oceanz wrote on Dec 15^th, 2007 at 8:14am:

Quote:  I don't see how anybody can be an atheist and live with themselves? Agnosticism I can unserstand, since there's so much organized religeon in the world. It's hard to trust one faith. But at least they believe in a life after this one. If you're putting your beliefs in atheism, you're basically saying "My life has no purpose, I've got one life, then nothing at all. I'm gonna do the best I can and (not) live with it" Buddhism would be closer to my belief  system at present but I love the idea of Christianity... this love of Chistianity was supported by Sunday school and Bible studies as a kid insisted upon by my Catholic mother. I think the reality of God/Jesus is based more on ones own perceptions than actual proof that  God/Jesus ever existed at all. Evolution gets in the way of this for me. Dinosaurs.!

I can see that a few ppl, Christians here, who have a problem reconciling the existence of Dinosaurs / evolution, with a creation by God.

For myself, this is not a problem.

I firmly believe in creation, and i believe in a 'Young Earth'.



The only real problem is that, today, there is a lack of awareness, among Christians, of the overwhelming evidence, and information, which supports a creation, and a young earth.

The ungodly [God deniers] have been very successful in suppressing much of this information, TRUTH.

The free dissemination of information on the net today, has been able to reveal much of this suppressed information.





Before you dismiss this assertion [above], please, may i suggest you view the video seminars of Kent Hovind,

Go to....

http://www.drdino.com/downloads.php

Select, 'Seminars Video', then click, Display.

If you hold the mouse over the links which appear, they will reveal links to, Hi or Lo definition d/loads in wmv format.

I got the Lo definition videos, and they view ok for me.


Each video seminar is about 2 hrs long!
....but these presentations by Hovind are quite entertaining, and they are very informative.

Just watch the first one, The Age of the Earth, before deciding on viewing the others.




In watching these video seminars, i was not disappointed.

Any devout Christians who watch these video seminars, may, or may not, be convinced by Hovind's arguments, and the evidence he presents,
but they will not be disappointed, or bored!

I think that might be worthy of a new thread Yadda.

freediver wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2008 at 4:39pm:

I think that might be worthy of a new thread Yadda.

freediver, I am always behind the times on these forums.


Please, can you move my post to a new thread, or must i do this myself?

Done. Please change the title of your post.

Done alright..like a dodo.

Shirley you can't be serious?

2 hours long !!!!!!!!!  Can you put your precis of it here please ?

Got to be able to put forward an idea in 10 mins. MAX.

It is a waste of time Sprint, it is just bible literalism, very silly stuff.
When Islam try and justify ancient texts as literal, we deride their foolishness, we cannot lower the bar for christianity.

Most christians are past needing to make absurd claims to justify their faith, but not all.

Quote:

overwhelming evidence, and information, which supports a creation, and a young earth.

;D ;D ;D

...and again,

;D ;D ;D

;D ;D ;D, indeed Jordan.
How many people have overwhelming evidence that a magician can make a train disappear?

Unfortunately, the standards of evidence required to appear overwhelming, to some, is frightfully underwhelming, to most.

You just show some dog-dang respec' you hear Mozz? And less of that musicians and trains. Next thang you'll be spouting off about carbon dating and sich like.

Where do you read about carbon dating in the Bible? If it ain't in the Bible, it cain't be true, and it must be the work of the devil.

YOU GO READ YOUR BIBLE NOW, BOY.

I don't see how anybody can be an atheist and live with themselves?
Agnosticism I can unserstand, since there's so much organized religeon in the world. It's hard to trust one faith.
But at least they believe in a life after this one.
If you're putting your beliefs in atheism, you're basically saying "My life has no purpose, I've got one life, then nothing at all. I'm gonna do the best I can and (not) live with it"

Where the hell did this quote come from.?? The above shows oceanZ' reply, but who said the first bit?

Yadda wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2008 at 4:36pm:

The only real problem is that, today, there is a lack of awareness, among Christians, of the overwhelming evidence, and information, which supports a creation, and a young earth.

