Flood? World's Oldest Living Tree -- 9550 years old -- Discovered In Sweden

by skyking 48 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Perry

    For those of you who are amazed at the find of "68 million" year old T-Rex stinking, rotting, stretchy soft tissues, complete with hemeglobin and protein fragments that appear more suited for your grill rather than enshrined in an evolutists' ivory tower fortress, you might also enjoy looking at the hundreds of other artifacts that have been found that do not fit the standard Evolutionary Paradigm here:


  • Galileo
    Seriously though, I don't disagree with you, but I have a feeling that the only thing that
    kind of articulate acidity accomplishes it to make us feel happily vented. Scorn, though
    perhaps justified, often only serves to cement a believer's fundamentalism.

    I am sympathetic to that argument, which is why I reserve my scorn only for the most ignorant and closed minded of fundamentalists, with whom reasoning seems not to be an option. I have no sympathy for someone that in another thread called for atheists to be eradicated from universities "like the Nazi's". Ever since then whenever I see Perry's avatar I can't help but imagine him in clerical robes in the middle ages, pompously sentencing Galileo to house arrest for his godless science. He seems to be of that ilk.

    On the other hand, I have had many some lively discussions with others that are clearly devout, such as Burn, yet are also intelligent and reasonable people. In those instances, I have done my best to keep the acidity to a minimum. Besides, sometimes a little venting is necessary .

  • Alpaca

    The diamonds in the diamond study locked up carbon-14 that was available when the crystals formed. Diamonds take a very, very long time to decay back into graphite and in the meantime the carbon-14 happily sits there in the crystals.

    The diamond study means absolutely nothing!!!

    There are many overlapping radiometric dating methods used in conjunction with carbon-14 to create time brackets within which fossils, sedimentary rocks, and igneous rocks can be placed for dating purposes. The stratigraphic evidence in the Grand Canyon and elsewhere also shatter the creationist arguments that life on earth has only been here for a relatively short period of thousands or tens of thousands of years.

    I used to believe the creationist line but a thorough and honest examination of the evidence can lead to no other conclusion than the fact that all life has evoloved and that life on earth has been here for billions of years.

    Cheers to all (including you creationists-and I truly mean that),


  • inkling

    Dino soft tissue rebuttal: http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/dinosaur_blood_revisited.shtml

    and here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dinosaur/flesh.html

    and... Oh hell, all over the fraking internet!
    Do you even TRY to find the other side of the issue before spewing trite talking points?


  • inkling
    I reserve my scorn only for the most ignorant and closed minded of fundamentalists, with whom reasoning seems not to be an option.
    Besides, sometimes a little venting is necessary


  • FreeWilly
    So, the University of Georgia is technically wrong and "other" sources are right. Thanks for clearing that up. I will fire off an email to the University of Georgia and ask for a clarification.

    Bravo! Would you mind posting what you intend to ask as well as the reply?

  • inrainbows


    Inrainbows, some people take the tack to assume God is wrong first and then go on to learn about one thing or another.

    Yes, well, assuming that the Bible is true and the Qu'ran and Bhagadvita are not is presuppositonalistic. Science requires proof before something is accepted as right, be it Einstein's gravtitatinal lensing, Darwin's theory, Cold Fusion, etc..

    Christians take the opposite route; they assume God is right first and then go on to learn one thing or another.

    No YOU do that. Your defintions of belief are not the sole possible reresentations of Christianity. But any Christian who does that is by definition a presuppositonalistic. Next thing you're going to tell me is you're a member of the elect. LOL.

    It doesn't mean that I don't accept clear evidence of things that on first glance appears to be contrary to a literal reading of God's word.

    Yes you do, time and time again. Tell me, where is the Bible non-literal and how do you know?

    • The Flood?
    • Locusts with sulphur coloured breast-plates?
    • Isrealite soldiers taking virgin girls as war booty?
    Has it ever occured to you that this is the identical experience of born again Christians? They have personal knowledge of God and discount all other sources to one degree or another. It sounds like we are in agreement with this most basic process for determining truth.

    Yes Perry, but other religious people have contradictory personal experiences of various ideations of god, even of your own ideation of god, and you want me to believe you are right and they are wrong based upon nothing more than your say-so.

    Nice try, you still fail to differentiate yourself from the guy in a loin-cloth and a bone through his nose worshipping a rock because his personal experience of the divine leads him to do so.

    So, the University of Georgia is technically wrong and "other" sources are right. Thanks for clearing that up. I will fire off an email to the University of Georgia and ask for a clarification.

    Way to go at missing the point entirely. They are right for a given SIMPLIFIED value of right. Just like pi at 3.1415 is right for a given simplified value of right.

    I'm curious, why is being this important to you?

    Where did I say that it was important to me? Again, you are beign a presupposuitionalist.

    Why don't you expalin it, just a few words would do.

    Because my point is not teaching you. All I have to do is look at past posts and I see that there is no point. My point is illustrating the ignorent and arrogant approach you take to declaring modern science wrong and the 'goat-herder's digest' right. I'm illustrating the pathology of your thinking, not really trying to correct you as I do not believe you will ever change your beliefs.

    Have you ever seen the extent that a single mom will go to to keep her job and support her children? It is quite amazing. She ain't stupid.

    I love it. Now you're attacking another Christian. Go for it Perry! Why not just call her a liar? Show me how little you think of anyone who disagrees with you, to the extent that even if they are sincere committed Christians you will attack them over their scientific interpretation when you TIME AND TIME AGAIN show how little you know of science.

    I'll say. But, may I point out the the word "fossil" will need revising as well to make it fit.

    Is there no beginging to your knowledge?

    Fossils (from Latin fossus, literally "having been dug up") are the mineralized or otherwise preserved remains or traces (such as footprints) of animals, plants, and other organisms. (Wiki)

    No revison of definition needed. You prove again you fail to do the most elementary of research and have the most slight understanding of what you potificate over.

    Did you miss the bit about research into the contents of these cracked open bones has confirmed the theories that dinosaurs have more in common with birds than with reptiles? Why, yes, of course you did... LOL

  • Beta Male
    Beta Male

    the bristlecone pines are dated to 5000 years ago by counting their rings.

    this throws a wrench in the biblical flood chronology without relying on C14 dating.

    that and all the archeaological records of the kings that lived before, during, and after the

    supposed dat of the flood.

  • PCubiles

    does it matter?

    the bible says that time began 6000 years ago, was the tree created before time existed?

Share this