The First Human Attack on the Word of God

[Bracket]

Warrior

Here's the thing. Can you give irrefutable proof that it can be very, and regularily, inaccurate? You can't, because everyone who has brought this idea forward has never brought forward any evidence that it is reguiarly inaccurate. Infact, current understanding of the history of life is most likely close to the truth because it is based on repeated and careful testing and consideration of data, this is not true for the people who claim it's inaccuracy. Repeated testing of multiple specimens have shown that it is actually extremely accurate.

[The Warrior]

Bracket....I will search for your question. Although I do not think the idea is that hard to grasp...at least not to me. You state "repeated testing of multiple specimens have shown that it is actually extemely accurate". How is that possible? Can you show me something a million years old that is FACT. NO. You mean they have mutliple specimens from the same period of time....and using this carbon dating method...they come up with the same results? That is still using assumptions. You have to understand that carbon reacts differently in different enivironments. Have these been taken into account? Do they have a day by day record of the surrounding environment over the past million years? What exactly is it going to take for you to understand that the dating process is a theory? I am not talking about how carbon breaks down under X conditions....I am talking about how carbon breaks down under X Y Z conditions. And what if X = Y or what if there is a 4th unknown condition. All I am saying is that there are too many unknowns to say this is a fact that something is a million years old. But fine....I will drudge up all kinds of "evidence" for you.

---

Bracket...here is the first one I have found....which basically states that carbon dating past 50,000 years is inaccurate. I want you all to understand that I am not saying the universe is 6,000 years old....nor am I saying that it is billions of years old. All I am saying is that carbon dating is a theory.

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/carbon.html

---

LAST BUT NOT LEAST....LET ME SAY THIS.....GOD IS THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA. HE HAS BEEN HERE FROM THE BEGINNING. I DON'T CLAIM TO KNOW WHEN THAT WAS OR HOW IT IS SO...ONLY THAT IT IS. NO-ONE CAN REALLY IMAGINE THIS TRULY....IT JUST IS. PERIOD.

ALL I AM SAYING IS THAT THE ARGUMENT THAT GOD DOESN'T EXIST....USING THE BIBLE AND DINOSAURS AS THE SOLE REASON IS A BUNCH OF BS...BECAUSE THE THEORY IS FLAWED.

---

OK....BRACKET AND DRBLOW.....

Here is a great article....getting to the heart of my point. Please read.

http://contenderministries.org/evolution/carbon14.php

[Bracket]

Warrior

Once again, that doesn't give any facts.

---

(09-25-2009 06:24 PM)The Warrior Wrote:  Here is a great article....getting to the heart of my point. Please read.

http://contenderministries.org/evolution/carbon14.php

That still doesn't give much.

[The Warrior]

What about this do you not understand? I have handed you everything on a silver platter. I think you don't want to understand.

---

ok Bracket....lets do it this way.....

Let me reverse this....how exactly are these statements about inaccuracy wrong? I want you to give me a scientific statement from a reliable source that states that this is 100% accurate in all scenarios. Then I want you to give me this in multiple forms. Good grief....you are really testing my patience here. Just friggin admit that it isn't completely accurate. Even the inventor of carbon dating admits it!

---

I am not asking you to say that Bible dating is correct....only that carbon dating isn't exactly accurate when looked at ... in comparison to things supposedly millions of years old. If you refuse to accept this...then you are biased and throwing out data which doesn't back up your beliefs.

[Bracket]

I never said i don't understand it. They don't get into specifics. How long are these periods that change the process? How much of a discrepency do they cause? What about the other forms of dating, have they been altered as well?

I never said it was 100% accurate but the majority of it is. Infact, it's correct about 70% of the time.

[The Warrior]

Bracket....they can't get into specifics anymore than you or I can....because they don't know. Using common sense I would estimate the discrepancy to be between 50,000 to millions of years....with the given data. I haven't looked at other forms of dating but I would say you would have the same problems. You don't have any evidence that is for a Fact a million years old....so there is no million year old reference point no matter what model you use. Perhaps some of these models are correct...please don't get me wrong....it is just that it is still theory at this point.

I would think the 70% accuracy is for items in the past 50,000 years. But for something to be Fact it has to 100% not 70%....and please note that I am giving possible accuracy out to 50,000 years...way past what some biblical scholars claim.

[drblow]

You have raised a few interesting points about carbon dating that I did not know. It may be that in some cases it is not as accurate as previously thought, however it appears that the article you linked to only doubts its accuracy beyond 150 million years, am I right?

Of course, there can be very little in the world that is 100% reliable, and science is the same. Mathematics can be 100% sometimes, but science relies on experimentation, observation and notation of findings. As Bracket says, carbon dating is under constant review, and the reliablility of samples has been pretty constant throughout the years.

There are other, newer methods of dating too ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric...g_methods. NOt all are applicable to fossils or organic material, but some are used to determine the age of rock samples and geological formations. Most of the world is agreed that the earth is approx 4.5 billion years old.

The article you linked to above does raise some interesting points aswell. But using the biblical flood as some kind of reference when discussing geological or environmental facts is somewhat of a strange argument. You cannot use the flood as a reference, as it cannot be proven that it happened - especially when it is contained in the very same book of the bible that professes the planet to be 6000 years old!

It also attempts to argue that dating is inaccurate because it relies on assumptions, but does so by making some even wilder assumptions! There is no clear data on any increase or decrease in the presence of C14 in the atmosphere, and it gives a few possible reasons including the atomic bombs of the 20th century??!! That is hardly going to affect the dating of fossils from 69 million years ago.

The existence of dinosaurs is not necessarily an argument that God doesn't exist. I don't think either myself or Bracket have claimed as such. What it does show is that parts of the bible are not literally true. I think that it is fair to say that much of the Christian church had accepted this, and that the creationists are in the minority.

Christians seem to panic a little when faced with the probability that the bible is not actually the literal word of god, and that every word of it is some kind of sacred truth. Many religions around the world accept that their ancient scriptures are metaphorical, and it does not seem to conflict with people's faith.

For me personally, I just find this creationist museum to be in very poor taste. Because it is presenting a biased, illogical view of science, based on very spurious assumptions and aimed at vulnerable, impressionable children who should at least be given the biblical right of freewill to choose their own path, without being bombarded with religious brainwashing from their early years.

[The Warrior]

The Creationist museum....well I didn't agree with it on some points and disagree on others, which I posted earlier. However, most parents that take their children there are Christians and they are already influencing their children to believe in this manner. I would like to state that given the fact that the ten commandments and prayers have been taken out of schools...it is nice to have a museum dedicated to God.

However, I really do not believe that the world is only 6,000 years old. Honestly I think the Christians that believe that are using the Bible as more of a history book than the word of God. In my opinion...God never intended us to argue about this.

drblow....one of the links does state the 150 million years....and another states 50,000 years.

Now I am going to throw a theory out there...that I haven't read but makes sense to me. If possibly...the dinosaurs were killed by a meteor....and that the explosion covered the earth and caused the ice age....it seems to reason that the event would have altered C14.

Also....if the Noah flood was true (which I believe it is)...you will find from the links I attached that C14 reacts differently to items under water. (and even if you don't believe in Noah...ice is water...H2O...so dinosaurs trapped in ice would have different C14)

[Graveyard Hound]

What were they thinking? Baffles me that folks come up with some notions and pronouncements as if they had just finished a 1-1 discussion with the Almighty.