How Old is the Earth?

[DeafVeggie]

Job 40

That's a chapter #. What's the verse? All of it?

~DV

 

[DeafVeggie]

Please show me a verse if any people are there in outer space.

You didn't understand me, again! Please re-read my question carefully! I will rephrase it just for your basic reading level sake so here you go:

You said, "The Bible teaches us that the humanity is here on the earth. There is NO people in outer space.". Ok, show me the verse!

~DV

 

[VamPyroX]

I know how you feel about how old the Earth is. According to scientists, Earth is billions of years old. According to the Bible, Earth is thousands of years old.

Who's telling the truth? So far, science has proven many things while the Bible has proven nothing but individual hand-written stories by various authors who either made up the story or wrote what they saw in their own imaginative words.

 

[Cheri]

I will rephrase it just for your basic reading level sake so here you go:~DV

Was that necessary to say that? Most of us have misunderstood from time to time. No body is perfect. He just misunderstood your post.

 

[Codger]

I know how you feel about how old the Earth is. According to scientists, Earth is billions of years old. According to the Bible, Earth is thousands of years old.

Who's telling the truth? So far, science has proven many things while the Bible has proven nothing but individual hand-written stories by various authors who either made up the story or wrote what they saw in their own imaginative words.

The Biblical account of history has been proven to be more accurate than a lot of scientific and scholarly supposition. Egyptology is one example:

"Egypt is in a class all by herself in the study of archaeology and ancient civilizations. As we shall soon see, I believe that the entire premise of history is founded on a series of false interpretations of early Egyptian historical accounts.

The foundation of all ancient historical understanding is based on two seemingly different historical streams of information. The first is found largely in the Old Testament, and other extra-biblical Jewish commentaries and writings. These are, obviously, written from the perspective of the ancient Israelites. The other historical body of information is from the perspective of the ancient Egyptians. The Egyptian accounts are widely dispersed through ancient lists of kings and priests, historical monuments, inscriptions, stelae, tombs, & pyramids. Historical records & archaeological information from ancient Egypt are extensive & well documented.

The conflict that has raged from the beginning is the fact that the two accounts are almost completely contradictory. The parallel chronological time-lines are uneven and chaotic. When there are dates that are seemingly well established in one history, the parallel account doesn't match up at all. The conclusion reached by the majority of scholars is that the evidence is saying that one or the other account must be fictional, or riddled with errors.

For example, one Egyptian document will speak of a certain historical account — say a famous battle with a people that sound very much like the Israelites; but the Bible says that during that period, there was peace. Or the Bible will describe a certain tribal settlement during a very specific time period, while the archaeological records show no hint of any Israelite occupation in that strata.

Another seeming contradiction is found in Old Testament prophecy. In both Jeremiah and Ezekiel, we have prophecies that say that Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon would go to war with Egypt; yet in the Egyptian accounts, there is apparently no record of such an invasion. And what of the Exodus account — the foundation of the Jewish faith?

The Bible says that Egypt was completely and incontrovertibly decimated through 10 cataclysmic plagues. Exodus further states that the entire Egyptian army and their god-king, the Pharaoh, drowned when the waIls of the red sea collapsed after the fleeing Israelites had escaped. Yet the Egyptologists uniformly state that there is no Egyptian historical record of such a catastrophe. How can this be?

Because of the widespread dissemination of these apparent historical inconsistencies and discrepancies, the overwhelming majority of teachers, scientists, linguistics experts, archaeology professors, and scholars of every discipline believe the Egyptian accounts are accurate; and because these secular professionals are predisposed to reject the staggering and often miraculous claims of the Bible (and thereby rid themselves of the conviction of the Holy Spirit that is seeking to point them to the truth), these Egyptian historical records have been endorsed and practically canonized by modern man. Conversely, the 'religious' accounts from the same period (as recorded in the Old Testament), have been relegated to the trash bin as unscientific and contradictory legend and myth.

The vehicle that has seemingly accomplished this overwhelming denial of the truth of ancient history as documented in the Bible has been Egypt. In fact, Egyptology is (arguably) the largest single field of specialization in the study of antiquities. The study of the contradictions alone has baffled students of both historical time-lines for ages. How ironic that the explanation for all of these anomalies was originally published over 40 years ago; and yet the same scholars who have rejected the historicity of the scriptures have rejected the truth of why these seeming contradictions exist.

