How do Christians explain the dinosaurs? I've often wondered.

It all depends on which Christians you listen to.

Some Christians are Creationists and believe that man and dinosaurs coexisted peacefully together in the Garden of Eden.Death did not exist.All creatures were vegetarians.Then Eve bit the apple and everything went to shit.They also believe that the earth is between 5 and 8 thousand years old.

Some Christians are a little more practical and accept the reality that the dinosaurs lived and died millions of years before man came into being.

quote:Originally posted by truckfixr:

It all depends on which Christians you listen to.

Some Christians are Creationists and believe that man and dinosaurs coexisted peacefully together in the Garden of Eden.Death did not exist.All creatures were vegetarians.Then Eve bit the apple and everything went to shit.They also believe that the earth is between 5 and 8 thousand years old.

Some Christians are a little more practical and accept the reality that the dinosaurs lived and died millions of years before man came into being.





How how in the hell can you be so blind as to think all dinosaurs not only were vegetarians, but lived 8 thousand years ago at the most? that is shear stupidity and is obviously turning a blind eye to logic. there's so many things wrong with that. I mean, carbon dating alone proves that they lived a lot further in the past than 8 thousand years ago. And to think that someone would try to convince anyone that an animal whose body and physiology is completely fashioned to be a predatory animal ate nothing but fruits and vegetables makes me want to punch them in the face.

I said " some Christians believe..."

I personally don't see how they can be so blind to the obvious facts proven by science.If the dinosaurs hadn't become extinct,the creatures that would later evolve into man would have been a snack for a 'Raptor .

The truely sad part is that they try to present all their BS as if it were based on real science, and not some twisted version of the facts .

Google " Creationism" and you'll see what I mean.

quote:Originally posted by WristSlitter:



How how in the hell can you be so blind as to think all dinosaurs not only were vegetarians, but lived 8 thousand years ago at the most? that is shear stupidity and is obviously turning a blind eye to logic. there's so many things wrong with that. I mean, carbon dating alone proves that they lived a lot further in the past than 8 thousand years ago. And to think that someone would try to convince anyone that an animal whose body and physiology is completely fashioned to be a predatory animal ate nothing but fruits and vegetables makes me want to punch them in the face.

Yeah. It's mad, heh. Blind faith, Supported by too much pride ... or something *shrugs* Fuck it, believe what ya want tha's what I say.

religion is bullshit, dont beleive in any of it. + it makes you waste time of your life just to pray n stuff

I've heard a theory that revolved around the story of there being "a world before ours", meaning the one before Man came here.. but that doesn't make sense, since there are dinosaur fossils on OUR world.

ehhhh, they think it's so crazy for apes to turn into man over millions of years, but they encourage believing in a man who created the earth in 6 days. Fucking twats.

Ho Hum, and so the cycle of having to read people's silly responses to an old question begins again.

Christians believe in dinosaurs. In fact, the fact that dinosaurs existed gives more credence to the bible's historical accuracy.

Job 40:15: Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones [are as] strong pieces of brass; his bones [are] like bars of iron. He [is] the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach [unto him]. Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him [with] their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. Behold, he drinketh up a river, [and] hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. He taketh it with his eyes: [his] nose pierceth through snares.

love,

thebishop

Might as well throw Job 41 in there as well, the whole chapter is about a sea-dwelling "leviathan." I believe it says he breaths fire (more or less) among other things...

"Ho Hum, and so the cycle of having to read people's silly responses to an old question begins again." - theBishop

Yeah. If the other responses were silly then your response was absolute fucking shite.

"In fact, the fact that dinosaurs existed gives more credence to the bible's historical accuracy."

How? You didn't explain how.

That quote from the bible you gave suggests dinosaurs were created alongside humans within the last 8000 years: "Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee" I'm sure most would agree that it's a dumb philosophy given what is generally common knowledge about dinosaurs, e.g. they're a lot older than 8000 years and don't just eat grass.

quote:Originally posted by pengd0t:

Might as well throw Job 41 in there as well, the whole chapter is about a sea-dwelling "leviathan." I believe it says he breaths fire (more or less) among other things...

Yeah you might as well throw it in. Nice little monster story to keep us entertained.

