Jump to content

Dating Methods


Jeremy
 Share

Recommended Posts

A brief intro. My wife is a christian attending a fundy church, I am not. Luckily for me she is not extreme and we have an understanding and respect each other. I guess since her "church family" notices she attends church alone they feel the need to bring me into the fold. After learning that I was an atheist my wife was presented with a packet of information (for me) attacking carbon and radiometric dating. Also, one of the gentlemen from the church wants to meet with me to "discuss this." I know telling him to get lost would be the easiest, if not the best thing to do; and I may do just that. But I would like to know how accurate are these dating methods and how can they be tested for accuracy? Christians claim they do their own testing and find these dating methods faulty; I'm not quite sure how dispute their claim.

 

A second question. Forget for a moment the improbability of Noah and his arc, what do you say to christans that claim there is evidence of a world wide flood? For example, one may say there are fossils of fish found in a mountain.

 

Third, where can I find the age (estimated date) of the old testament books? For example, when was Genesis written?

 

 

Thank you very much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: All Regularly Contributing Patrons enjoy Ex-Christian.net advertisement free.

The recent discussions, here and elsewhere, with several that disagree with climate change, and it's causes have shown me that no matter what you say, they will not change their position. Some people, and maybe I'm one too, just will not change. Creationists will not change their position. "God did it" and nothing you can way would change their mind. No amount of facts, logic, or science, will ever sway them during the discussion. Years later it may sink in and there is hope for some, but pick your battles. Is this one you want to fight?

 

If you with to enter the fray; get familiar with talkorigins.org. The specific answer to radiometric dating methods can be found here. You might want to check out this site that has a Christian perspective on radiometric dating and address common christian complaints.

 

Once one understands a tiny bit of geology, you come to understand that the Flood was a non event. Both those websites I linked to above addresses all the common christian BS for the Flood.

 

I'm pretty sure the oldest parts of the OT are about 4,000 years old. Genesis is a retelling of an even older story that came from an older civilization; the story of Gilgamesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talkorigins.org (that's dot ORG, not dot com) is a great resource for all things related to creationist claims.

 

http://talkorigins.org/faqs/isochron-dating.html

http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-youngearth.html

http://talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

 

Glen Morton (former young earth creationist, still christian, but no longer young earth)

has some good stuff as well relating to dating methods, science, etc.

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/age.htm

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/dmd.htm <-- scroll down to "List of Articles"

 

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/suigetsu.htm <-- Why radio carbon dating works.

 

Keep in mind, radio carbon dating is only for relatively recent dates,

and radio carbon dating is only one sort of dating relying on radio

active decay. There are other methods relying on radio active decay

besides carbon, and other methods not relying on radioactive decay.

 

google also, dendrochronology, which is to say, counting tree rings,

and matching up their thicknesses from tree to tree (the thickness of

each ring depends on the climate that year) to stretch back in time much

longer than the lifetime of a single tree. Why is it these match up with

radio carbon dating, if radio carbon dating isn't any good?

 

 

Check out also, ice cores.

http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/02.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3792209.stm

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=221

(Just google "ice cores 400000 years" (or leave out the 400000 years part.)

 

As for the history of the bible, a couple of good books are "Who wrote the Bible" and "The Bible Unearthed". Check amazon, etc. for more details.

 

Google also, "varves"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The recent discussions, here and elsewhere, with several that disagree with climate change, and it's causes have shown me that no matter what you say, they will not change their position.

This is mostly true, but not always. And the change doesn't happen over night. It might take two or three years, but I have seen people I thought were hopeless cases come around and manage to figure it out eventually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jeremy,

 

Welcome to Ex-C!

 

We've had discussions on the Flood here before with fundies and basically how could they breath if there were no plants to produce any oxygen. Goddidit, is not acceptable.

 

Good luck, let us know what happens.

 

Taph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A second question. Forget for a moment the improbability of Noah and his arc, what do you say to christans that claim there is evidence of a world wide flood? For example, one may say there are fossils of fish found in a mountain.
I laugh at them mostly. If their beliefs are based purely on evidence, as is the case even if they don't realize it, then why are they worried about evidence? The existence of fish fossils (I think it is clams actually, I don't remember reading anything about fish which is interesting) on mountain tops may be evidence of a flood, but it is also evidence for plate tectonics. And without any other evidence for there being a flood, which you would think there would be evidence that all but a handful of people and a couple of each animal was destroyed suddenly a few thousand years ago, it is far from convincing. And leaving out the impossibility of Noah's ark is leaving out the best part.

 

As for dating methods, I'd imagine that they would focus on carbon dating and try to show that it "doesn't work" by citing "studies" where it was used wrong, like trying it on a live animal or dinosaur fossils. Don't fall for it. Study up on the links already given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A second question. Forget for a moment the improbability of Noah and his arc, what do you say to christans that claim there is evidence of a world wide flood? For example, one may say there are fossils of fish found in a mountain.
I laugh at them mostly. If their beliefs are based purely on evidence, as is the case even if they don't realize it, then why are they worried about evidence?.....

