BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
The book does not make on claim regarding a missing delta of a river, it cites hundreds of anomalies in your field.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evidence for an ancient earth
- Thread starter sayak83
- Start date
The book does not make on claim regarding a missing delta of a river, it cites hundreds of anomalies in your field.
Thanks for the clarification.
I would be interested in knowing the reasons why you think it's only a possibility. What kind of evidence or reasons are causing you to withhold full on acceptance? I believed your statement from the Grand Canyon was one of them. That is why is wished to understand what you understood from that book that causes you to suspect that the earth is not old.
Thanks.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
1. I didn't date the Flood to circa 4,500 BCE.
2. You are using circular logic. 99% of ALL fossils extant are marine. Perhaps the fossils are dated incorrectly. You cannot carbon date a 33-million-year-old organic anything. You look at surrounding rocks and make... assumptions.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
Ah, but you must worship science because you have conflated and confused the values of relying on prayer and God as your tools and relying on science as (all) your tools.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
I appreciate your thoughts here, but you (and others) skipped my point--science is based on a priori assumptions regarding creation and nature of reality and knowledge. Science cannot weigh justice, love or logic.
And what you skipped in your explanation of the gospel is this:
God only talks to open people and reveals more to open people then closed people--just like you.
God desires a deep relationship with those who desire one in return--just like you do.
Etc.
Once you allow God to live in your mind where it regards love, wisdom and relationships, not just scientific notions of testability and falsifiability--you can begin to understand.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
Why is it a fault of an education system. I've asked skeptics the same questions about evolution for years now, and they always say the god of evolution will soon solve the issues I've raised.
Sapiens
Polymathematician
I am an evolutionary biologist and a trained geologist (that's the nature of oceanography ... add fluids, physics and chemistry).
We are currently in the sixth extinction. Rates of evolution appear to be a function of available niche space, there will lots of niche space in the near future, so there will be an explosion of new replacement species ... I suspect the current experiment with primates is all but over.
Sapiens
Polymathematician
Science most assuredly does deal with justice, love and logic.
How convenient, your invisible friend only talks to you and your fellow travelers. My daughter grew out of that fantasy when she was eight.
gnostic
The Lost One
I didn't say you did, but anyone with basic arithmetic or a calculator, can use the OT, to calculate backward, starting with known archaeological and historical event, namely the fall of Jerusalem, can calculate the following:
- the reigns of kings of Judah, all the way to Solomon's beginning his temple building programme on his 4th year of reign (1 Kings 6:1);
- where in this same verse (1 Kings 6:1), it also referred to when Moses lead the Israelites out of Egypt, 480 years before Solomon's 4th year on the throne;
- and during Israelites leaving in Egypt (Exodus 12:40-41), it stated Jacob and His ancestors were living in Egypt (according to Masoretic Text) or in Canaan and Egypt (in the Septuagint) for 430 years (Exodus 12:40-41);
- and depending if you are using Masoretic and Septuagint, the 430 years in the former (Masoretic) would mean when Jacob arrived in Egypt (Genesis 46), while the 430 years in the later (Septuagint) being Abraham receiving his covenant from god (Genesis 15). The Masoretic context is impossible, because it would mean that Jochebed, daughter of Levi and mother of Moses, would have to be between 261 and 350 years old when she gave birth to Moses (note that we have no detail about how old Levi was when Jochebed was born, but I am guessing she was born in Egypt since her name never appear in Genesis 46. So the 430 years is most likely the date of Abraham's covenant.
- And finally calculating forward from Adam to the birth of Abraham in Genesis, we can the estimate of passage of time between Noah's Flood and the birth of Abraham.
That's how I get 4500 years. I am thinking 2340 BCE is more likely.