There is no such evidence, in fact radiometric dating has shown rocks to be as old as 4.5 billion years.  I'm not talking about carbon dating (a limited form of radiometric dating used for organic material).

A few quotes from Martin Luther, the father of Protestantism:

Reason is the Devil's greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil's appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom ... Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism... She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets.
Martin Luther, Erlangen Edition v. 16, pp. 142-148

People gave ear to an upstart astrologer [Copernicus] who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred scripture tells us [Joshua 10:13] that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth.
Martin Luther, "Works," Volume 22, c. 1543


Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God.
- Martin Luther

At least in the 15th Century, they were honest about it.

muso wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 9:12am:

At least in the 15th Century, they were honest about it.

True, but religion must protect itself from other ideas if it is to spread successfully.

locutius wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 9:03am:

I don't see how anybody can be an atheist and live with themselves? Agnosticism I can unserstand, since there's so much organized religeon in the world. It's hard to trust one faith. But at least they believe in a life after this one. If you're putting your beliefs in atheism, you're basically saying "My life has no purpose, I've got one life, then nothing at all. I'm gonna do the best I can and (not) live with it" Where the hell did this quote come from.?? The above shows oceanZ' reply, but who said the first bit?

It's from Labor man. Follow the link at the top of the quote.

Kytro wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 9:08am:

Yadda wrote on Oct 23rd, 2008 at 4:36pm: The only real problem is that, today, there is a lack of awareness, among Christians, of the overwhelming evidence, and information, which supports a creation, and a young earth. There is no such evidence, in fact radiometric dating has shown rocks to be as old as 4.5 billion years.  I'm not talking about carbon dating (a limited form of radiometric dating used for organic material).

Yes. You can read about radiometric dating here:

http://www.allaboutcreation.org/Radiometric-Dating.htm

It's not worth arguing.  Christianity Inc has a canned answer for everything.

Can I stop digging dad?

Stop whinging jesus, and just keep planting those dinosaur bones. ::)

Kytro wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 9:08am:

Yadda wrote on Oct 23rd, 2008 at 4:36pm: The only real problem is that, today, there is a lack of awareness, among Christians, of the overwhelming evidence, and information, which supports a creation, and a young earth. There is no such evidence, in fact radiometric dating has shown rocks to be as old as 4.5 billion years.  I'm not talking about carbon dating (a limited form of radiometric dating used for organic material).

Kryto,

Are you absolutely sure about that???

On what basis is radiometric dating calibrated?

And how do we know that such calibration is accurate?

How???

Do you know that, can you state, that you are sure that the environmental influences [i.e. this earth's atmosphere, and its shielding influence] used to determine / calibrate such dating today, has never changed,  .....in 'billions' of years?
:D

+++++


Consider the evidence of this real scientist, who tested the geologic dating system, which science depends on today,
...this person found it wanting.

In June of 1992, Dr Austin collected a 7-kg (15-lb) block of dacite from high on the lava dome......
The laboratory was not told that the specimen came from the lava dome at Mount St Helens and was only 10 years old.
.....the [dating] results ranged from 340,000 to 2.8 million years! Why?
.....the results from the different samples of the *same rock* disagree with each other.
It is clear that radioisotope dating is not....proof for millions of years of Earth history.
When the method is tested on rocks of known age, it fails miserably.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i3/radiodating.asp


Google,
fossil dating a fraud
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=fossil+dating+a+fraud&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Yadda wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 1:13pm:

Kryto, Are you absolutely sure about that??? On what basis is radiometric dating calibrated? And how do we know that such calibration is accurate? How???

I'm sure in so far as I understand the process.  I am not by any means an expert.  

However, one of the most established methods is Uranium-lead dating.