Most christians are fucked up.

quote:Yeah. If the other responses were silly then your response was absolute fucking shite.

quote:

Yeah. It's mad, heh. Blind faith, Supported by too much pride ... or something *shrugs* Fuck it, believe what ya want tha's what I say.

religion is bullshit, dont beleive in any of it. + it makes you waste time of your life just to pray n stuff

ehhhh, they think it's so crazy for apes to turn into man over millions of years, but they encourage believing in a man who created the earth in 6 days. Fucking twats.



Hmm, it seems to me, and correct me if i'm wrong, but my post actually contrubuted something to the discussion. The aforementioned post are just a series of spouting offs. Maybe you don't like when a Christian defends his "blind" beliefs, but in my opinion that additude is "absolute fucking shite".

quote:"In fact, the fact that dinosaurs existed gives more credence to the bible's historical accuracy."

How? You didn't explain how.

I really thought the fact that the bible mentions something that seems to perfectly describe the apatosaurus was self-explanitory. It's just like a few years ago when a bunch of artifacts were found 300 feet below the surface of the Black Sea seem to give credence to the story of the great flood. Maybe i'm just seeing what i want to see but i know i'm not the only person who thinks so. Obviously the dinosaurs didn't only eat grass, but the dinosaur i believe being described here actually did eat grass, so what's your point? Also, the verse doesn't necissarily say humans an dinosaurs lived together. It certainly didn't say Job lived with dinosaurs, God was showing Job the dinosaur in a vision. And finally, where are you getting the 8000 years number. I've heard that before but i'd like to hear where you came up with it.

In conclusion, this is exactly the kind of close-minded (assuming) atheist i think gives the atheist movement a bad name. "Lil bag o' Waggy Bash" starts a thread seemingly honestly wanting to know what Christians believe about dinosaurs. I give a bible quote that seems to me to be describing dinosaurs, something that was written centuries before dinosaurs were discovered, and then "Waggy Bash" starts talking shit. Typical.

theBishop.

This is only one of many .Google "young earth creationism" and you will find more.



www.creationism.org/topbar/dinosaurs.htm (http://www.creationism.org/topbar/dinosaurs.htm)

Just like modern history books twist the facts or ommit certain information to protect the image of a certain group of people, the same thing happened with the bible. What if I start writing a book and claim it was inspired by God, would you take me seriously? No, why because you've already accepted a version of God and your puny intellect will automatically disregard any other message as non-authentic, because it wasn't the "original." Yet, how much of the bible is an authentic document that was perfectly translated, without any sort of editing?

Open your eyes, the bible is a book, promoting a way of life, that's all. Buying the bible is buying someone else's version of your life. That is giving up free will, and violating the very reason God created you. Besides most of you only believe the bible when it's convenient, ie. too stupid to think for yourself.

I'm drunk.

"I really thought the fact that the bible mentions something that seems to perfectly describe the apatosaurus was self-explanitory." - the bishop

Yeah, it doesn't surprise me that the bible is self-explanitory to you cos you prolly don't look very far outside of it. It doesn't "perfectly describe the apatosaurus". It just says some fairly generalised comments about a big thing with a tail. Doesn't really go into any specific detail.

I came up with the 8000 year bit from what wristslitter said so ya best ask him where he got if from. Sorry, but I can't really be arsed to check up on details. I'm all open to debated issues cos I find it's the best way to learn things. And I also came up with it from the knowledge that some Christians believe that the world and it's inhabitants were created within the last 8000 years.

"In conclusion, this is exactly the kind of close-minded (assuming) atheist i think gives the atheist movement a bad name."

You're the one putting all your faith in the bible and closing your mind off to other options of POSSIBLE truth. I try to avoid assumptions. All I've done is questioned the authenticity of the bible, and to be honest, so far you've done a pretty shit job of convincing me I should respect the bible as the word of God "in all it's perfect truth and glory" (or whatever) blah blah ..

"Maybe i'm just seeing what i want to see but i know i'm not the only person who thinks so."

Yeah you prolly are seeing what you wanna see. Fair play, nothing wrong with that. But stay open to the truth and don't put all your eggs in one basket. A.K.A don't rely entirely rely on the bible as your source of knowledge. Be open. If God does exist, he wouldn't of put all his eggs in the bible.

Am I talking shit? I'm drunk and can't work it out. Hah! tada

ok, carbon dating is bullshit it tries to date the fossil/rock/whatever based on how much carbon is left in them. well how do they know how much it started with? its called circular reasoning.