Writer David Fry has noted that 3 things had to occur for the pyramid age to begin: They needed a technical mastermind to design them, there had to be a social need (or possibly a crisis) that was intense enough to unify the people into a common goal, and most importantly, the royal family had to have the wealth to finance such an undertaking.

Egyptian historical accounts provide part of the picture, but logic and familiarity with the scriptures will help us to synchronize the time with the Biblical accounts. The Egyptian histories specify that the first pyramid was designed by Egypt's first Grand Vizier. A very wise man named Imhotep, his name appears in the archaeological records on the pedestal of a statue in the court of the step pyramid (the first pyramid). According to most authorities, this Imhotep came to power under Pharaoh Zoser just before a great 7-year famine. 4. The accounts say that this famine occurred because the Nile failed to rise.

The Egyptian Stele of the Famine further states that the Pharaoh asked Imhotep how to deal with the problem of the famine. Other historians associate Imhotep with Pathotep who was also the Grand Vizier of Egypt during ancient times. They are very likely one and the same for the second name simply adds the Egyptian god name 'path' or 'ptah' to the individual’s name.

The interesting thing about Imhotep/Pathotep is that the Egyptian accounts say he was "a foreigner," who lived to be 110. The famous Egyptologist James Breasted wrote that "The success of Zoser's efforts was perhaps in part due to the counsel of the great wise-man, Imhotep, who was one of his chief advisers. In priestly wisdom...and architecture, this remarkable figure...was never forgotten." 5. The historical records show that Imhotep was among the most beloved leaders in all of Egyptian history. He was so favored by Pharaoh himself that the king gave him the daughter of the high priest of Heliopolis to be his wife.

According to another of Imhotep's biographers, one of his greatest political achievements was the inauguration of the first income tax in Egypt. She writes that this "...income tax in Egypt was one-fifth of the harvest and of the increase of cattle, plus several months of labor each year upon great public works by all able bodied men." 6. Yet another historian writes that,

"The Egyptians ascribed the invention of the art of building with stone to Imhotep, Vizier and architect of King Zoser, who reigned about 50 years before the building of the great pyramid... The Egyptians described Imhotep as a sort of Leonardo da Vinci of Egypt, mathematician, scientist, engineer, and architect." 7.

This statement clearly puts Imhotep in the time of the building of the first pyramid. Although there is a tremendous body of additional evidence about Imhotep/Pathotep, by now it should be obvious that Imhotep was, indeed, the son of Jacob described in the Bible as JOSEPH.

The scriptures say that Joseph came to prominence in Pharaoh's court by interpreting a startling & vivid prophetic dream of the king. The prophetic dream forecast a great 7-year famine that was to fall on Egypt. Joseph & Imhotep both came to power as a result of his counsel to the Pharaoh amidst a great 7-year famine.

The Egyptian records show Imhotep created the first income tax and that it was "one-fifth." The book of Genesis says that income tax came to Egypt because "...Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part...." 8.

The Egyptian inscriptions show that Imhotep/Pathotep was the first Grand Vizier of Egypt while the Genesis record says that Pharaoh set Joseph "...over all the land of Egypt" and said to him "...only in the throne will I be greater than thou." 9.

Imhotep/Pathotep's biographers say he "...was not a native Egyptian, " 10. while the Bible also clearly shows that Joseph was not an Egyptian, but a Hebrew. The Egyptian documents say that Imhotep/ Pathotep lived to be 110. Genesis says that "...Joseph died, being an hundred and ten years old...." 11. The Egyptian accounts say that Pharaoh held Imhotep in such high esteem that he gave him the daughter of the high priest of Heliopolis as his wife. The Bible says Pharaoh gave Joseph “Asenath the daughter of Potipherah priest of On.” 12. The city of On was also known as Heliopolis.

There are many, many more compelling reasons to connect the two. Why have I gone into such detail? Because the conventional historical chronology put forth by authorities everywhere says that Joseph could not possibly be Imhotep because they are sure that they lived about 600 to 700 years apart. But did they?"