From wiki:
Uranium-lead is one of the oldest and most refined radiometric dating schemes, with a routine age range of about 1 million years to over 4.5 billion years, and with routine precisions in the 0.1-1 percent range.[1] The method relies on the coupled chronometer provided by the decay of 238U to 206Pb, with a half-life of 4.47 billion years and 235U to 207Pb, with a half-life of 704 million years. This decay occurs through a series of alpha decays, of which 238 U undergoes seven total alpha decays whereas 235U only experiences six alpha decays.[2] This technique has played a fundamental role in determining the age of the Earth.


Yadda wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 1:13pm:

Do you know that, can you state, that you are sure that the environmental influences [i.e. this earth's atmosphere, and its shielding influence] used to determine / calibrate such dating today, has never changed,  .....in 'billions' of years? :D +++++

The particular weakness you are referring to are based on Carbon-Dating.

from Wiki:
The rate of creation of carbon-14 appears to be roughly constant, as cross-checks of carbon-14 dating with other dating methods show it gives consistent results. However, local eruptions of volcanoes or other events that give off large amounts of carbon dioxide can reduce local concentrations of carbon-14 and give inaccurate dates. The releases of carbon dioxide into the biosphere as a consequence of industrialization have also depressed the proportion of carbon-14 by a few percent; conversely, the amount of carbon-14 was increased by above-ground nuclear bomb tests that were conducted into the early 1960s. Also, an increase in the solar wind or the earth's magnetic field above the current value would depress the amount of carbon-14 created in the atmosphere. These effects are corrected for by the calibration of the radiocarbon dating scale.



Yadda wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 1:13pm:

Consider the evidence of this real scientist, who tested the geologic dating system, which science depends on today, ...this person found it wanting. In June of 1992, Dr Austin collected a 7-kg (15-lb) block of dacite from high on the lava dome...... The laboratory was not told that the specimen came from the lava dome at Mount St Helens and was only 10 years old. .....the [dating] results ranged from 340,000 to 2.8 million years! Why? .....the results from the different samples of the *same rock* disagree with each other. It is clear that radioisotope dating is not....proof for millions of years of Earth history. When the method is tested on rocks of known age, it fails miserably. http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i3/radiodating.asp

I'm pretty certain the lab that did the measuring cannot accurately measure sample less than 2 million years old.  Also the samples were not homogeneous which could invalidate the results.

Yadda wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 1:13pm:

In June of 1992, Dr Austin collected a 7-kg (15-lb) block of dacite from high on the lava dome......

Yadda - That's complete nonsense. You Young Earth Creationists have no idea. In fact almost as little idea as the Old Earth Creationists, and as for Muslims, well I fart in their general direction. You're obviously not interpreting the Bible right. You see, it says in Genesis:

"I am the Alpha and the Omega"

That means that God is the beginning and end of time. All views that we have of time are merely an illusion. Only we Now Earth Creationists are correct.

The Earth was actually created 3 seconds ago. Everything that you have in your memory was put there by the Lord (Blessed be his cotton socks) and all this talk of 1992 was planted by the Devil (erm cursed be his ....whatever)

What PROOOOF DO you have that you are right?  You have none.  I have all the proof I need in Scripture.

muso wrote on Oct 24^th, 2008 at 1:54pm:

Yadda wrote on Oct 24th, 2008 at 1:13pm: In June of 1992, Dr Austin collected a 7-kg (15-lb) block of dacite from high on the lava dome...... Yadda - That's complete nonsense. You Young Earth Creationists have no idea. In fact almost as little idea as the Old Earth Creationists, and as for Muslims, well I fart in their general direction. You're obviously not interpreting the Bible right. You see, it says in Genesis: "I am the Alpha and the Omega" That means that God is the beginning and end of time. All views that we have of time are merely an illusion. Only we Now Earth Creationists are correct. The Earth was actually created 3 seconds ago. Everything that you have in your memory was put there by the Lord (Blessed be his cotton socks) and all this talk of 1992 was planted by the Devil (erm cursed be his ....whatever) What PROOOOF DO you have that you are right?  You have none.  I have all the proof I need in Scripture.

muso,

LOL

Whatever you say.