0
   

How can you believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old?

 
 
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2007 05:59 pm
This is for the so-called "young earth" creationists. I suspect that Real Life subscribes to this idea, but if there are any others on this board, I would like to ask you too. So here it is. I'd like to know how, with all the fossils, geologic data, and scientific evidence out there, you can possibly believe that the earth is less than 10,000 years old?

Thanks.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 8,937 • Replies: 162
No top replies

 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2007 08:41 pm
I'd like to know also.
0 Replies
 
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2007 08:59 pm
Kicky.

What is that funny smell coming out of your avatar Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
muslim1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 04:09 am
Re: How can you believe the earth is less than 10,000 years
kickycan wrote:
This is for the so-called "young earth" creationists. I suspect that Real Life subscribes to this idea, but if there are any others on this board, I would like to ask you too. So here it is. I'd like to know how, with all the fossils, geologic data, and scientific evidence out there, you can possibly believe that the earth is less than 10,000 years old?

Thanks.

Good question.



Quote:
Archaeologist uncovers 11,000-year-old artefacts in Syria
10/23/2007 06h46

DAMASCUS (AFP) - Deep in the heart of northern Syria, close to the banks of the Euphrates River, archaeologists have uncovered a series of startling 11,000-year-old wall paintings and artefacts.

"The wall paintings date back to the 9th millennium BC. They were discovered last month on the wall of a house standing two metres (6.6 feet) high at Dja'de," said Frenchman Eric Coqueugniot, who has been leading the excavations on the west bank of the river at Dja'de, in an area famous for its rich tradition of prehistoric treasures.

The etchings are "polychrome paintings in black, white and red. The designs are solely geometric, and only figurative. The composition is made up of a system cross-hatched lines, alternating between the three colours," Coqueugniot told AFP.

They were found in a circular building, around 7.5 metres (25 feet) in diameter. The excavated house features three solid blocks where the paintings were located.

The main pillar has been completely excavated and stands almost two metres high displaying the new murals, said Coqueugniot, a researcher for the Paris-based National Centre for Scientific Research.

The remains of the building, much larger than the small and rectangular domestic dwellings of the period, "must have been used as a meeting place for the whole village or for a clan," he added.

Apart from the organic artefacts, which have decomposed over time, the site has provided many well-preserved treasures.

Carved stone tools, flints, seed-grinding implements and brick-grinding stones have been recovered. Many bone objects were also found -- both remnants of the animals that made up part of the daily diet and intricately fashioned tools.

The dig also uncovered several figurines made of gypsum, chalk, bone and clay. The most recent discovery, an 11,000-year-old statue of a man is "particularly important and well preserved," Coqueugniot said.

This item will allow comparisons with other similar sculptures found on sites in the Urfa region of southern Turkey, added the French scientist, who has overseen archaeological projects at Dja'de for 15 years.

"The figures could have had religious significance. The female statuettes could also have been fertility symbols. But they could have had entirely different ritual meanings," Coqueugniot said

"We can only offer hypotheses," he added. "It is still very difficult to say what was the significance of this 11,000-year-old statue of the woman."

The latest discoveries date back to the start of the Neolithic era, in a period known as the Epipalaeolithic.

Many artefacts from this period have been discovered in northern Syria, in particular at Jerf al-Ahmar, a site destroyed by the Tishrin dam, Coqueugniot said. It was one of several built over the past three decades that have flooded a number of archaeological sites.

For example, the dam at Tabqa flooded an area of around 650 square kilometres (250 square miles) after it was erected in 1976. Prior to that, the government approved testing of 56 sites, 20 of which were spared when the dam was built.


SOURCE

0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 04:22 am
I'm sorry, muslim1, but are you providing that as proof? Despite the fact that older fossils (much older) have been found?
0 Replies
 
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 05:29 am
If you are ready for a real eye opener I would recommend Cremo and Thompson's "Forbidden Archeology". It contains just about everything the modernists can't explain away and would prefer to ignor.

It is worth a thread just on the merit of its content.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 05:31 am
You can be part of a cluster of beleivers in a literal Bible with a good charismatic leader and,in the din and hallelujahs, you can buy just about anything. I get a similar kick out of the "snake handlers" who dance around with rattlesnakes and cottonmouths as part of their religious ceremony.

