How do you explain evidence of Glaciation in Israel during the Mid-Pleistocene era?
Why is there no mention of Glacial periods in the Bible.
Surely if the climate changed so radicaly that glaciers formed in Israel they'd be mentioned in the Bible, somewhere?
The actions and traces of glaciation are obvious and consistent worldwide and can be seen and studied today at current glaciation sites. They do not vary.
Could it be that the Geological time scale is correct and these Glaciers were in Israel about one million years ago?
Click on the site and see for yourself!
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2003/20...
I've asked this before and had no answers that made any sense. If it is over your heads then why are you trying to usurp logic and science?
2006-12-27 07:45:15 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Err Mr Cool Carbon Dating isn't used to determine the age of rocks! Its used to determine the age of organic materials! I think your thinking of Radio-isotobe dating and please offer a source if you want to be taken seriously.
2006-12-27 08:01:59 · update #1
Can you explain why you obsess over peeing on people's faiths? I'm an agnostic myself, and don't believe in the creationist account of Man... but I decided a long time ago that no one likes idiots who can't just "let it go." Does your ego make demands on you that you post questions like this so you can see how many of us will congratulate you for being so clever and smart? Are you the ultimate "thumbs up" who.re? Get over it, already, huh?
And besides, show me the verse in the bible where it says the earth is 6000 years old? The whole thing was invented by some Englishman who sat down and added up all the years that all those people were "begatting" each other in the bible, and he figured it was about 6000. Ridiculous.
2006-12-27 07:48:56 · answer #1 · answered by I hate friggin' crybabies 5 · 0⤊ 4⤋
It never ceases to amaze me how Creationists and Conspiracists are so much alike in the way that they go to great lengths to make facts fit the fiction while ignoring the obvious. But, it's their choice. I prefer logic, theory, and experimentation.
The latest slap in the face of science was when I saw someone on television claim that God made man and the dinosaurs exist simultaneously. And I especially like how they explain the way the universe was formed and all things that have come to be since with the "perfect order" of things.
2006-12-27 07:50:09 · answer #2 · answered by Awesome Bill 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
most the time i cant say what is true and not. scientist have not proven a whole lot. they say things and then they say the have proof. if you want to hit that road then explain all the facts that go against so called evolution scientist. how do they even know about a glacier when they have admited that there was a world wide flood. and they claim they prove stuff because of rock formation but then that got proven wrong because they have found fishes and trees and wales and other bones and fossils in many rock layers that were supposed to be millions or years apart. i believe they are called strata layers or something. not to mention why do evolutionist make a dinosar using bones from 10 to 50 other dinasars. they do it all to try to discredit creation. and yes they have been caught doing that. i believe God created us all. but you know what i dont go off and dis on those who dont believe in that. i let everyone know what i believe and let them believe what they want. nothing against it but if to you God does not exist then why care so much about those who believe in God. at least we are taught to love everyone and to not sin. why pick on us who beleive why not those who drive drunk and kill inocent people and then get away with it. or those who go out and beat people for fun. or those who go to schools and shoot as many people as possible. i know some christians get the attitude that they are better or something. or they love to let you know all about your sins and i agree those christians are wrong. the Bible says we are all equal in Gods eyes. and we all sin. and we are not to judge anyone. says dont look at the speck in others eyes tell you get the plank out of your own. and honestly they have not been able to disproove the Bible. infact they prove it to be acurate.
and carbon dating is used to determine the age of pretty much anything. and they have shown that to be false. they had a bone and on one side they showed it to be thousands or years old and the other side it was only like 60 years old. they have also been corrected on finding something burried and saying it was a couple hundred years old when it was only 5 years old.
and when mt everrest blew its top or mt rainer i cant remember well all the mt that blew there top but that was a big hit against evolutionist. because they said that the after effects took thousands of years and reality it took all of no more then like 5 min or however long.