And another thing, there isnt one complete geological column that demonstrates evolution in order. fossils and large amounts of sediments usally happen when a catastrophe strikes.just look at mt mckineley and all the sediment layers it laid in minutes that would have taken "millions of years" to lay down. o hey what do you know the bible has a global flood which might have laid all those sediments along with animals down. maybe, just maybe, dinosaurs!

A whole lot of civilizations have a flood story so why couldnt it have happened? dinosaurs lived peacefully until after the flood then they died out because of the catostraphic(sp?)climate change they would have endured.

well thats my opinion by the way im christian and i hope i open someones eyes to what i believe as truth. if not well then i guess you will all burn for eternity and ill be with my savior. i mean even if we are wrong and there is no afterlife wouldnt you rather be safe instead of going to hell?

quote:Originally posted by nothingbutcrazy:

ok, carbon dating is bullshit it tries to date the fossil/rock/whatever based on how much carbon is left in them. well how do they know how much it started with? its called circular reasoning.

And another thing, there isnt one complete geological column that demonstrates evolution in order. fossils and large amounts of sediments usally happen when a catastrophe strikes.just look at mt mckineley and all the sediment layers it laid in minutes that would have taken "millions of years" to lay down. o hey what do you know the bible has a global flood which might have laid all those sediments along with animals down. maybe, just maybe, dinosaurs!

A whole lot of civilizations have a flood story so why couldnt it have happened? dinosaurs lived peacefully until after the flood then they died out because of the catostraphic(sp?)climate change they would have endured.

well thats my opinion by the way im christian and i hope i open someones eyes to what i believe as truth. if not well then i guess you will all burn for eternity and ill be with my savior. i mean even if we are wrong and there is no afterlife wouldnt you rather be safe instead of going to hell?

Oh, carbon dating is bullshit? You found this out all by yourself did ya? You're fucking stupid. You think if carbon dating was bullshit they would use it as much as they do? I'm not ever sure of how it works, but it's pretty obvious that it works great if so many different organizations use it. They have different ways of determinging age as well, such as segiment layers. Oh, and when a volcano erupts or when there's a massive flood, the sediment layer it leaves behind is huge compaired to all the others and it's all made out of the same rock and dirt. Also, they do know how much carbon should be in a sample of organic materal, how could they ever carbon date in the first place if they didnt?

*sheds tears*

How sad it is to know that my God is going to send me to hell for not subscribing to your flawed interpretation of the Bible.

No wonder Jesus spent so much time telling everyone how he created the world in 7 24 hour periods... and now you condemn the members of the early church, including the likes of Justin Martyr and St. Augustine to the firey flames of hell. If only they had been white middle class westerners living in the later part of the 20th century, preferebly in the mid-western United States, or even better along the bible-belt.

Perhaps then they might have been saved.

Whilst I believe you have nothing but good intentions, making arrogant arguments (im not saying that you are arrogant) is the opposite of with "meekness and fear".

"God's line of demarcation runs differently from ours. Those we would include as insiders may well be outsiders in God's scheme of things".- C.Ringma

It's funny, I read that quote this morning, along with Matt 22:1-14...coincidence?

" i mean even if we are wrong and there is no afterlife wouldnt you rather be safe instead of going to hell?"

I'll take just as much chance of safety as an atheist and hope that maybe there's a psionic bunny rabbit that sends non-believers to heaven and the pious to hell. You're not playing it safe, you're playing it ignorantly without realizing it. Have the balls to admit you don't know what the hell any of the answers are and perhaps you can begin to find some real answers.

Yeah, as far as Christianity goes, "The Wager" is not going to do any good. If faith in Jesus is truly the only way into heaven, then i doubt "fire insurance" belief is going to cut it anyway. Either you believe voluntarily, or you don't, i don't think God likes when people play both sides ;-).

Anyone who knows better than me feel free to correct, but for the sake of having some reference, i believe Carbon14 testing works by measuring the amount of carbon that has decayed and compares that to the known half-life of carbon14. It isn't very accurate at all, but it is useful in determining a ballpark age of something organic.

Carbon-14 dating can also be backed up by counting rings on trees and comparing them to previous trees.

I can't be bothered to go into detail; suffice to say, rings form patterns, patterns can be followed back for a long time, they agree with carbon dating.

