Our 6000 Year Old Earth

[quote=Lon;1146066]

Originally Posted by Themis

The Bible is not the original source of the 7 day creation story..

Agreed-----------but don't the Creationists use the bible as their reference and justification of belief? I wasn't looking for the source of the story, but any legitimate data that would justify this belief.

I would say that the 'creationists' base thier faith on the bible, the prof for that fait comes by observation of the known universe, and thats what they try to discuss scientifically.

[Lon]

Originally Posted by Jester

Lon, when a study gets published and the archeologist publishes ALL of his tests using Carbon 14 testing, and not just the ones he selected out of the many tests done then I will give more credibility to carbon 14 testing. Also, another common method is not not test objects at all, but to rely on reivious data form the same site, alos not acceptable to me scientifically speaking.

In my opinon carbon 14 testing is unreliable.

The only non biblical method I know of to accurately establish mankind is to trace back lineages. (birth records).

Do you accept the 6,000 year concept?

Originally Posted by Lon

Do you accept the 6,000 year concept?

If you give me 5 minutes I'll go give you an exact date hows that?

As near as I can figure the date of the creation of mankind was approx. 1APR3975- thats 3975 years to the birth of Christ, on 1 APR2009 the mankind will be 5984 years old.

I accept that the earth was created in 7 days, just like the biblical record states, however, I have not been convinced yet that there was not a delay between the 1-4 'days' of the creation record.

I estimate based on the scientific data I have read that the earth could be between 12000 and 6000 years old-

I do not have faith in any of the current methods of fossil dating beyond 12000 years old.

And thats my best guesstimate for ya.

[Amber Sun]

Originally Posted by Daniyal

Your On Point With Most Of What Your Saying .

LOL, regarding this topic I'm 'on point with all I am saying'.

[Lon]

Originally Posted by Jester

As near as I can figure the date of the creation of mankind was approx. 1APR3975- thats 3975 years to the birth of Christ, on 1 APR2009 the mankind will be 5984 years old.

I accept that the earth was created in 7 days, just like the biblical record states, however, I have not been convinced yet that there was not a delay between the 1-4 'days' of the creation record.

I estimate based on the scientific data I have read that the earth could be between 12000 and 6000 years old-

I do not have faith in any of the current methods of fossil dating beyond 12000 years old.

And thats my best guesstimate for ya.

Hmm-------------Thanks for the response Jester

Originally Posted by Lon

Hmm-------------Thanks for the response Jester

No problem Sir,

Ya got me curious though Lon, in the past week now you've posted a series of health threads and now some threads that dance on the edge of questioning religion and philosophy.

Might I ask a personal question?

Why?

[Lon]

Originally Posted by Jester

No problem Sir,

Ya got me curious though Lon, in the past week now you've posted a series of health threads and now some threads that dance on the edge of questioning religion and philosophy.

Might I ask a personal question?

Why?

No problem------------The health threads, philosophy and religion postings were generated by some articles that I have been reading, plus my insatiable curiosity about what people think and believe, and why.
In regard to this present post on the "6,000 year old earth", I had been reading a series of articles by Creationists trying to make their case by citing scientists (without credentials) that dispute what I thought was indisputable Radio Carbon Dating. I found this incredulous and know no one personally that buys into this 6,000 year old fairy tale (no offense). My own academic back round in the sciences
precludes me accepting the Creationists beliefs. It's gets down to that old saw that belief is paramount to religion. You either got it or ya don't. Creationist and Evolutionists have been at it a long time and neither is about to give an inch.
I feel the case for Evolution is overwhelming, but more importantly, that the case for this earths birth being eons ago even more overwhelming. This post will no more change your thinking on the subject any more than you will change mine.
So be it.

