What of the dinosaurs?

[JackH]

I believe it is heretical to accept parts of the Genesis record that please, discarding parts that offend

Have you been telling any teenagers to throw their Bibles in the garbage lately because they contain some vanilla statement about evolution?

So Christians who do not accept your 6,000-year-old world are heretics, 'eh?

That's a whole lot of Christians going to hell. The Pope. Pat Robertson.

Hey, but that's what Ken Ham says too.

Here is a critique of Ken Ham's book Dinosaurs in Eden that is funny as hell (where all the heretics who don't accept your 6,000-year-old world are going, according to you):

Every Day Is Like Wednesday: (Not a comics) Review: Ken Ham's Creationism-for-kids book, Dinosaurs of Eden

 

[Dr_GS_Hurd]

There are several problems that trash the effort to deny radioactive decay series in the ICR "reports" linked by Mr. Swords Guy.

The first obvious failure was "Unfortunately for the secularist, there are radiohalos formed from what appears to be primordial Po (polonium), rather than Po in the form of daughter isotopes from U decay." (This is the correct link to Creationist Silly Part 1, by the way).

The failure is of course that the creationists merely make the empty assertion without any evidence. This particular creationist fraud has been popular since Robert Gentry's publications in the 1970s. What he, now any later creationist was never ever able to explain was how they could tell the difference between "primordial" Polonium and the regular sort. The entire creationist fantasy is debunked by (PDF) Collins, Lorence G. "Polonium halos and myrmekite in pegmatite and granite." (1997). Then there is the basic error of the Helium content of zircons promoted by Russ Humphreys. Among the gross errors of fact are that the tested material was removed from very high pressure rock which alters Helium diffusion, and that the silly notion of "accelerated nuclear decay" would have melted the Earth, and slaughtered all life.

Then there is this little horse's gift to the pasture, "Unfortunately for the secularist, there are serious problems with the uniformitarian view as it is applied to radioactive dating. Recent experimental evidences verify that the decay rates of radioisotopes can vary significantly from the currently accepted values—by as much as 10[SUP]9[/SUP] times faster (that’s 1 billion times faster) when exposed to certain environmental factors." The "certain environmental factors" happen to be heated to a ionized plasma. That is correct, boys and girls. All we need to do to alter negative beta decay is turn the Earth into a glowing ball of electron free gas.

Sure- no problem.

That was followed by the comparatively minor lie that, "It is particularly interesting that the alpha-decay rates of [SUP]228[/SUP]Th are increased by as much as 10[SUP]4[/SUP] (10,000 times) under conditions which give rise to high pressure waves."

This cited a paper that was refuted by a half dozen later experiments. But even if it was not a failure as science, the "environmental conditions" in this case were a dissolved thorium oxide subjected to ultrasound cavitation.

Sure- no problem. Just liquefy the Earth in a giant blender in an ultrasound machine, and then there might be some effect that cannot be replicated by anyone. (2009. Piezonuclear decay of thorium. Physics Letters A. 373 (22): 1956-1958).

 

[Dr_GS_Hurd]

Re: "The Iconic Isochron: Radioactive Dating, Part 2" Vernon R. Cupps, Ph.D.

I nearly laughed out loud when I read, "Note: The equations may be daunting, especially to the layman, so we’ve placed them in sidebars. Hang in there—read the narrative and we’ll get to the answer we’re looking for."

That's right kids, don't sweat that hard book larnin' "we’ll get to the answer we’re looking for." It won't matter what the real answers are, creationists can always fake the "answer they’re looking for."

And sure enough, if you ignore the facts, if you cannot do simple math, Vernon R. Cupps, Ph.D. will give you "the answer you’re looking for." Look how well it worked on Mr. Sword. He went looking for the answer he wanted, and there was a professional creationist waiting to sell it to him. Win! Win!

Hey, reality sux. It is much better to just pretend.

 

[Dr_GS_Hurd]

It is my intention to keep atheistic lying exposed for the sake of Christians and those still searching, allowing fair decisions. I was contaminated the first 31 years of my life, and will do what I can to prevent such hindrances to anyone I can warn.

I don't know what brain trauma might have led Mr. Sword to accept without thinking the failed biblical interpretation of Young Earth Creationism. 1 John 4:1 "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world."

The creationist scam is an excellent test case.