Either ways, both dates are wrong, because there were never any global flood, and both archaeological and geological evidences point to there being no such flood, and all of Genesis are nothing more than a collection of myths (e.g. Creation, flood, Tower of Babel, the three patriarchs, etc, are myths).
gnostic
The Lost One
I was a civil engineer, not a biologist, so I have never studied or researched fossils. My geology subject in civil engineering course, never brought up fossils. But I know enough about geology, to know if there were flood, there would be evidences in the earth, that can be dated.
No such evidences can be found that a single flood covered the earth, even cover that of the "highest mountains". There are simply zero evidence for Genesis Flood.
No such evidences can be found that a single flood covered the earth, even cover that of the "highest mountains". There are simply zero evidence for Genesis Flood.
gnostic
The Lost One
Computers are tools, and I don't worship computers. I used Microsoft Windows, but I don't worship Bill Gate or Microsoft.
And I used to be a civil engineer, I don't worship my drafting pens, tables, or any of the surveying equipments (e.g. theodolite, level, etc).
I eat rice, meat and vegetables, doesn't mean that I worship cereal, cows, and plants. My main tools for cooking is wok, frying pan, pots and oven, does that mean I worship these tools or equipment.
You are using "worship" and "tools" too loosely and your common sense has dwindled to a tiny electron-size. Basically you are being st####.
Last edited:
The website describes that the delta is missing to account for the sediment eroded by from Grand Canyon. I believe the book also makes this claim. It is claimed as one of the anomalies in Geology that is not explained by current scientific evidence. In reality it is very well explained by present scientific.
In reality all the anomalies described by the non-scientific Bible based anecdotal claims are bogus. Some in reality have been explained by science, others are vague biased arguments from ignorance as cited,
Last edited:
Malicex
New Member
I don't want to talk about a lot of things all at once, so I'll focus on this. What exactly are you getting at when you say science is based on apriori assumptions, such as "truth exists" and "the law of noncontradiction"?
Also, do you believe that believing in a creator God or gods doesn't make these assumptions or somehow fixes this problem?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Except the water level never got anywhere close to the tops of these mountains. Evidence shows that the peak of high water was only 120 meters from where it currently is. -- https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/gornitz_09/
Genesis 5.3: And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:
Genesis 5:6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
Total: 130+105 = 235 years
Genesis 5:9 And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan:
Total: 235+90 = 325 years
Genesis 5:12 And Cainan lived seventy years and begat Mahalaleel:
Total: 325+70 = 395 years
Genesis 5:15 And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared:
Total: 395+65 = 460 years
Genesis 5:18 And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he begat Enoch:
Total: 460+162 = 622 years
Genesis 5:21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:
Total: 622+65 = 687 years
Genesis 5:25 And Methuselah lived an hundred eighty and seven years, and begat Lamech.
Total: 687+187 = 874 years.
Genesis 5:28 And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
5:29 And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.
Total: 874+182 = 1056 years
Genesis 7:6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.
Total: 1056+600 = 1656 years
This gives the date of the flood according to the Bible.
Genesis 8:13 And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the earth: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dry.
Total: 1056+601 = 1657 years
This gives the date of the end of the flood.
Genesis 11:10 These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood:
Total: 1657+2 = 1659 years
This is a bit ambiguous: is the two years measured from the beginning or the end of the flood? I used the end of the flood.
Genesis 11:12 And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah:
Total: 1659+35 = 1694 years
Genesis 11:14 And Salah lived thirty years, and begat Eber:
Total: 1694+30 = 1724 years
Genesis 11:16 And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg:
Total: 1724+34 = 1758 years
Genesis 11:18 And Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu:
Total: 1758+30 = 1788
Genesis 11:20 And Reu lived two and thirty years, and begat Serug:
Total: 1788+32 = 1820 years
Genesis 11:22 And Serug lived thirty years, and begat Nahor:
Total: 1820+30 = 1850 years
Genesis 11:24 And Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begat Terah:
Total: 1850+29 = 1879 years
Genesis 11:26 And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.
Total: 1879+70 = 1949 years
Genesis 21:5 And Abraham was an hundred years old, when his son Isaac was born unto him.