Originally Posted by Lon

No problem------------The health threads, philosophy and religion postings were generated by some articles that I have been reading, plus my insatiable curiosity about what people think and believe, and why.
In regard to this present post on the "6,000 year old earth", I had been reading a series of articles by Creationists trying to make their case by citing scientists (without credentials) that dispute what I thought was indisputable Radio Carbon Dating. I found this incredulous and know no one personally that buys into this 6,000 year old fairy tale (no offense). My own academic back round in the sciences
precludes me accepting the Creationists beliefs. It's gets down to that old saw that belief is paramount to religion. You either got it or ya don't. Creationist and Evolutionists have been at it a long time and neither is about to give an inch.
I feel the case for Evolution is overwhelming, but more importantly, that the case for this earths birth being eons ago even more overwhelming. This post will no more change your thinking on the subject any more than you will change mine.
So be it.

Sorry Lon, I was here but then smelled diesel and discovered about a 40 gallon leak of it, bummer, got it cleaned up though.

As far as creation goes- by faith I accept it. It's difficult to actually express my level of trust in my faith. Faith in my opinion, is believeing something without having evidence, I have to trust it is true. The concepts are almost the same, but differ slightly.

For me, man cant explain things to my satisfaction. The evolutionist says xxx fossil places its 'life' 12 million years ago- and growing up I heard and read these kinds of things, then one day I started reading some encyclopedias and discovered that the scientists argue back and forth constantly with opposing points of view even though they were using the same data? And it dawned on me that man isnt as smart as they think they are (me too).

I realize science is fallable, and later on I realized man lies to prove his own point very often- evolution, despite the hubbub about 'precision scientific data collection methods' still cant agree on what it means half the time. Evolution, has an agenda, and it has backers and those backers run the money that grants education programs to scientists. It's all over in the grant community what to study to get the grant bucks- and even what results they want you to come up with.

There is no accurate method to date a fossil, period.

I wish I could find the link, and the quote from a canadian archeologist who sometime in the mid 80's at a huge scientific seminar blew the doors off radio carbon dating (carbon 14 dating) by exposing the 'data that was left out' of the dating of different fossils in a bunch of studies that were then being flooded into the archeology data system. Basicly they data testors were not doing it blind or double blind, and they were also doing multiple tests (for accuracy) and they purposely left out any data that did not support the conclusion, and he sited specific data that was left out with a huge range of aged dates- the majority fo the dates in one study as I recall were in the 4000 year range, but only three date ranges were selected in the final study- which were billions of years from the majority of the tests data. But that didnt fit the outcome expected so they just left it out.

My love of God, and the accuracy of the bible proved out in my life, makes me give far more credibilty to it than to a scientist that falls victim to his own bias and hi pocket book everytime. For me, the bible has become a guidebook, and when I follow those principles mentioned then exactly whats promised is given and I find truth in that. It's far easier to trust something thats been proven than to trust in a field of study thats corrupt.

The date that I posted above comes from a study of the lineage fo the biblical record mixed with historical landmarks that tie in the dates of recorded occurances in time. For instance we know the agesof the men as recorded in scritpture, what the authtors of the book I read did was trace thos eback in a time line and establish a starting point. I trust in the accuracy of th ebible well enough to get that fine of a ball park estimate-

Most folks would just say yer crazy Jester- and to some I am, but I'll tell you one thing, man lies and so far God hasnt lied to me yet.

Honestly I still find it difficult to accept that the earth is this young (6000), my mind has a difficult time grasping that, but in the other end my mind has a difficult time grasping eternity too.

I have two other reason why I belive we were created... the first being that all aroudn me there is a constant of cause and effect, where was this act of evolution first caused?

Second- The further out we see in the universe it keeps getting larger. And conversely the smaller we can see, it just keeps getting smaller, more complicated. So far my experience is that the what was created is degrading and not evolving into higher anything- the theory of evolution is backwards.

I of course am always trying to figure this out, much like you do. As far as changin my mind or me changing yours, im not interested in that at all. I respect you a lot Lon, your ideas are yours, I appreciate the way in which you dicsuss them.

Originally Posted by Jester

What data do you have to prove this statement? What records do you have that suggest the Sumerians or Myans told this story first?

It's easy to find jess just read about their cultures it's not unknown of something i've invented........ it's written in stone