Just a bit back on the subject...

Let me do the math.  21 incidents in 19 years.  Ohh, gee...that's so disarming!  You and Lula have disagreed about the "truth" more times than that in the last year, which means that at least one of you has been posting misinformation to the Internet.  You have done so deliberately, both of you, because you refuse to admit that you do not and can not know the truth.  Maybe if the scientific method was your guide, you could pare this down a bit.  But will you?  Nope.  Your shortcut to knowledge, aka faith, is too strong.  To admit you're wrong would destroy your entire world.  Don't feel bad - millions of faithers have gone before you, and millions more are being brainwashed by ignorant parents every day.  Your status is safe.

God is outside of time.  He's not bound by time at all. 

Lula and I agree to disagree on certain things and there is much we do agree on.  We only have these strong debates when it comes to the authority of the RCC.  Other than that, we get along quite hunky dory.  And if you're squemish about blood, stay away.  The articles are adult content and if you can't handle it......well you know. 

carbon dating is good but it's not perfect.  It can only date things accurately if the variables stay the same.  If some catastophe happens it upsets the dating accuracy...like Mt. St Helens or say like the flood.  Evey Scientist I've ever spoken with says the same but with a much more elaborate way than I can.  I'm not a Scientist but I do know they don't put all their money behind this carbon 14 dating.  It's a useful tool but only up to a point. 

no, not at all.  The Jews followed it for centuries way before the word Christian was even formed on anyone's lips. 

well show me something that has been wrong.  Everything that can be verified, places, events, dates, people etc have been verified by the experts even to the people who went on a search to disprove it to be. There have been some things thought to be in error but upon further research found to be quite true instead.   Many have been converted in the process.  There was one well known archeologist who researched the book of Acts for 30 years.  He knew there were places, dates, names, and people in that book alone that he wished to research to verify if were true historically and thru archeology.  So he went and spent many years following in the footsteps of Paul. 

 He went into this adventure an unbeliever and came out singing God's praises.  He said the detail Luke put down was quite amazing.  He was able to verify almost everything written down in that book alone.   Luke being a doctor paid attention to every detail. 

Just checking.

LOL

Be Well, ~Alderic

science is a rat race and the best way to get kicked off it is to fake data.  Nobody says that science is perfect or that there are cheats in it but seeing as the vast majority of science is built on other knowedge it is checked.  If an article doesn't fit in with the pattern, and later evidence, it is gradually ingored.

OCK POSTS:

Radiometeric dating uses the relative concentrations of parent and daughter products in the radioactive decay chains; in this case, Rubidium-87 to Strontium-87. OCK, while the isotope concentrations or ratios can be measured very accurately, the problem is isotopes are not dates.  To derivie ages from such measurements, unprovable assumptions have to be made such as:

1---The starting conditions are known. For example, that there was no daughter isotope present at the start, or that we know how much was there.

2---Decay rates have always been constant.

3---Systems were closed or isolated so that no parent or daughter isotopes were lost or added.

Well if you've said it, then it must've been in a cryptic way because I've read and this is the first time I've seen you do it. Also, you're attributing the unethical practices of some onto many. That just doesn't work KFC. There are examples out there were things have been verified to be a certain age, but I'm not going to waste my time.

You may want the truth KFC, but the thing is...in your search for truth, you've closed yourself off to truth. You've already made up your mind on what Truth is, to you. You believe that God is the truth. So, in essence, when it comes to things like faith/religion, you're only open to the truth that verifies your truth.

Oi...that made me drive circles in my head.

Well your head is planted in the sand, Ock

No, your head is, KFC

No your head is, Ock.

No, yours is Lula

Just wanted to get those posts out of the way.  Perhaps I should have added some nyaa nyaas to it.  Oh well, nobody is perfect.

Here's some facts for you to ponder of men who have dreamed up theories and call it science. 

In 1862, a scientist named thompson said the earth was 20 million years old. 35 years later, he doubled the age to 40 million. 2 years later,  a guy named J. Joly said it was 90 million years old. Then, Rayleigh in 1921 said the earth has been here for 1 billion years. 11 years later, W.Hotchkiss moved the figure up to 1.6 billion. A. Holmes in 1947 declared the earth to be 3.35 billion years old. In 1956, he raised it to 4.5 billion.

No matter how you slice and dice it, radiometric dating techniques really don't mean that much. The fact is there is STILL no objective radiological proof that the earth was any of these ages old....certainly not 4.5 billion years old. The new "Age" of the earth is given to fit the most current stellar evolution theory that is in vogue...and alas! taught to unwary school children as "fact". Oh my....I wish it weren't so.

And guess what back?  This doesn't prove one iota that the universe is billions of years old.

Yet, there are many powerful lines of evidence in favor of a young earth only a few thousands years old.

no it doesn't.

Given that no theory is ever 100% proven, much less 100% agreed upon, it'll be a cold day in your Hell before science will be able to claim the same degree of certainty that you so casually embrace for the Bible.  At least science changes & refines our understanding as new facts become known, unlike...