 

Here's an interesting story about Noah's Ark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After learning that I was an atheist my wife was presented with a packet of information (for me) attacking carbon and radiometric dating. Also, one of the gentlemen from the church wants to meet with me to "discuss this." I know telling him to get lost would be the easiest, if not the best thing to do; and I may do just that. But I would like to know how accurate are these dating methods and how can they be tested for accuracy? Christians claim they do their own testing and find these dating methods faulty; I'm not quite sure how dispute their claim.

 

A second question. Forget for a moment the improbability of Noah and his arc, what do you say to christans that claim there is evidence of a world wide flood? For example, one may say there are fossils of fish found in a mountain.

 

Third, where can I find the age (estimated date) of the old testament books? For example, when was Genesis written?

 

 

Thank you very much.

Oh my goodness. Where do I begin? Avoid them dragging you into their pseudo-science. The world’s scientists have gone over all the claims. They have had their day in the spotlight and have been rejected as bad/non-science. It is not a religious issue. It’s credible science versus religious-based junk science. 99.98 percent of the world’s scientists reject this crap. That’s good enough for me.

 

Why isn’t it for them????????

 

That’s the real question you need to focus on with them. Why does their “faith” need scientific corroboration??? Let me see… “faith”…. “proof”…. :shrug: Proof doesn’t need faith, does it? Faith needing proof isn’t really “faith”, is it?

 

So I guess I would ask him why he needs it? Then why should you side with 0.02 percent of the scientists in the world to believe in Jesus as your personal savior? You see where I’m going? Don’t let them drag you into something they are far from qualified to criticize. I always like to say to them, “Isn’t it simply amazing how NON-scientists, have figured out what all the real scientists are missing!?”

 

Read this lengthy thread to watch a Creationist at their finest. I think you will quickly see how F*’d up their get in their thinking. http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?showtopic=12795

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha given the title of the thread I was expecting something appropriate for the Sex and Christianity forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s the real question you need to focus on with them. Why does their “faith” need scientific corroboration??? Let me see… “faith”…. “proof”…. :shrug: Proof doesn’t need faith, does it? Faith needing proof isn’t really “faith”, is it?

 

I just take this as "proof" that even they realize that "faith" is an unreasonable position. It's the last claim to make when backed into a corner and their opponent has them at "check." They will cheat and squirm their way out of checkmate by obtusely pulling the faith card. Intellectual dishonesty reigns amongst xian's with brains and the rest are just too thick to understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s the real question you need to focus on with them. Why does their “faith” need scientific corroboration??? Let me see… “faith”…. “proof”…. :shrug: Proof doesn’t need faith, does it? Faith needing proof isn’t really “faith”, is it?

 

I just take this as "proof" that even they realize that "faith" is an unreasonable position. It's the last claim to make when backed into a corner and their opponent has them at "check." They will cheat and squirm their way out of checkmate by obtusely pulling the faith card. Intellectual dishonesty reigns amongst xian's with brains and the rest are just too thick to understand.

Good point. We need to Pay close attention to the inconsistency of their position. It's subtle on their part, accomplished through trying to put you on the defensive. The fallacy is that it is on them to substantiate their position, whereas all they do is cast stones at what they perceive of as their enemy. Not only do they not have credible cause to dispute the whole world, all they have to offer is criticism. If you can step back, try to track with their inconsistencies and not allow them to distract you by putting you on the defensive. Then the frauds that they are will become glaringly obvious.

 

If nothing else he should have these guys defend their position here with us. We've dealt with this nonsense enough to expose them pretty quickly. If what they have is so solid, then they should have enough confidence to come in here with it. Ask them to discuss it with you here. If not.... well, I guess maybe they're just con-artists then, preying on those who lack knowledge yet. These guys are so damned transparent, it's grotesque.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s the real question you need to focus on with them. Why does their “faith” need scientific corroboration??? Let me see… “faith”…. “proof”…. :shrug: Proof doesn’t need faith, does it? Faith needing proof isn’t really “faith”, is it?

 

I just take this as "proof" that even they realize that "faith" is an unreasonable position. It's the last claim to make when backed into a corner and their opponent has them at "check." They will cheat and squirm their way out of checkmate by obtusely pulling the faith card. Intellectual dishonesty reigns amongst xian's with brains and the rest are just too thick to understand.

Good point. We need to Pay close attention to the inconsistency of their position. It's subtle on their part, accomplished through trying to put you on the defensive. The fallacy is that it is on them to substantiate their position, whereas all they do is cast stones at what they perceive of as their enemy. Not only do they not have credible cause to dispute the whole world, all they have to offer is criticism. If you can step back, try to track with their inconsistencies and not allow them to distract you by putting you on the defensive. Then the frauds that they are will become glaringly obvious.

 

If nothing else he should have these guys defend their position here with us. We've dealt with this nonsense enough to expose them pretty quickly. If what they have is so solid, then they should have enough confidence to come in here with it. Ask them to discuss it with you here. If not.... well, I guess maybe they're just con-artists then, preying on those who lack knowledge yet. These guys are so damned transparent, it's grotesque.