I dont see the problem with some Christains and the Dinosaurs. How does having Dinosaurs somehow disprove gods existence? Creatures and species die out even now as we speak... so why does dinosaurs dying out disprove anything?

Genesis just says during one of the creative days that-

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>

<LI> Genesis 1:24-25

"24 And God went on to say: “Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth according to its kind.” And it came to be so. 25 And God proceeded to make the wild beast of the earth according to its kind and the domestic animal according to its kind and every moving animal of the ground according to its kind. And God got to see that [it was] good."

</UL>

Nobody knows how long these creative days were. So the bible has no problem with the dinosaurs. God obviously had a purpose for them-what this could be is anybodys guess.

my guess is that he used them to develop the ecosystem. Some huge dinosaurs going around eating tonnes of plant material, shitting everywhere, allows the ground to become more fertile-and then these would need to be kept in check-predators, eg tyrannosaurs ect...

once the habitat was developed enough to be inhabbited by man-god wipes them out?

sup yo ^^ many chirstains wonder about stuff like this.. like this one guy named Chris Rice (christain singer man) says hey wut happned to all of those dinosaursn wheres the garden of eden and wuts up with dejavo (sorry i cant spell) so i dunno when u die ask god ^^

You know sometihng. I've looked at this post and looked in her and kept going. But then I realized this is a tremendously kewl question.

It baffles me how they start creation off with, God creating everything and puttin some fuckin dumbasses in a garden. How then do they explain the dinosaurs?

Why isn't there anything about them neing seen in the bible?

My friend you just single-handedly disproved the bible. MARVELOUS, just MARVELOUS! How couldn't I have raised this very question a long time ago?! How come none of the theist(including ath-), are scientist ever asked this?

We now know for a fact that dinosaurs were indeed here before, and even before man. So how come creation in the bible or the people in it never say anything about the dinosaurs? Because the bible is false!

(Rust don't bother saying it has no credibility, because I really don't care to hear it, and you can't change my mind. False things, as I've said before can/do hold some truth in them)

quote:Originally posted by nothingbutcrazy:

ok, carbon dating is bullshit...

Ok, say carbon dating is bullshit. So why then IN THE BEGINING, of creation does the bible say man was made? And man being made first, how come no one in the bible ever spoke about something happening with a dinosaur involved? How come no one ever saw them, or knew of them?

How could man create those huge temples and everything with untameable titans, that possess unmatchable power, roaming around? Surely t-rex's and the creatures bigger than them, would have made a buffet out of the huge crowds of peole. People would make refuge in crapped hiding places not huge massive buildings. How then do you explain that?

The following is an explanation of carbon dating (from howstuffworks.com) This can be used to prove that the dinosaurs existed millions of years before man.However,the fact that dinosaurs existed does not disprove the bible.It does disprove the Creationists theory of a young earth.If by chance there is a god, how can we determine how long a day would be to him/her?I personally can't imagine a being that could create something as vast as the universe and being interested in something as insignificant (in comparison to the universe) as mankind.

Carbon-14 dating is a way of determining the age of certain archeological artifacts of a biological origin up to about 50,000 years old. It is used in dating things such as bone, cloth, wood and plant fibers that were created in the relatively recent past by human activities.

How Carbon-14 is Made

Cosmic rays enter the earth's atmosphere in large numbers every day. For example, every person is hit by about half a million cosmic rays every hour. It is not uncommon for a cosmic ray to collide with an atom in the atmosphere, creating a secondary cosmic ray in the form of an energetic neutron, and for these energetic neutrons to collide with nitrogen atoms. When the neutron collides, a nitrogen-14 (seven protons, seven neutrons) atom turns into a carbon-14 atom (six protons, eight neutrons) and a hydrogen atom (one proton, zero neutrons). Carbon-14 is radioactive, with a half-life &lt;http://science.howstuffworks.com/nuclear.htm&gt; of about 5,700 years. Carbon-14 in Living Things

The carbon-14 atoms that cosmic rays create combine with oxygen to form carbon dioxide, which plants absorb naturally and incorporate into plant fibers by photosynthesis. Animals and people eat plants and take in carbon-14 as well. The ratio of normal carbon (carbon-12) to carbon-14 in the air and in all living things at any given time is nearly constant. Maybe one in a trillion carbon atoms are carbon-14. The carbon-14 atoms are always decaying, but they are being replaced by new carbon-14 atoms at a constant rate. At this moment, your body has a certain percentage of carbon-14 atoms in it, and all living plants and animals have the same percentage.