Most of the really commited believers cling to a belief that if just one line of the Bible is merely legend, then the whole thing falls flat for them.
Its a sad waste of time, especially if theres some talented kid whos stuck in a family of YE Creationists. In my years of teaching Ive had a few kids who professed all a YEC belief and they were enrolled in an undergrad survey course in Historical Geology. It was a lot of fun and these kids actually helped the other kids learn the power of direct evidence v "legend". SO Im not so quick to have them disband because they make great learning tools for the majority of the students. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 07:32 am
http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/oca0007l.jpg



Be patient Kicky, Gungasnake will be on this thread like a dog on a porkchop.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 10:19 am
Re: How can you believe the earth is less than 10,000 years
kickycan wrote:
This is for the so-called "young earth" creationists. I suspect that Real Life subscribes to this idea, but if there are any others on this board, I would like to ask you too. So here it is. I'd like to know how, with all the fossils, geologic data, and scientific evidence out there, you can possibly believe that the earth is less than 10,000 years old?

Thanks.


Why would you 'suspect' such a thing, when I've stately clearly that I do consider the earth to be young? Is it just so you can appear clever?

Did you know that coal, which is considered to be millions of years old, commonly has C14 in it?

C14 is supposed to be gone within tens of THOUSANDS of years, not hanging around after millions, kicky. Of course ALL of that coal is 'contaminated' that's why it has C14.........Yeah, that's it.............
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 10:26 am
We could talk about other things as well...........

Soft tissue in dinosaur bones that are supposedly millions of years old

Dinosaur depictions in art and folklore in many cultures around the globe (and not just 'ancient' ones)

Unproven/unprovable assumptions of and problems with dating techniques

Mitochondrial Eve and the MRCA

The young faint sun paradox

The receding moon

lots more

Why don't you do a little reading in an area that you've never read in and we'll have some fun.........
0 Replies
 
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 10:54 am
C14 is a valuable tool and is only useful for archeological dating, maybe 30,000 years. It works only if you have some carbon and know its origin.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 11:06 am
Re: How can you believe the earth is less than 10,000 years
real life wrote:
kickycan wrote:
This is for the so-called "young earth" creationists. I suspect that Real Life subscribes to this idea, but if there are any others on this board, I would like to ask you too. So here it is. I'd like to know how, with all the fossils, geologic data, and scientific evidence out there, you can possibly believe that the earth is less than 10,000 years old?

Thanks.


Why would you 'suspect' such a thing, when I've stately clearly that I do consider the earth to be young? Is it just so you can appear clever?

Did you know that coal, which is considered to be millions of years old, commonly has C14 in it?

C14 is supposed to be gone within tens of THOUSANDS of years, not hanging around after millions, kicky. Of course ALL of that coal is 'contaminated' that's why it has C14.........Yeah, that's it.............


C14 is more of a problem for the creationists. If it did indicate a young earth it would give an age of about 40k years.

But in fact its no problem (except if you are looking for neutrinos)

Quote:
The short version: the 14C in coal is probably produced de novo by radioactive decay of the uranium-thorium isotope series that is naturally found in rocks (and which is found in varying concentrations in different rocks, hence the variation in 14C content in different coals). Research is ongoing at this very moment
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 02:05 pm
Re: How can you believe the earth is less than 10,000 years
real life wrote:
kickycan wrote:
This is for the so-called "young earth" creationists. I suspect that Real Life subscribes to this idea, but if there are any others on this board, I would like to ask you too. So here it is. I'd like to know how, with all the fossils, geologic data, and scientific evidence out there, you can possibly believe that the earth is less than 10,000 years old?

Thanks.


Why would you 'suspect' such a thing, when I've stately clearly that I do consider the earth to be young?


I'm sorry, but I don't read everyone of your posts. I thought I'd seen you say that somewhere, but when I wrote this thread I wasn't sure. Plus, you frequently say things in an ambiguous way. So I only suspected.

real life wrote:
Is it just so you can appear clever?


Why would you ask me that? Is it just so you can appear to be a smarmy prick?

