i know they can be somewhat inaccurate. but usually they are correct. so why do they disregard it when they prove the tmeframe for the world in bible is entirely fault. there are infinite discoveries proving that the world is older than 6000years.
2007-03-11 21:17:30 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Funny thing is if it prove something about their belif is right, they would aggressively defense and argue that the dating technologises is accurate. But if it is something to prove them wrong, they would immidately claim it doesn't work. They're very hypcorcite about thing like this.
2007-03-11 21:22:40 · answer #1 · answered by Honor Among the Demons 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Radio 14 carbon dating of the earth. Carbon has a half life of 5370 years. Since all objects contain carbon and lose it at a predictable rate, science measures the amount of carbon in an object to determine how long it has been here. They measured a pair of LIVING penguins and determined them to be 8,000 years old. one part of a woolly mammoth to be 20000 years older than another part of the same mammoth. Four pars of the same rock varied by 1 million years. How accurate is science?
In 1999 we reached 6 billion people on earth.
In 1810 we had 1 billion people on earth.
In Ad 30 1/2 billion.
Continue the math backwards and there is no way man could have been here 300 million years. The reproduction trend of mankind has been constant and there is no reason to see the scales changing. If Science is right and man has been here for 300 million years (based on present models) There would be 150,000,000 people per square inch on the earth.
The moon's orbit around the earth demonstrates that the moon is moving away from the earth. We can scientifically measure how much that orbit is deteriorating and the effect that it is having on our tides and gravity. If we start to make a computer model and move the moon back towards the earth and factor in the effect on tides and gravity the earth cannot be more than 6000 years old or the earth would be crushed. As little as 1.2 billion years ago the moon and earth would have to touch.
Perhaps we aren't the ones that are delusional
2007-03-12 12:34:51 · answer #2 · answered by hmmmm?! 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've noticed they only accept that kind of dating when it supports their view. They probably heard "carbon dating is inaccurate..." but didn't listen in to the whole sentence... it's inaccurate after a certain amount of time because of the life of the carbon itself. Most I have spoken with don't even realize there are several other kids of dating processes and not just one is used when trying to find the date of something.
I think if they are going to refuse these dating processes when it dates the earth or anything else, then they should refuse it even when it supports their personal view. If it's wrong... it's wrong. It doesn't suddenly become accurate because it's supporting one view or another. These double standards are getting really old. No wonder the scientific field doesn't pay much attention to them when they say science is wrong.
2007-03-12 09:46:53 · answer #3 · answered by Kithy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well the Bible is the infallible Word of God. Everything else has to fall in line with the Bible and everything has to be interpreted through the Light of the Word of God. Science has taken the same rocks from the same places and have done carbon dating and got two different dates. Carbon dating is very inaccurate. Science has also proved that some of the things that they said was true were actually false.
2007-03-12 04:26:18 · answer #4 · answered by KingDavid6268 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Science vs Religion. The same old line.Be advised that the scientific community is agreeing more and more with Biblical lore as new discoveries come to light !!
2007-03-12 04:23:44 · answer #5 · answered by AZRAEL 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Please look up the Gap Theory of Genesis 1:1 - 1:2. That's what I believe in. There might be some nutty sites on that subject, so just get the gist of it and then you;ll know that many Christians do not believe in it, and that it gives the earth upteen years of time to settle.
2007-03-12 04:29:09 · answer #6 · answered by Christian Sinner 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no, they are very accurate once the reservoir effect and contamination are taken into account. i expect some people have some contrived idea similar to the noodley appendage intervention of the FSM, but it'll be Satan's fault of course.
2007-03-12 04:40:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is very miss leading to follow and believe in now days dating technology style as they do not goes hand in hand with the bible e.g the day now start at midnight while genesis 1 tells us that the day start at sunset. so choose what you want to believe.
2007-03-12 04:33:08 · answer #8 · answered by beauttyljoel 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of *course* the world is older than 6,000 years! But it's not *millions* of years old either!
2007-03-12 04:27:21 · answer #9 · answered by MilkWeed 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a fact can't support their beliefs then it is not a fact to them.That is one reason that they are dubbed as being delusional.
2007-03-12 04:24:11 · answer #10 · answered by Demopublican 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