MadMez

Oh rly? I'm guessing a dino bone with an "undisciphered" pictogram on it (maybe saying "This Way to the Arc" ) would shake up quite a few established thoeries. I'm suprised there wasn't one next to that human foorprint in the dino one.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to archaeologist: Would you like to discuss the global flood at the Evolution/Creation forum?

Would you like to discuss inerrancy at this forum in a new thread that I could start?

arnoldo

There is non concensus regarding that date or even if it even was global or local. Kinda like there is no concensus amongst scientists whether global warming will melt the ice caps and flood the world.

James Brown

Still missing the point.

First, you've offered no evidence that dinosaurs existed after the supposed flood, or even alongside human civilization to begin with.

Second, you've provided no samples of dinosaur bones with human writing on them. Whether a dinosaur bone was written on before or after the flood makes no difference, because no dinosaur bones were written on at all. Any dinosaur bones that ancient humans may have found (but did not understand) were already fossilized.

Third, when and how a language was deciphered is irrelevant to the issue. Again, there's a difference between a bone with writing on it--whether we can read it or not--and a bone with no writing on it. Surely you understand the difference between a blank page and a page filled with Microsoft Wingdings font. How difficult it is to translate Wingdings has no bearing on how easy it is to identify writing. I can't read Chinese, but I know what it looks like, and I can certainly tell if there is Chinese writing on a piece of paper.

So demonstrate a dinosaur bone that was used for writing, and that will be evidence that dinosaurs and humans lived side-by-side. If you can't, then your claims that the matter is irrelevant will be just more hand-waving based on unproved assertions.

Again, more assertions, with no evidence. This sounds like another example of binary thinking, another symptom of fundamentalism. People either believe or they don't believe. They are either saved or lost. They either love God or they worship Satan. If a scientist's work agrees with one narrow interpretation of an ancient text, then she is a righteous warrior in the battle for truth. But if her test results contradict the text, then it is biased and filled with errors and based on flawed assumptions.

And yet, there are countless scientists who claim to be Christian, and they agree that the universe is not six thousand years old. They agree that dinosaurs and men did not walk side by side. They know how to use scientific instruments properly, with no chance of bias, and they are not afraid to publish their results to peer review and challenge and criticism. You'll never see Kenneth Miller agree that Adam and Eve rode triceratops around in the Garden, and yet he is a Bible-believing Christian who worships God in church every Sunday.

Oh ho, so the results of qualified professionals do matter, after all. Earlier you said that they were all biased and used faulty assumptions. Now you want to silence criticism on this board by asserting their authority. Which is it?

I did. Now read this:
It would appear that Hapgood tweaked his source maps to fit his conclusions, which allows him to blame any corrections on later copyists. That's poor scholarship, whether we agree with his conclusions or not.

archaeologist

Let's start with the flood and what are the realistic ground rules?

You haven't done that for their pre-flood existence. I use the Bible where is your evidence.

First, i do not have to as yo have presented none from the pre-flood world and cannot prove that dinosaur bones were written on in the first place. Yours is an unrealistic demand.

Second, You can't prove that

Third, You can't prove that and dinosaurs did not exist millions of years ago.

It still wouldn't be proof for ink can write on fossilized bone so your urealistic demand is worthless.

I do not need to provide evidence for what is known by every man.

None of that makes them/him correct nor christian. You obviously do not know what takes place in peer review process. Creationists are not afraid, they are discriminated against. Oh and peer review is a worthless system.

If they are publishing man's ways then they are not obeying God. God proclaimed who created the Heavebsand earth an dall of God's followers must do the same, there is no unbiased position here.

Nice eample of eisogesis. I said no such thing.

Link didn't work for me.

spin

Bible scholars over the last several centuries have worked out when that was. Why haven't you?

1. Start with Solomon at circa 960 BCE building the temple.
2. The exodus was 486 years before that (1 Kgs 6:1).
3. Israel was in Egypt 430 years (Ex 12:40).
4. Jacob (Israel) went to Egypt when he was 130 years old (Gen 47:28).
5. When Jacob was born, Isaac was 60 (Gen 25:26).
6. When Isaac was born, Abraham was 100 (Gen 21:5).
7. When Abraham was born Terah was 70 (Gen 12:26).