 

[Codger]

continued

Archaeologists, linguists, paleontologists, and practically every other form of science associated with antiquarian research has been affected by this corruption of our historical perceptions. The problem is simple: in one era of the Egyptian account, the history would describe a great war, but in the parallel account in the Bible, there was a time of peace. We demonstrated how the Egyptian inscriptions provided multiple names for the various dynastic kings, and these names were placed consecutively in the kings-list when actually only one king was in view. This caused the chronology to be non-synchronized with the Biblical account by approximately the same time period — anywhere from 400 to 700 years.

The error has compounded itself because the stature of significant numbers of scholars is now at stake. Thus, when an honest researcher recognizes the problem of the conventional chronology, he or she is “encouraged” to rethink his findings to force them to conform to the long standing error in order to protect vested career interests. To make matters worse, studies of adjacent cultural time-lines such as the Persian, Assyrian, Grecian, and Hittite have all synchronized their historical accounts to conform to the "established" Egyptian time-lines — thus throwing practically all ancient accounts except the Hebrew into a confusing inconsistency.

Immanuel Velikovsky (1895-1980) discovered the error and in a herculean effort at historical revisionism, reconstructed the timelines of Egypt, Persia, Babylon, Greece, Mycenae, and many more. Velikovsky's historical revisionist books were entitled Ages In Chaos, The Peoples Of The Sea, Ramses II And His Time, Oedipus and Akhenaton, The Assyrian Conquest, and The Dark Age Of Greece, to name a few.

The beauty of his work is that it unmasked the mechanism that has been used to distort the historical reality of the Biblical account. It also allows us to see how the secular and pagan accounts, once properly re-synchronized, validate the Holy Bible. In our last issue of CURRENTS, we showed how the beloved Egyptian figure Imhotep was actually Joseph — the son of Jacob whose life is exquisitely described in the book of Genesis. As we move past Joseph & Imhotep’s time in our research, we expect to find similarly exciting “matches” in the two historical time-lines.

Indeed, the re-synchronization of historical events in the two parallel accounts actually becomes more and more difficult to simply contrive some sort of connection. If the parallel accounts continue to match up, the odds of it being coincidental go off the scale. In other words, if Joseph was indeed Pharaoh Zoser's Grand Vizier Imhotep, then the events that occurred in the next generation after Joseph must also line up with the events that occurred in the next generation after Imhotep.

Therefore, as these historical accounts are reconstructed, and the various events continue to match, the chances of the resynchronized histories coinciding by accident changes exponentially. In short, each additional generation with a likely historical corollary proves the revisionist theory correct a thousand times over.

The scriptures tell how, after the time of Joseph, another Pharaoh came to power that did not honor Joseph or his descendants in Egypt — to say nothing of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The Hebrews fell into slavery, and after many years, God delivered them through Moses amid many miraculously generated plagues. This account is the foundation of the Hebrew religion for it marks the deliverance from slavery for the Israelites and the destruction of their Egyptian oppressors.

Secular historians tell us that there is no evidence that the Exodus from Egypt ever took place. The Bible says that Egypt was horribly judged and practically destroyed as a nation. In a very detailed account, the Bible informs us that God sent tremendous plagues and disaster upon the land; yet the conventional historians say there is no trace of such a cataclysm.

However, utilizing Velikovky's time-line revisions, we find a radically different scenario. The truth is, at the time of the Exodus and the destruction of Egypt through the plagues sent by God, there was an Egyptian writer named Ipuwer. Writing in the early media of papyrus, this ancient Egyptian recorded his experience of a time when Egypt was decimated through strange plagues; but the "scholars" have dismissed any connection between the two because they were already convinced that the Exodus never happened!

Describing the terrible cataclysm that struck Egypt, Ipuwer's papyrus tells us that "...Plague is throughout the land. Blood is…everywhere." 1. At the same time, the book of Exodus says "...there was blood throughout all the land." 2. Ipuwer's papyrus says "The River Is Blood" 3. while the associated biblical account said "All the waters that were in the river were turned to blood." 4.