Dating a Fossil

As soon as a living organism dies, it stops taking in new carbon. The ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14 at the moment of death is the same as every other living thing, but the carbon-14 decays and is not replaced. The carbon-14 decays with its half-life of 5,700 years, while the amount of carbon-12 remains constant in the sample. By looking at the ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14 in the sample and comparing it to the ratio in a living organism, it is possible to determine the age of a formerly living thing fairly precisely.

A formula to calculate how old a sample is by carbon-14 dating is:

t = [ ln (Nf/No) / (-0.693) ] x t1/2

where ln is the natural logarithm, Nf/No is the percent of carbon-14 in the sample compared to the amount in living tissue, and t1/2 is the half-life of carbon-14 (5,700 years).

So, if you had a fossil that had 10 percent carbon-14 compared to a living sample, then that fossil would be:

t = [ ln (0.10) / (-0.693) ] x 5,700 years

t = [ (-2.303) / (-0.693) ] x 5,700 years

t = [ 3.323 ] x 5,700 years

t = 18,940 years old

Because the half-life of carbon-14 is 5,700 years, it is only reliable for dating objects up to about 60,000 years old. However, the principle of carbon-14 dating applies to other isotopes as well. Potassium-40 is another radioactive element naturally found in your body and has a half-life of 1.3 billion years. Other useful radioisotopes for radioactive dating include Uranium -235 (half-life = 704 million years), Uranium -238 (half-life = 4.5 billion years), Thorium-232 (half-life = 14 billion years) and Rubidium-87 (half-life = 49 billion years).

The use of various radioisotopes allows the dating of biological and geological samples with a high degree of accuracy. However, radioisotope dating may not work so well in the future. Anything that dies after the 1940s, when Nuclear bombs &lt;http://science.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-bomb.htm&gt;, nuclear reactors and open-air nuclear tests started changing things, will be harder to date precisely.

I'm still interested in this "young earth" idea. I can't say i've heard very many specifics about it at all. I know Christians supposedly say this in the bible, but i've yet to see where anyone came up with this age.

Are people totally ignoring the verse i posted in Job? Is there any creature on earth that fits that description better than the Apatosaur? I don't think so. Why then, are we still debating whether the bible overlooks dinosaurs?

The 6000 years old figure comes from one Bishop Ussher, who apparently traced back all the lineages and ages given so that Adam would have been created in 4004 BC.

Young Earth Creationism is pure bullshit. To believe that there's anything to it you have to believe that either the huge majority scientists (biologists, geologists, physicists, paleontologists, etc.) are seriously incompetent or conspiring against God - including the ones who are Christians.

I'll admit, the Job thing does sound like a dinosaur. It's pretty vague though; it could just as easily be an elephant. I'm kind of doubtful that apatosauri ate much grass too.

quote:False things, as I've said before can/do hold some truth in them)

By definition, "false things" cannot have truth in them.

False:

"Contrary to fact or truth: 'false tales of bravery'.

Deliberately untrue: 'delivered false testimony under oath'.

Arising from mistaken ideas: 'false hopes of writing a successful novel'.

"

*sigh*...man and beast were created on the 6th day. The bible says god created the beasts of the field on the 6th day, then he goes "and god proceeded to see that it was good". THEN he created man, and planted him in a garden. this all occurs onthe same creative day-but the creative day is a metaphor, just like your grandparents could say "back in my day"...

the amount of time between the beasts of the field and then the garden of eden being created and adam put in it-the amount of time between these isnt stated in the bible. How would you explain the earth's formation of life to someone like Moses, with no knowledge of science??

the main thing about the creation story, is that it is very simplified, but the chronology is exactly in line with what scientists say. No other creation story comes close. How did Moses get all of them in the correct order??

Without getting into too much evolution vs creationism in this post- in the beggining, the earth cant really support sophisticated life forms. So you see a progression from basic to advanced life forms. the most advanced thing being made was man, which also was the last thing made.

