahs Ark Park.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.