The young earth creationists worship a god who is a deceiver. Their god fakes rocks, fakes fossils, fakes stars, fakes galaxies, and faked the Big Bang.

Real rocks:


Real fossils:



Real stars forming planets:


Real galaxies billions of light years away:


And a real photo of the Cosmic Microwave Background- the "selfie" of the Big Bang:

 

[Dr_GS_Hurd]

Here is a just published photo of a new star forming planets:

 

[Kerry]

And you are a fake and have no proof just propagating your Ideas

 

[Kerry]

I Have a written document going back 6,000 years where is yours?

 

[Dr_GS_Hurd]

And you are a fake and have no proof just propagating your Ideas

Well, you should give the creationists some slight credit. They have been lied to by professional liars. They mostly just repeat these easy lies.

Plus, science is a difficult subject without the worry that if reality peeks into you brain you will burn in Hell.

 

[Kerry]

Professor's are great liars as they do not live in the real world for instance Obama.

 

[Kerry]

Explain why Nasa has to account for a missing day?

 

[Kerry]

Well this thread is about dinosaurs and they are preadamic and were destroyed by God and according to Jeremiah 4 so was the beings that inhabited this Earth and the cities they built.

 

[Dr_GS_Hurd]

The oldest fragments of stories told in the Bible's oldest bits are only from the Sumerian tablets of Atrahasis.

See;
Blenkinsopp, Joseph
1992 "The Pentateuch: An Introduction to the First Five Books of the Bible" The Anchor Bible Reference Library New York: ABRL/Doubleday

Dalley, Stephanie
2000 “Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, The Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others, Revised” Oxford University Press

Killebrew, Ann E.
2005 “Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity: An Archaeological Study of Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, and Early Israel.” Society of Biblical Literature

Parker, Simon B. (Editor)
1997 "Ugarit Narrative Poetry" Translated by Mark S. Smith, Simon B. Parker, Edward L Greenstein, Theodore J. Lewis, David Marcus, Vol. 9 Writings from the Ancient World. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature

Sparks, Kenton L.
2005 “Ancient Texts for the Study of the Hebrew Bible” Peabody PA: Hendrickson Publishers

Speiser, E. A.
1962 "Genesis: Introduction, Translation and Notes" New York: Anchor Bible- Doubleday


I mention this because you are clearly ignorant of when the Bible was first formed, and in what languages it was first told, and what it says.

 

[Dr_GS_Hurd]

Explain why Nasa has to account for a missing day?

Missing DAY?

Sorry Kerry, I thought you were sane. Seriously. I didn't know you were not.

 

[Kerry]

These are synopsis written by atheist so of course they are obscured and biased. The bible has stood the test of time and none of your buddy's books have.

 

[Kerry]

Missing DAY?

Sorry Kerry, I thought you were sane. Seriously. I didn't know you were not.

when Nasa launches they must account for the missing day which occurred in Joshua I thought you were smarter than this.

 

[Kerry]

By the way where is your 6,000 year old document that has stood the test of time?

 

[Dr_GS_Hurd]

There is a great book on Job;
Pope, Marvin H. 1965 “Job: A new translation with Introduction and Commentary” Anchor Bible Vol. 15, New York: ABRL/Doubleday

And the strongest expert on the Ugaritic tablets and the Bible is still Reverend Mitchell Dahood. Read his first volume on the Psalms if no other:

1965 "Psalms I, 1-50: Introduction, Translation and Notes" New York: Anchor Bible- Doubleday

The next two volumes were excellent as well.

 

[Kerry]

Then read this old Document and explain the existence of Israel? This has got to be good I"m anxious to here your explanation.

 

[Kerry]

There is a great book on Job;
Pope, Marvin H. 1965 “Job: A new translation with Introduction and Commentary” Anchor Bible Vol. 15, New York: ABRL/Doubleday

And the strongest expert on the Ugaritic tablets and the Bible is still Reverend Mitchell Dahood. Read his first volume on the Psalms if no other:

1965 "Psalms I, 1-50: Introduction, Translation and Notes" New York: Anchor Bible- Doubleday

The next two volumes were excellent as well.

I could careless about what some intellectually dude said, but what does the bible say?

 

[Kerry]

Israel was made a nation by the stroke of the pen has any other nation been made by that?