As for the rest of your "answer" to my question, I'll just read along. I'm seriously interested in how people convince themselves that things like this are true.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 02:11 pm
Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We could talk about other things as well........... DE NOVO EMPLACEMENT OF C14 IN COAL HS BEEN STUDIED TO DEATH AND 2 MODES OF EMPLACEMENT ARE PROVEN
1THE BREAKDOWN OF U/Th , A COMMON GROUPING IN ANCIENT COALS, WILL YIELD AN AMT OF ABOUT 10-10 pIc/l .wE ARE PRESENTLY LOOKING FOR NATURAL BUFFERS FOR NEUTRINO DETECTIONS IN WHICH THE C 14 IS AT 10-22 pIC/L OR LESS.

2 COAL IS LOADED WITH IRON PYRITE AND IRON PYRITE IS QUICKLY BROKEN DOWN INTO FeSO4 BT THIOBACILLI. tHE THIOBACILLI ARE A CARBON BASED LIFE-FORM

Soft tissue in dinosaur bones that are supposedly millions of years old
THE "SOFT TISSUE" HAD TO BE ACID ETCHED OUT OF THE MATRIX AND IS A KERATIN BASED SUBSTANCE (LIKE FOSSIL LOBSTER SHELLS) NOTHING REMARKABLE HAS BEEN FOUND (IE, ITS REALLY NOT "SOFT TISSUE" AT ALL, ITS MORE LIKE SAPONIFIED TISSUE

Dinosaur depictions in art and folklore in many cultures around the globe (and not just 'ancient' ones) YEH RIGHT, YOU AND GUNGA SNAKE HAVE BEEN SMOKIN THE WHACKY WEED. THERES ONLY THREE OR FOUR OF THESE MYTHICAL ANIMAL DRAWINGS (NEWSPAPER ROCK,THE BLUFFS ALONG THE MESABI,AUSTRALIA , AND SOUTH AMERICA) IN EACH CASE THE DRAWINGS COULD BE INTERPRETED AS ALNOST ANY SUBJECT OF MYTH , JUST LIKE DRAGONS. (SEE ANY DRAGONS AROUND LATELY?)

Unproven/unprovable assumptions of and problems with dating techniques . ONLY MISUNDERSTOOD BY THE IGNORANT OR THE DECEITFUL. MY FEELINGS ABOUT YOUR dR aUSTEN , IS THAT HE FITS IN THE LATTER GROUP.

Mitochondrial Eve and the MRCA (QUE?)

The young faint sun paradox (ANOTHER QUE?)

The receding moon (MOON IS RECEEDING AT A RATE THAT TAKES US AT LEAST TO THE LATE PRE- CAMBRIAN AS A SEPARATE BODY. YOU WANT TO PROVIDE HARD EVIDENCE OTHERWISE?

lots more
0 Replies
 
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 02:54 pm
real life wrote:
We could talk about other things as well...........

Soft tissue in dinosaur bones that are supposedly millions of years old

Dinosaur depictions in art and folklore in many cultures around the globe (and not just 'ancient' ones)

Unproven/unprovable assumptions of and problems with dating techniques

Mitochondrial Eve and the MRCA

The young faint sun paradox

The receding moon

lots more

Why don't you do a little reading in an area that you've never read in and we'll have some fun.........


The time has come the walrus said,
to speak of other things
of shoes and ships and sealing wax
and cabbages and kings
And why the sea is boiling hot
and whether pigs have wings. Laughing
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 03:34 pm
real life wrote:
We could talk about other things as well...........

Soft tissue in dinosaur bones that are supposedly millions of years old

Dinosaur depictions in art and folklore in many cultures around the globe (and not just 'ancient' ones)

Unproven/unprovable assumptions of and problems with dating techniques

Mitochondrial Eve and the MRCA

The young faint sun paradox

The receding moon

lots more

Why don't you do a little reading in an area that you've never read in and we'll have some fun.........

Assuming for the moment that you actually "do" believe this stuff. Please tell us "why" you believe it, when these things have been repeatedly refuted by more accurate reasoning.

What's the primary reason you believe the earth to be young? Is it because you just "want" it to be young to support your beliefs, or is it because you think there is a conspiracy in science to hide the truth from everyone? Or is it something else?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 04:26 pm
Whats yer point about the MRCA? Maybe we can answer and clear up your confusion.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 05:39 pm
<bookmark>
0 Replies
 
Chai
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 06:45 pm
smarmy prick.....hoo boy.....
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Nov, 2007 08:43 pm
I enjoy being a smarmy prick, so watch it teabag
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » How can you believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/06/2021 at 06:14:11