 

These guys would be slaughtered if they try and defend their position here. You can tell they are just repeating something they have been told. The packet of information ended up being print outs from christian websites. trueauthority.com was one, another was from bible life ministries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:)Welcome to the site Jeremy!

 

I think it is great the church is even willing to talk to you about it. Hopefully you can talk to the main guy one on one, just you and him and your wife. Then when you start making a lot of sense, maybe he won't get frustrated and get mad at you and start screaming. But, that may be just what your wife needs to see to make her own break. :wicked:

BTW, I think even Titus 1:14 in the NT may even say all those Jewish stories are just fables...

 

<snip>The recent discussions, here and elsewhere, with several that disagree with climate change, and it's causes have shown me that no matter what you say, they will not change their position. Some people, and maybe I'm one too, just will not change. Creationists will not change their position. "God did it" and nothing you can way would change their mind. No amount of facts, logic, or science, will ever sway them during the discussion. Years later it may sink in and there is hope for some, but pick your battles. Is this one you want to fight?

 

Dave, you're probably right. I came on here thinking a variation of Noah's Ark in a limited region may have happened. Debating it on a thread here, I did not go for the presented scientific evidence against it right away. IMO, most Christians are not nearly as scientifically oriented as you and many here seem to be. I can't believe I didn't see how obvious this was just a fable from the very beginning though! :Doh:

 

Jeremy, one suggestion is to not allow anyone to use biblical verses to prove their point. That forced me to think on my own and not resort to endoctorinated beliefs. What initially got to me is that it is impossible for someone to get two of every animal in even just Orlando, FL on a ship, much less a vast uncivilized region. Then, once the boat landed, what is everything going to eat? Each other? Floods kill all plants too. One problem led to another problem with the story... A week or two of thinking it over, I finally saw the light. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave, you're probably right. I came on here thinking a variation of Noah's Ark in a limited region may have happened. Debating it on a thread here, I did not go for the presented scientific evidence against it right away. IMO, most Christians are not nearly as scientifically oriented as you and many here seem to be. I can't believe I didn't see how obvious this was just a fable from the very beginning though! :Doh:

 

And it's not even original to the bible. They stole it from the Sumerian. It's their story of Gilgamesh. I'm sure you know the Sumerians lived in Sumer, between the Tigrus and Euphrates Rivers. In the spring when those two rivers flooded - their whole world flooded. Over the centuries a particularly bad flood probably got embellished several times to the story that ended up in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it's not even original to the bible. They stole it from the Sumerian. It's their story of Gilgamesh. I'm sure you know the Sumerians lived in Sumer, between the Tigrus and Euphrates Rivers. In the spring when those two rivers flooded - their whole world flooded. Over the centuries a particularly bad flood probably got embellished several times to the story that ended up in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

 

Dave, does that have anything to do with the flood of 5,600 BC found here?

 

Also, the Sumerians were rather smart for their time, IMO. It seems they are the ones attributed to creating the first written language, cuneiform, around 3000 BCE. I've heard they are the ones who invented the wheel, and they figured out the earth was round by the lunar eclipse. Yet, it seems I've read they discipated out of existence soon after the common era, and I wonder why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't sure you meant Carbon Dating or Girl/Boy Dating...

 

About dating, well, the supernova SN1987A helps to know that the universe and the Earth is at least much older than 168,000 years. Just by using simple trigonometry and the fact of the constant speed of light in vacuum. Either the supernova happened 168,000 years ago, or trigonometry is false, or the speed of light isn't constant or God is liar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it's not even original to the bible. They stole it from the Sumerian. It's their story of Gilgamesh. I'm sure you know the Sumerians lived in Sumer, between the Tigrus and Euphrates Rivers. In the spring when those two rivers flooded - their whole world flooded. Over the centuries a particularly bad flood probably got embellished several times to the story that ended up in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

 

Dave, does that have anything to do with the flood of 5,600 BC found here?

 

No. It would have been around 2650 BCE.

 

Also, the Sumerians were rather smart for their time, IMO. It seems they are the ones attributed to creating the first written language, cuneiform, around 3000 BCE. I've heard they are the ones who invented the wheel, and they figured out the earth was round by the lunar eclipse. Yet, it seems I've read they discipated out of existence soon after the common era, and I wonder why?

 

They didn't go anywhere - Iraq is still there, just the name changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. It would have been around 2650 BCE.

That date makes more sense for these fables.

 

They didn't go anywhere - Iraq is still there, just the name changed.

Well... I was wondering why I never heard of the name Sumerians any more.

 

Thanks Dave. :thanks:

 

Gosh... is that all you do is study all subjects? You seem well informed about everything! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gosh... is that all you do is study all subjects? You seem well informed about everything! :)

You know that old saying.... I know a little about everything and a whole lot about nothing. I've just been around for awhile and picked up things here and there. A confession too..... I usually do an Internet search to make sure I got it right. :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.