So what is wrong with God going from basic, to more advanced life forms as the earth's eco-system gets into balance for the creation of man? it makes scientific sense. Dinosaurs are just one of these progressions from basic to advanced. i dont see how that conflicts with the bible at all, or proves it wrong.

quote:Originally posted by theBishop:

I'm still interested in this "young earth" idea.

Don't put too much stock in it. It's been disproven by every independent field of Earth science that exists.

Young Earth Creationism (YEC) is a religious standpoint and not a scientific one.

I don't mean "i wonder if this is true". I want to know where it says in the bible that the earth is 8000 years old. I doubt this is the case, and i'm also skeptical that the bible asserts this as a fact. I'd like to see the verses this idea is derived from.

quote:Originally posted by theBishop:

I'm still interested in this "young earth" idea. I can't say i've heard very many specifics about it at all...

Ok, just like you said. The damned dinosaur you're talking about was a grass-eating bitch. Not a T-Rex, or a Raptor. There is no possible way that man and T-rex or any of the other carnivorous dinosaurs could have co-existed.

When Noah loaded up the ark, there where no T-rex's or raptors on that ark. This I could ashore you of, because the other animals wouldn't have made it to their destinations. And the damned ark would have sank. How then could you, one who believes in the bible, explain the existance of dinosaurs?

How could you believe that the Romans and every other civilisations, made it to the point they had made it to. There is no way that people could have built those large monuments, and cathedrals, while the 75ft tall T-rex roamed about.

There is no way they would have become as advanced as is stated in the bible, with a ravenous creature of the strength that a T-rex possessed. Humans would not have survived an era, co-existing with carnivorous creatures like that.

Not with the minute strength we now possess. So how then, could you explain the survival of man in those days? The human race would have been wiped out if T-rex's lived in the same era as man, man had to many wars back then. We were wiping ourselves out, so with the added danger of dinosaurs(carnivorous ones) we would not be here now.

quote:Originally posted by nevermind:

in the beggining, the earth cant really support sophisticated life forms.

Bullshit. If God can create the Earth and everything on it, he can create it so that it supports sophisticated life forms.

quote:i dont see how that conflicts with the bible at all, or proves it wrong.

It doesn't, really - you can make the Bible say just about anything. It's usually a real stretch, though - either you're stretching scientific fact (YEC) or biblical interpretation (OEC, etc)

theBishop, see my above post. It was calculated from geneologies.

quote:Originally posted by theBishop:

I don't mean "i wonder if this is true". I want to know where it says in the bible that the earth is 8000 years old. I doubt this is the case, and i'm also skeptical that the bible asserts this as a fact. I'd like to see the verses this idea is derived from.

Nowhere in the Bible does it make any statement on how old the earth is. Biblical literalists assume a young earth by counting up the geneologies in the Bible back to Adam and assuming that the Earth was created the same week as the alleged first man and woman.

wait i got it!!! listen to this.

1st god was trying all the pot he just invented then after that he created DINOSAURS!!! then when he got sober he went SHIT look wut i did.. then killed em all real fast like to cover up the evidence... thats y u never read about it in the bible!!!!

quote:I mean, carbon dating alone proves that they lived a lot further in the past than 8 thousand years ago.

Based on the unprovable assumption that one plus one always equals two. Likewise, a telephone pole struck by lightning suddenly gains a couple of million years according to carbon dating.

quote:I'm not ever sure of how it works, but it's pretty obvious that it works great if so many different organizations use it.

In the middle ages many organisations used charts that showed the world was flat. Works great, doesn't it?

Read Strata by Terry Pratchett. It might improve your reading, sense of humour, and shut up your stupid ramblings.

Now for all you science trusting morons out there, science is just speculation, based on assumptions that seem to work. It's not solid, it's ever shifting, and to blindly believe in any theory is as much stupidity as you keep shouting about religion. To use science as a mental crutch the way you all do is to use it as your own religion.

[This message has been edited by VampireSlaya (edited 04-29-2004).]

quote:Originally posted by nothingbutcrazy:

ok, carbon dating is bullshit it tries to date the fossil/rock/whatever based on how much carbon is left in them. well how do they know how much it started with? its called circular reasoning.



"Basically, all living things are mostly made of carbon. A small portion of this carbon is in the form of Carbon-14, an unstable radioactive isotope. Once an organism dies, the C-14 in the organism begins to disintegrate. Because it disintegrates at a steady, known rate, scientists can measure the amount of C-14 remaining and use a scientific formula to determine the age of the sample."