and dinasous have not been determined if they ate meat or plants. we assume but not prove. you cant prove something just because of there teeth. in fact they have asked evolutionist what an animal eats that is alive today and they have guessed wrong because they try to study the teeth. and they look like they would eat meat but they eat plants. a lot of dinasours that they thought ate meat have been shown they could not eat meat cause there teeth were to long and if they bit something hard it would have broke off. and the Bible talks about dinasours. and huge animals in the Bible and dragons. in fact i believe there is 3 names even that the Bible uses and one of the names given is descibed with a long tail that moves all over and huge. all we have is an elephant and a hippo that are both big and neither have a long tail. i can think of a couple dinos that fit that however. and the Bible does support earth being 6000 years old. it is funny how God moved upon the writers of the Bible to include how old people lived and who they had and so forth down the tree line. some say that was not important but God new it would be.
2006-12-27 08:11:32 · answer #3 · answered by dannamanna99 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
As an Athiest, I know about a lot of these modern-day "fixes" to dilemmas courtesy of the bible.
The specific "fix" for this problem is that one day during the creation story is MUCH more than what we consider one day. Possibly millions of years.
Similarly, the bible says that Sarah and Abraham and others lived well into their 100s. The "fix" for this is that they didn't count one year then like we do now.
2006-12-27 07:50:08 · answer #4 · answered by strikebf 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Those who say the earth is only a few thousand years old are fools who think themselves wise. The Bible doesn't back up this, and doesn't tell us exactly how old the earth is. I believe God created the earth, and also wiped out the dinosaurs millions of years ago so they wouldn't eat us.
2006-12-27 08:20:52 · answer #5 · answered by jesuscuresislam 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most of these nuts aren't trying to "usurp" science, many of them actually believe they are DOING science...which is the really scary part. :(
I doubt you'll see any other answers that make sense. Your ice-age question is just one of hundreds of thousands of such examples that they have no scientific answer to...so they'll fall back on the usual "it doesn't say anything about it in the bible, so it can't be true." Which is, of course, completely meaningless. :(
2006-12-27 07:49:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Did ya know that the Carbon datign used to determine age of Dinosaur Bones was used on Volcanic Rock from Hawaii documented to be 200 years old and Carbon dating claimed Billions of Years old when we know those Rocks were only 200 years old.
Also have ya actually considered how many Thousands go into 1 Million and how many Millionga go into Billion.
There is absolutely no way that Earth could be Billions or even Millions of years old.
We know it is at least 6000 years old if not older.
Is there a chance that Earth is older than 6000 years? it's possible but I don't think it could be any older than 15,000 or 20,000 years.
I hope that answers your question.
2006-12-27 07:51:19 · answer #7 · answered by MrCool1978 6 · 0⤊ 4⤋
I can't actually answer this because I'm not a "believer" in pseudoscience, but you might just as well ask a monkey to explain the differential calculus.
Failing that, try the girl below who says "I believe that the earth is approx. 6,000 years old because Jesus said so, and I believe him." But I'll wager you'd have better luck with the monkey.
2006-12-27 07:48:54 · answer #8 · answered by jonjon418 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I believe that the earth is approx. 6,000 years old because Jesus said so, and I believe him. Your "scientific proof" is so ridiculous as to make me want to laugh. You laugh at me for believing in Jesus and a creationists view, and I laugh at you because you believe in a MAN who says something happened a billion years ago and you believe him because he says so (how is that science and not faith?) You believe that all life was created by some dirt (where did the dirt come from) and I believe that it was created. I believe my house was built by a carpenter, and that it didn't just exist because a microwave blew up. You must believe that your house was created from some dirt. Was the guy who said all this stuff, that you believe by faith, there a billion years ago? Were you?
2006-12-27 08:07:00 · answer #9 · answered by Christine5 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It would be good if a creationist had the intellectual honesty to admit that they have no explanation and that it does create a problem for creationism-if they were at least honest I might not have such contempt for them, even if I could never accept their viewpoint.
2006-12-27 07:48:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