Note: Abram and Abraham are the same person.
Total: 1949+100 = 2049 years.
Genesis 25:26 And after that came his brother out, and his hand took hold on Esau's heel; and his name was called Jacob: and Isaac was threescore years old when she bare them.
Total: 2049+60 = 2109 years
Genesis 47:28 And Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years: so the whole age of Jacob was an hundred forty and seven years.
Total: 2109+147 = 2256 years
This means that Jacob went into Egypt at
Total: 2256-17 = 2239 years.
Exodus 12:40 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.
Note: this is an over-estimate: some people think the 430 years starts when Abraham went into Canaan.
Total: 2239+430 = 2669 years.
1 Kings 6:1 And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD.
Note: some would add to this the 40 years in the desert.
Total: 2669+480 = 3149 years.
The temple stood for 410 years:
Total: 3149+410 = 3459 years
Destruction of the temple of Solomon by Neuchadnezzer was in 587 BC.
This means that Adam was formed 3459+587 = 4046 BC.
The global flood ended 4046-1657=2389 BC.
Note: If you think the 430 years starts when Abraham went into Canaan, the dates would be:
Adam formed: 4006 BC
Global flood end: 2349 BC
If you think the 2 years for the begetting of Arphaxad was at the beginning of the flood, then the dates are
Adam formed: 4004 BC
Global flood ended: 2347 BC
gnostic
The Lost One
And you are being terribly uneducated.
You don't "carbon date" any fossil older than 50,000 because radiocarbon (C14) dating are known to have limitations.
Any archaeological evidence, particularly within the Holocene epoch, such as the Neolithic period, Bronze Age and Iron Age can be dated with some accuracy, using C14 dating.
The problem with radiocarbon dating, is that the older fossils and other materials containing carbons, the less carbon-14 there are. The upper limit for radiocarbon dating is 50,000 years, and it has only a half-life of 5730 years.
Geologists and palaeontologists already know this limitations since the 1960s, so they often used other radiometric dating methods, such as
- Potassium-Argon (K-Ar) dating, would date rocks from 1000 years to 1 billion years, .
- Uranium-Lead (U-Pb) dating, would date rock from 1 million to over 4.5 billion years, with 0.1 to 1 percent precisions.
Your 1st mistake is thinking that geologists and palaeontologists are stupid enough to use radiocarbon dating on marine fossils on the Himalayas. Apparently the only stupid people are creationists, who still think radiocarbon dating is only radiometric dating method being used, ignoring K-Ar and U-Pb radiometric datings, because they are so stupid from learning their mistakes.
Tell me, why are you ignoring K-Ar, which is far more accurate than C14 dating?
Second...your 2nd mistake...is about dating the fossils and organic materials.
Carbon-14 is lost, when dating fossils, the older fossils get, which I have already said.
gnostic said:
They don't "carbon date" these older fossils (than 50k years), but they can date those fossils with K-Ar method, because the fossils would still have radioactive isotopes calcium-40.
If you know even the rudimentary biology, you would know that calcium are found in bones, teeths, ivory, and shells, and these materials are what last in fossils, not skins, muscle tissues, organs, hairs, etc.
K-Ar method (with isotopes 40 for potassium and 40 for argon) can date anything that has calcium, from a few thousand years to 1 billion years, with 0.1 to 1 percent precision.
So dating marine fossils on the Himalayas (with K-Ar) are not a problem. U-Pb method can also be used, in this case.
If you want to date some fossils older than 1 billion years, than you would use U-Pb method with isotopes
(A) U-238 and Pb-206,
or (B) U-235 and 207
or (B) U-235 and 207
(A) has longer half-life than (B), which was used to date the age of Earth's oldest rocks.
Sorry, BilliardsBall, but you have been so blind with creationist propaganda about radiocarbon dating, that you have ignored other dating methods available to geologists and palaeontologists. I am quite sure that a lot of members here have already explained to you why other alternative radiometric methods are being used.