Oh yeah...a few thousand years makes a whole lot of difference when something reads off as being 45,000 years old. Carbon dating has its inaccuracies, but it proves without a doubt that the young earth shit is complete bull.

quote:Likewise, a telephone pole struck by lightning suddenly gains a couple of million years according to carbon dating.



quote:Oh yeah...a few thousand years makes a whole lot of difference when something reads off as being 45,000 years old

Slight disparity between your quote and mine - I'm talking millions, you're talking thousands.

Burning a tree does not change the ratio of carbon 12 /carbon 14. Carbon 14 is a radioactive isotope taken in by living plants and animals.The ratio changes as the carbon 14 decays(which occurs at a constant rate).



You cannot measure millions of years with carbon 14 dating.Radiocarbon 14 dating only works for organisms that have died within the last 60,000 years.Other isotopes with slower decay rates are used to determine the age of older items.

How can it only work in the last 60,000 years when it has a margin of error of 45,000 years? I'm not going to dispute the validity of carbon dating, but we need to get some actual experts in here because this isn't computing.

My bad then.

Carbon dating can only be used on objects that have died within the last 60,000 years. There is not enough carbon 14 to measure after that much time.Carbon dating has a margin of error of a few thousand years,Not 45,000. If you are really interested, go to howstuffworks.com for a detailed explanation.Don't listen to how someone on totse assumes that it works.

I know that much already - totse is filled with morons. You however, stated your point quite concisely and without resorting to swearing in every sentence, so I'm willing to trust you.

"Slight disparity between your quote and mine - I'm talking millions, you're talking thousands."

Your millions though, would only be accurate if the carbon dating used Carbon-12...the one produced by combustion. Being as it uses Carbon-14, the inaccuracy would still only be a couple thousand years off 45000 from now, making the measurement be anywhere from say 43000-47000...not too inaccurate. There's a certain sense of trust you have in a method you understand and have seen countless studies on to verify the accuracy of.

quote:Originally posted by VampireSlaya:

You however, stated your point quite concisely and without resorting to swearing in every sentence, so I'm willing to trust you.

Completely off-topic, but usage of cuss-words should have nothing to do with credibility.

I swear for emphasis. If you think that makes the things I say any less true - fuck you. They're words. They're part of my vocabulary. They serve a purpose. I use them.

Of course, there is such a thing as overuse, and it's definitely not OK (or valid) to base your argument on personal attacks (whether there's cursing involved or not).

My views on the Bible:

I believe the Bible, in its current form is about 50% crap inspired by humans.

At the time, humans were relatively simple and oblivious to science. Not to say that they were idiots, but they didn't understand how the world works. I believe that the Bible was inspired by God, but the human translation was interpreted in human terms.

Consider this: During 4th period lunch at your school, a fight breaks out. One guy throws an orange at the other guy, the other guy gets up and pushes him. By the end of the day the story is "Yo yo, Mike threw his food into Deke's face, and then Deke broke a chair over Mike's head!"

Human's have a proven tendency to exaggerate, and put things in understandable terms. Our theory about the big bang could be ridiculous compared to the truth, but it seems to "make sense" as far as what we understand.

So, back to the Bible. My guess is, God inspired the original writers with visions, dreams, etc. The writers then interpreted these dreams and visions into the books of the Bible.

---

Further down the line, with the development of the Church and such, more crap was added in, that was TRULY crap. I think that most of the concept of "hell" is bullshit used to get people to join the Church.

What am I trying to say overall? I believe that the messages the Bible wants to get accross DO get accross. Unfortuneatly, lack of human understanding of science, in addition to exageration and corruptness make the Bible a much more confusing and contradictory document than it is supposed to be.

quote:Originally posted by VampireSlaya:

I know that much already - totse is filled with morons. You however, stated your point quite concisely and without resorting to swearing in every sentence, so I'm willing to trust you.