Detail after detail matches up between the ancient Egyptian’s words and the Biblical account found in the Hebrew work known as Exodus. Ipuwer writes "Behold, cattle are left to stray" 5. while the Bible says "...he that regarded not the word of the Lord left his cattle in the field." 6. Ipuwer said the catastrophe was so great that "He who places his brother in the ground is everywhere," 7. while the Exodus account said "...there was not a house where there was not one dead." 8.

The simple fact is, the Ipuwer papyrus is an eyewitness account of the Passover that was recorded from the Egyptian point of view. Incredibly, the Exodus from Egypt that followed the amazing story of the Passover is also recorded in an Egyptian historical inscription.

At the border of Egypt and Palestine is the shrine of El-Arish. Chiseled in stone, it is an Egyptian monument describing a great catastrophe in which the king of Egypt died. The Egyptian text describes a time of great darkness when "The land was in great affliction. Evil fell on this earth...It was a great upheaval in the residence...nobody left the palace...neither the men nor the gods could see the faces of their next."9.

The same aspect of the El-Arish account is described in the book of Exodus it says "...and there was a thick darkness in all the land of Egypt three days; They saw not one another, neither rose any from his place...." 10. The similarities continue from the stone inscription to the Biblical tale — yet the major media has never told the public of these discoveries, and the archeological community has remained quiet concerning the suppression of the facts in this most important discovery. And there is more.

The Egyptian El-Arish inscription goes on to tell how the Pharaoh perished in a "whirlpool" while fighting against "evil-doers." It says "His majesty leapt into the so-called Place of the Whirlpool." 11.

This is simply astonishing — to say nothing of infuriating. After all, here is a secular historical artifact that plainly confirms that the Exodus occurred — right down to the detail of how the Pharaoh drowned, and yet the scholarly “community” has relegated this important record to obscurity. Why? Because it supports the truth of the Biblical account.

The inscription at El-Arish provides an incredibly important detail in that it actually names the location where the Pharaoh died. Amazingly, this Egyptian inscription gives us the same name that is found in the Holy Bible, and it confirms that this is, indeed, an Egyptian account of the Exodus. The stone shrine says "His Majesty [here words are missing] finds on this place called Pi-Kharoti." 12. The Exodus says "...the Egyptians pursued after them...and overtook them encamping by the sea, beside Pi-ha-hiroth." 13. Pi-Kharoti is Pi-Khiroth in the Hebrew text.

Because the establishment “scholars” are convinced that their historical time-lines are correct, they are equally convinced that the Bible cannot be historically accurate. Because of this intellectual bias, they simply discount these striking similarities because they believe the two accounts are, once again, centuries apart.

During the 18th dynasty in Egypt, the Kingdom was enjoying a rare period when the nation was ruled by a woman. Her name was Queen Hatshepsut, and she was the daughter of Pharaoh Thutmose I. Also known as Makere, this queen left inscriptions, bas-reliefs, and many statues of herself. On the walls of the Egyptian temple at Deir el Bahari is the story of a great journey that was undertaken by the feminine monarch "to the land of punt." 14. While historical accounts don't clearly identify where "punt" was, the temple accounts say it was "a blessed land" where "white men of a north-Semitic or Caucasian race" lived in a "glorious region of God's land." 15.

A further clue is given in the temple reliefs where Hatshepsut described how, in this great journey, she finally reached "the myrrh-terraces." 16. The scriptural corollary is in II Chronicles 9:11 where it says that the great king of Israel "...made of the algum trees terraces to the house of the Lord...."

This passage came from a period in Israel which the scholars tell us was about 700 years later than the inscriptions at Deir El Bahari. Oddly enough the accounts written in the Bible during this period in the history of Israel also tell the story of a great queen that came to visit the "glorious region of God's land."

That king was named Solomon, and the scriptures called his famous visitor The Queen of Sheba. There are no other accounts in the Bible of famous foreign queens that paid a royal visit to Israel, other than The Queen of Sheba. There are no other historical accounts in the Egyptian chronologies about a famous queen that went on trip to visit a grand foreign king other than Queen Hatshepsut, yet the scholars tell us Solomon & Hatshepsut were separated by — you guessed it — about 700Years.