Seriously, BB. Why do you keep repeating the same mistakes and the same misinformation about radiometric dating? Cannot you not see other alternatives and why?
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
You are right, it isn't possible. I don't think it (430 years) has to with Jacob and family entering Egypt.
It isn't possible because of Jochebed, who is both daughter of Levi and mother to Miriam, Aaron and Moses.
Jochebed is not listed in the Levi's family, so I assuming she was born in Egypt. Levi arrived in Egypt at age 48 (2239 AM) and died there at 137. So Jochebed would have been born at some point in this time.
She was married to her nephew, her brother's son.
If Exodus 12:40-41 430 years was when Jacob's arrival in Egypt, then Jochebed would be between the age of 261 and 350 years old when she gave birth to Moses. That would be too old for Jochebed to be pregnant or to go through the pain of childbirth.
If the 430 years is about the time one of the following -
(A) of Abraham arrived in Canaan at age 75 (Genesis 12), or
(B) when he receive the covenant at age 85 (Genesis 15), or
(C) the covenant given just before Isaac was born, when Abraham was age 99 (Genesis 17),
- then Jochebed's age would not be so drastically old when she gave birth to Moses.(B) when he receive the covenant at age 85 (Genesis 15), or
(C) the covenant given just before Isaac was born, when Abraham was age 99 (Genesis 17),
The Greek Septuagint on Exodus 12:40-41 say they were in "Canaan and Egypt" for 430 years.
Exodus 12:40 NETS (New English Translation of the Septuagint) said:
The Greek translation (Septuagint) and Hebrew text (Masoretic) offered different contexts of that passage.
Normally, I don't like the Septuagint, but a little investigation revealed something interesting. The Dead Sea Scrolls on Exodus 12:40 are in agreement with the Masoretic Text, but the Samaritan Penteteuch and the Targum are in agreement with the Septuagint:
Exodus 12:40 Samaritan Pentateuch said:
In the Samaritan Pentateuch, it also state "...the children of Israel...", Israel meaning "Jacob", but the "...fathers of them", would imply Abraham and Isaac.
The Syrian translation, the Targum, is even more specific with the passage Exodus 12:40:
Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on Exodus 12:40 said:
The Targum put 430 years to Abraham getting the covenant (of circumcision) just before Isaac was born (Genesis 17), when Abraham was age 99.
The main reason why I think it is wrong to associate 430 years (Exodus 12:40) to Jacob arriving in Egypt (Genesis 46) is because of the age of Jochebed would have to be, in order to give birth to Moses.
Sarah's age at 90, is already considered impossible, so Jochebed's 260+ years would be even more so.
What BilliardsBall cannot understand that even though Genesis and Exodus are myths, they do contain enough information to calculate a number of possible timelines to the exodus out of Egypt and to the Flood.
Last edited:
First, it is terribly misleading to say 99% of all fossils are marine fossils, and yes. not true. By the numbers it is ~95%, but only because of the deposition in a marine environment preserves more fossils.
As far as dating anything estimated to be 33 million years old whether land or marine fossils it would not be dated by carbon 14.
Well, if someone follows a serious course about geology, and still believes that the earth is 6000 years old, then the problem might be somewhere else. Between chair and desk, I guess
.So, evolution is not relevant. By asserting a young earth, you are forced to throw in the garbage bin virtually all of science. Geology, astronomy, astrophysics, anthropology, cosmology, nuclear science, relativity, etc. etc. Evolution is just a tiny negligible bit.
So, what is more likely: that all scientists are so wrong (by a factor of millions) about virtually any discipline, or that a group of ancient herders did not know what they were talking about?
The answer to that riddle should be obvious. Don't you think?
Ciao
- viole
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
Thanks for the correction. Since there are as many scientific, verified markers of an old Earth as of an old universe, I do accept, fully.
I would, however, retain a different outlook on global catastrophe, and would say that book and others give good reasons to accept a universal Flood event.