I, too, thought that had been confirmed. 
Posted on 08/09/2011 7:59:49 PM PDT by Pharmboy
BS
I am sorry for your anger towards Christians. You may want to check out the main page of FR. it says some things about people like us. I wish u the best, and ask that you keep your demeaning comments to yourself.
The age of the universe has been determined by three different independent techniques, all of which yield the same age.
And what techniques might those be? Science has never determined it. I'm sure Drs. Snelling, J. Morris, Woodmorappe, and Steven Meyer would love to hear it. Wjhat you left out (conveniently) is that all current techniques assume that the model is correct. As an example, using light to determine age runs into the horizon problem: you assume that all variables remain constant, everywhere. You are left with a hypothesis, but it's not something that can be proved.
So I prefer to go with what CAN be proved: the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and his fulfillment of 365 prophecies attributed to the Messiah. That alone gives me a baseline to "prove all things, hold onto that which is good". And if he is truth embodied in human form, then everything he has said is true.(1 Th 5:21 and John 17:17).
Don't be silly. I have no anger for Christians. Stop with the non-sequitors and don't start claiming I'm "persecuting" you.
Persecute was not a word I typed. You aren’t persecutiing anyone. What you are doing is making us out to be fools, which is your right to do; although doing so is utterly and profoundly ignorant.
Unfortuntely, at the judgement, you will be found to have been the stupid one for believing fairytales, sad but true.
With the Bible, you can pursue religion, philosophy, morality and even history, but not science.
Well put, but I’m not one of those on this thread that needs to understand that.
Arguing science vs. faith always ends badly.
Oh...no “sorry” necessary. Nuance is hard to convey in a post...in agreeing with you, I just meant to reinforce that thought for others. Thanks again for your reasoned addition to the thread.
I, too, thought that had been confirmed.
|
|
|
| GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach | |
|
|
Thanks Pharmboy. |
|
|
|
|
If the amber was from North America we could resurrect a large Epicyon, Orrorin tugenensis’ best friend.
Radiometric Dating, A Christian Perspective[snip] Radiometric dating -- the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements -- has been in widespread use for over half a century. There are over forty such techniques, each using a different radioactive element or a different way of measuring them. It has become increasingly clear that these radiometric dating techniques agree with each other and as a whole, present a coherent picture in which the Earth was created a very long time ago. Further evidence comes from the complete agreement between radiometric dates and other dating methods such as counting tree rings or glacier ice core layers. Many Christians have been led to distrust radiometric dating and are completely unaware of the great number of laboratory measurements that have shown these methods to be consistent. Many are also unaware that Bible-believing Christians are among those actively involved in radiometric dating. This paper describes in relatively simple terms how a number of the dating techniques work, how accurately the half-lives of the radioactive elements and the rock dates themselves are known, and how dates are checked with one another. In the process the paper refutes a number of misconceptions prevalent among Christians today. This paper is available on the web via the American Scientific Affiliation and related sites to promote greater understanding and wisdom on this issue, particularly within the Christian community. ...differences still occur within the church. A disagreement over the age of the Earth is relatively minor in the whole scope of Christianity; it is more important to agree on the Rock of Ages than on the age of rocks. But because God has also called us to wisdom, this issue is worthy of study. [/snip]
by Dr. Roger C. Wiens
First edition 1994; revised version 2002
*kof-kof*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.