 

[DeafVeggie]

I will rephrase it just for your basic reading level sake so here you go:
~DV

Was that necessary to say that? Most of us have misunderstood from time to time. No body is perfect. He just misunderstood your post.
Was that necessary to say that? Most of us have misunderstood from time to time. No body is perfect. He just misunderstood your post.

Couple of readers and I had some past problems with Askjo who jumped conculsions without finding the facts so Askjo just needs to slow down to read our postings carefully and then, give us the direct answers properly. Askjo didn't follow our advice so Askjo is doing it again! For example, follow the threads starting with this and you'll get the picture of who Askjo is. Enjoy!

~DV

 

[Codger]

Couple of readers and I had some past problems with Askjo who jumped conculsions without finding the facts so Askjo just needs to slow down to read our postings carefully and then, give us the direct answers properly. Askjo didn't follow our advice so Askjo is doing it again! For example, follow the threads starting with this and you'll get the picture of who Askjo is. Enjoy!

~DV

Yes, like Cheri pointed out, we all make mistakes and misread. In post 27 you showed us, you said that patents didn't start until the 1800's. You did not check the facts either.

"Copyright" was not invented until around 1800's....~DV

"The history of American copyright law originated with the introduction of the printing press to England in the late fifteenth century. As the number of presses grew, authorities sought to control the publication of books by granting printers a near monopoly on publishing in England. The Licensing Act of 1662 confirmed that monopoly and established a register of licensed books to be administered by the Stationers' Company, a group of printers with the authority to censor publications. The 1662 act lapsed in 1695 leading to a relaxation of government censorship, and in 1710 Parliament enacted the Statute of Anne to address the concerns of English booksellers and printers. The 1710 act established the principles of authors' ownership of copyright and a fixed term of protection of copyrighted works (fourteen years, and renewable for fourteen more if the author was alive upon expiration). The statute prevented a monopoly on the part of the booksellers and created a "public domain" for literature by limiting terms of copyright and by ensuring that once a work was purchased the copyright owner no longer had control over its use. While the statute did provide for an author's copyright, the benefit was minimal because in order to be paid for a work an author had to assign it to a bookseller or publisher.

Since the Statute of Anne almost three hundred years ago, U.S. law has been revised to broaden the scope of copyright, to change the term of copyright protection, and to address new technologies. For several years, the U.S. has considered and acted on copyright reform. The Canadian government is considering copyright reform as well.

1787: U.S. Constitution

According to Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution, "the Congress shall have power . . . to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."

http://arl.cni.org/info/frn/copy/timeline.html

 

[DeafVeggie]

Yes, like Cheri pointed out, we all make mistakes and misread. In post 27 you showed us, you said that patents didn't start until the 1800's. You did not check the facts either.
<snip>

<snip>
1787: U.S. Constitution
<snip>

I snipped your posting for a simple clarity....

Patents? I thought we were talking about Copyrights? Patents and Copyrights have their own different rulings.

You gave me the year of 1787 which was pretty close to what I said for the year of 1800's on my posting #27. What I should have said close to around 1800's. :|

Yes, I know readers do misread and posted differently. When I was grilling at Askjo on the previous this positing, Askjo just keep going off topics. I had to corralled him back to my basic question and nailed him to the point. Then, I know who Askjo is. Askjo is a great person to be here on AD and just need to slow down.

~DV

 

[Codger]

I snipped your posting for a simple clarity....

Patents? I thought we were talking about Copyrights? Patents and Copyrights have their own different rulings.

You gave me the year of 1787 which was pretty close to what I said for the year of 1800's on my posting #27. What I should have said close to around 1800's. :|

Yes, I know readers do misread and posted differently. When I was grilling at Askjo on the previous this positing, Askjo just keep going off topics. I had to corralled him back to my basic question and nailed him to the point. Then, I know who Askjo is. Askjo is a great person to be here on AD and just need to slow down.

~DV

Point taken. Patents in this case refers to what is now known as "Intellectual Property Law" (inclusive of copyright, trademark, design and utility patents). Originally it was a King's Patent or recognition of exclusive rights by the crown. It included land patents, copyrights, trademarks, inventions, and even the right to engage in a trade. Our constitution only dates to the 1700's. Patents (inclusive) originated MUCH earlier.