Your absolutely right, totse is filled with morons, you being the biggest fucking idiot of them all though. Are we morons because we choose to believe in physical evidence that has presented itself to us in the real world, are we morons because we accept fact over fiction. You are a fucking dumbass, do not bring our intelligence into question when it is you who has rejected physical evidence and proven scientific theory. Of course it would be foolish of me to think I could try and get you to accept the reality of our existence, however I can tell it would be a waste of my time as you are ignorant, uneducated, foolish, deluded, gulible and above all else posses inferior intellect to that of myself and all others who rely on fact, and dont lead there lives on a false vision of grandeur.

quote:Originally posted by TheDragon:

So, back to the Bible. My guess is, God inspired the original writers with visions, dreams, etc. The writers then interpreted these dreams and visions into the books of the Bible.

Tell me, how do you tell the difference between God inspired visions, dreams, etc. and the regular kind?

quote:Completely off-topic, but usage of cuss-words should have nothing to do with credibility

True, I swear occasionally too (when the situation needs it, or I feel pissed off), but people here swear to excess, ever second fucking sentence for some. My point was, he didn't swear at all when presenting his point, and therefore has my respect, because:

1) he doesn't take it personally

2) excessive swearing generally shows excessive anger (and therefore shows a weak trust in one's argument, and a need to compensate with agression).

This dick being one of those:

quote:Your absolutely right, totse is filled with morons, you being the biggest fucking idiot of them all though. Are we morons because we choose to believe in physical evidence that has presented itself to us in the real world, are we morons because we accept fact over fiction. You are a fucking dumbass, do not bring our intelligence into question when it is you who has rejected physical evidence and proven scientific theory. Of course it would be foolish of me to think I could try and get you to accept the reality of our existence, however I can tell it would be a waste of my time as you are ignorant, uneducated, foolish, deluded, gulible and above all else posses inferior intellect to that of myself and all others who rely on fact, and dont lead there lives on a false vision of grandeur.

I myself have no physical evidence of what you believe so strongly, and I have bowed to a superior knowledge. You on the other hand seem to swallow whatever is given to you, as long as it has a scientific phrasing. Gullible has 3 l's, not 2. Also, if you thought to any significant degree on this topic you are so passionate about, you'd realise nothing is provable, and only workable assumptions are achievable. If you can prove to me that 1+1=2 (that being the base assumption of all maths and science), you'd have to be a fricking genius, but it's not possible, and all you'll do is restate that 1+1=2 over and over again, in different ways, proving my point. Likewise, if theory was proven, then it wouldn't be theory anymore. All in all, nice lot of wanking you've posted there.

It's not an assumption that 1 + 1 = 2, it's a basis.

If 1 + 1 = 3, then 3 is just another name for 2.

Vampireslaya...

I have posted this already somewhere else but ill say it again "you are wrong until proven right, not right until proven wrong". Your ignorance of how evoltuion works is no argument against it. And would you like some solid evidence whish disproves god; If the entire population of our planet which is nearing six billion, was spawned soley from 2 people, adam and eve, it would be impossible for there to be the genetic diversity that there now exists today, impossible and not only that ,but it would take a hell of a long time for the population to reach its current number.

quote:It's not an assumption that 1 + 1 = 2, it's a basis.

If 1 + 1 = 3, then 3 is just another name for 2.



Asumptions can be a basis - heck they are a basis for maths and science. And no, I meant when 1 unit + 1 unit = 3 units, as in the three you all know and love. If it does this even once, then maths is wrong - and it has no rules to go by. Chaos theory states that the chance of anything happening is one over infinity - which means that generally speaking, 1+1=2 is a chance reoccurance.



quote:Vampireslaya...

I have posted this already somewhere else but ill say it again "you are wrong until proven right, not right until proven wrong". Your ignorance of how evoltuion works is no argument against it. And would you like some solid evidence whish disproves god; If the entire population of our planet which is nearing six billion, was spawned soley from 2 people, adam and eve, it would be impossible for there to be the genetic diversity that there now exists today, impossible and not only that ,but it would take a hell of a long time for the population to reach its current number.

So you believe in guilty until proven innocent? I actually know quite a bit about evolution - I make it my job to know anything about everything I can. Evolution itself states that there had to be 2 first Homo Sapiens Sapiens anyway, so what you're saying applies better to evolution than creation - because evolution doesn't give homo sapiens sapiens as long a run in history.

I think he was saying you are innocent until proven guilty. Essentially, all positive claims are false until proven true.

See, the 'false is the default assumption' idea is really a load of crap. It only leads to prejudices that might/will cause you to miss something.

The default should actually be 'I have no fucking idea', so at least that way, you won't bias your own findings.