 

[netrox]

The Biblical account of history has been proven to be more accurate than a lot of scientific and scholarly supposition. Egyptology is one example:

It proves nothing about God's existence or any supernatural. Remember, the Bible has history but it doesn't mean that the supernatural occurred. The Bible has borrowed several mythological ideas as well. Take Gilgamesh for an example - Noah's Ark was clearly copied from an older myth, Gilgamesh.

I could easily say that God caused the Northridge earthquake because they were wicked. That proves nothing about God, it's a claim made by me and you have a choice to believe in me or not. The Bible is no exception - it's written by several people.

We have many fiction stories using historical facts.

-jeff

 

[Codger]

Many cultures have flood stories, including Chinese and Native American. None of these disprove the Biblical account.

I realize that many people do not believe the words of the Bible, and others also do not believe in God. I cannot prove to you the veracity of the Bible or the existance of God. I don't want or need to. And you would refute it anyway. That is your choice. But I am curious why unbelievers are drawn to discussions like this? Are you trying to prove to believers that God does NOT exist? Or still trying to convince yourself? I dunno.

 

[gnarlydorkette]

Omit all theological comments--

The Earth is 4.6 billion years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Earth

not 7,000 yr-old... How the hell do you explain the dinosaurs? The Panega? If you don't believe in the Panega/Supercontienent, then how do you account for those fossils that are same shape, same animals etc in South America AND Africa.

Think about it. The Egyptian Empire occured around 2,000 years ago... to reach the desert climate in Africa, it took a BILLION year. Africa was once a forest, vast forest. No way everything occurs at 7,000 years old.
It took EONS for the Himaylaya Mountains to be THAT tall. India was once an island but it slided slowly to the mainland and crash into Tibet (convergent boundary)... which explained the current landscape of sharp, edgy, tallest mountain range in the world.

CLIMATE, TEMPERATURE, AND TIME change the landscape.
California will be part of Alaska in hundreds of thousand years later. (500,000-ish yrs later). How do we know? The pattern and directions of our tectonic plates (the lands/continent). California's San Andreas Fault is a transform fault which means two plates slide in opposite directions... the west side of the Fault is sliding north (hence the state of California)... this is where we got our theory that the land formerly known as California will be Cali-Alaska.

The San Andreas Fault in California is an active transform boundary. The Pacific Plate (carrying the city of Los Angeles) is moving northwards with respect to the North American Plate.

Study your geology!


...Some bishop named James Ussher claimed the Earth is 6,006 years old based on the familyline in the Bible. (I just googled it up and it said 4,004 on many websites... I strongly disagree. I passed my anthropology and philosophy class which do cover this fact and I KNOW it is 6,006 yrs) *found a website said 6,000.. but still it is 6,006!)


Based on the scienific usage of radioactive (as somebody pointed it out but was swallowed by theological bicker by members) process of counting the half-life (Carbon) as it decay, we have found a rock that is approximate 4.3 billion years old in Greenland, thus the Earth must be roughly 4.6 to 4.3 billion years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay

(I put in the link for you to find support to my facts. I have learned them in my geology class... if you ever learn Geology, you will understand by applying your education)

 

[Askjo]

That's a chapter #. What's the verse? All of it?

~DV

Read this chapter and you will find there.

 

[Askjo]

You didn't understand me, again! Please re-read my question carefully! I will rephrase it just for your basic reading level sake so here you go:

You said, "The Bible teaches us that the humanity is here on the earth. There is NO people in outer space.". Ok, show me the verse!

~DV

I am sure you are aware of the story of Adam and Eve in the book of Genesis.

 

[Codger]

You need a refresher course. You cannot carbon date a rock. Do you have a source I can look at on this rock?

Carbon dating is a variety of radioactive dating which is applicable only to matter which was once living and presumed to be in equilibrium with the atmosphere, taking in carbon dioxide from the air for photosynthesis.

Cosmic ray protons blast nuclei in the upper atmosphere, producing neutrons which in turn bombard nitrogen, the major constituent of the atmosphere . This neutron bombardment produces the radioactive isotope carbon-14. The radioactive carbon-14 combines with oxygen to form carbon dioxide and is incorporated into the cycle of living things.

The carbon-14 forms at a rate which appears to be constant, so that by measuring the radioactive emissions from once-living matter and comparing its activity with the equilibrium level of living things, a measurement of the time elapsed can be made.

http://dating.3simple-r.com/carbon-dating.html

 

[netrox]

But I am curious why unbelievers are drawn to discussions like this? Are you trying to prove to believers that God does NOT exist? Or still trying to convince yourself? I dunno

It's simple - I don't want to believe in a fairy tale. Would you? Not understanding why you exist is not an excuse for believing in a fairy tale. I don't know the answers and I don't need to read a fairy tale and say, "It has answers!" It may have answers for you but don't impose your beliefs on us.

-jeff

 

[netrox]

You need a refresher course. You cannot carbon date a rock. Do you have a source I can look at on this rock?

You're right, you cannot do that and that's already known. Carbon dating only dates up to 60,000 years. But it's so convenient that creationists forgot to mention that potassium (and some metals) dating dates up to a billion years old!

-jeff

 

[Codger]

You're right, you cannot do that and that's already known. Carbon dating only dates up to 60,000 years. But it's so convenient that creationists forgot to mention that potassium (and some metals) dating dates up to a billion years old!

-jeff

Potassium argon method?

POTASSIUM-ARGON AND ARGON-ARGON DATING OF CRUSTAL ROCKS AND THE PROBLEM OF EXCESS ARGON
by Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D.

According to the assumptions foundational to potassium-argon (K-Ar) and argon-argon (Ar-Ar) dating of rocks, there should not be any daughter radiogenic argon (40Ar*) in rocks when they form. When measured, all 40Ar* in a rock is assumed to have been produced by in situ radioactive decay of 40K within the rock since it formed. However, it is well established that volcanic rocks (e.g. basalt) contain excess 40Ar*, that is, 40Ar which cannot be attributed to either atmospheric contamination or in situ radioactive decay of 40K.1 This excess 40Ar* represents primordial Ar carried from source areas in the earth's mantle by the parent magmas, is inherited by the resultant volcanic rocks, and thus has no age significance.

However, are all other rocks in the earth's crust also susceptible to "contamination" by excess 40Ar* emanating from the mantle? If so, then the K-Ar and Ar-Ar "dating" of crustal rocks would be similarly questionable.

When muscovite (a common mineral in crustal rocks) is heated to 740°-860°C under high Ar pressures for periods of 3 to 10.5 hours it absorbs significant quantities of Ar, producing K-Ar "ages" of up to 5 billion years, and the absorbed Ar is indistinguishable from radiogenic argon (40Ar*).2 In other experiments muscovite was synthesized from a colloidal gel under similar temperatures and Ar pressures, the resultant muscovite retaining up to 0.5 wt% Ar at 640°C and a vapor pressure of 4,000 atmospheres.3 This is approximately 2,500 times as much Ar as is found in natural muscovite. Thus under certain conditions Ar can be incorporated into minerals which are supposed to exclude Ar when they crystallize.

Because it is known that excess 40Ar* is carried from the mantle by plumes of mafic magmas up into the earth's crust, it is equally likely that much of the excess 40Ar* in crustal rocks could be primordial 40Ar. Thus, we have no way of knowing if any of the 40Ar* measured in crustal rocks has any age significance. Additional to the primordial 40Ar from the mantle is 40Ar* released from minerals and rocks during diagenesis and metamorphism, so that there is continual migration and circulation of both primordial 40Ar and 40Ar* in the crust which is reflected in their presence in CO2-rich natural gases. Therefore, when samples of crustal rocks are analyzed for K-Ar andAr-Ar "dating," one can never be sure that whatever 40Ar* is in the rocks is from in situ radioactive decay of 40K since their formation, or if some or all of it came from the mantle or from other crustal rocks and minerals. Thus all K-Ar and Ar-Ar "dates" of crustal rocks are questionable, as well as fossil "dates" calibrated by them.

 

[DeafVeggie]

Read this chapter and you will find there.

Ok, I'll study the whole chapter tonight.

~DV