= 2176

You then use the parents' age at the birth of their sons to go back to the birth of Arphachshad two years after the flood (Gen 11:10ff):

1. Salah born when Arphaxad was 35
2. Eber born when Salah was 30
3. Peleg born when Eber was 34
4. Reu born when Peleg was 30
5. Serug born when Reu was 32
6. Nahor born when Serug was 30
7. Terah born when Nahor was 29

= 185 + 2
------------------
= 2363 BCE

HTH.


spin

(Any addition errors are mine, so do check it.)

James Brown

Dinosaurs aren't mentioned in the Bible. Are you denying that dinosaurs ever existed? The evidence that dinosaurs existed is as near as your local natural history museum.

Wait, back up. You originally asserted that it's impossible to tell the difference between a pre-flood and a post-flood artifact. Never mind the notion that such a notion presumes the flood actually occurred, MarkA offered that one way to determine would be if human writing could be found on a dinosaur bone. Presumably, this is because you believe (as do most young-earth creationists we encounter here) that dinosaurs were originally created side-by-side with humans, and that they all died in the flood or shortly thereafter. Since no dinosaurs existed post-flood, saith the YEC'rs, therefore, any dinosaur artifact would be pre-flood, and if they were written on by human hand, then that would be even further evidence of the simultaneous existence of humans and dinosaurs.

In other words, MarkA offered you a chance to provide evidence for your theory. Instead you've chosen to insist that we provide evidence that writing on dinosaurs doesn't exist. That's just silly, though. Of course I can't provide evidence that dinosaur bones were written on, whether pre-flood or post-flood. I never will, either, because humans and dinosaurs did not co-exist.

I'm realizing now that you believe that dinosaurs also existed post-flood. This makes any challenge to you very convenient, since the flood was not an extinction event but merely a bump in the road in the lives of dinosaurs.

So in a nutshell, you believe that dinosaurs and humans existed together as far back as the beginning of the universe. You believe that the flood completely destroyed all traces of human civilization. You believe that dinosaurs and humans existed together after the flood. And you believe that any dating of artifacts is impossible because of the flood.

You've effectively shielded yourself from criticism. You have no evidence for your assertions, and you've responded to requests for evidence with claims that any evidence would be impossible to provide. You would never accept that line of reasoning from anyone else, and yet you want us to accept it based on your word.

Yes, I can prove that dinosaur bones have fossilized, on the grounds that every dinosaur bone found to date has been fossilized.

Yes, you've asserted that before. Do you have any evidence that dinosaurs are recent? Since dinosaurs are not mentioned in the Bible, please provide something else.

Oh ho, so you do accept that dinosaur bones are fossilized. I guess that means that you do agree with me that dinosaur bones have been fossilized.

"Don't need to"? Or "can't"? It is known by every man that humans and dinosaurs didn't co-exist.

Oh really? Please enlighten us on how the peer review system is so worthless AND explain why Creationists try so hard to have their own work peer-reviewed as well.

Surely God is not afraid of fact-checkers.


I don't know what that word is. But yes, you did say those things.

First, in post #40, you wrote: Then, in the same post, you wrote: So which is it? Can we trust the experts, or not? Should we defer to their experience and privileged information, or should we dismiss their work if they don't agree with our preconceptions based on their assumptions and ideals?

Or, as I suspect, do you cling to authority when it supports your position and reject it when it doesn't?

Too bad. It demonstrates that Hapgood's work is not to be trusted because of poor scholarship.

Minimalist

Which is why no one takes you seriously, Arch.


BTW, Hapgood's theory of Earth Crust Displacement has been devastated by real science. It may have had a brief life-span prior to the understanding of plate tectonics but it is now a hopelessly outdated concept.....much as your bible being historical is now a hopelessly outdated concept.

arnoldo

I'm not good at math so I'm not even going to attempt to check it. The following article mentions the concept of "telescoping" and other issues which may factor in to determine chronological dates.


Of course the above info may be entirely wrong and there is no wiggle room towards setting the date of the flood to 2363 B.C.

lpetrich

Except that there is not a speck of evidence for a global flood.

Trees continued growing as if it had never happened -> tree rings
Sediment continued being deposited on lake bottoms as if it had never happened -> lake varves
Snow kept falling on glaciers as if it had never happened -> ice layers

That's a very contemptuous, dismissive attitude. You really ought to show some respect for their labors.

They aren't guessing -- they put together pieces of a puzzle.

Not because they don't want, but because those claims are not very convincing. People didn't have the Internet back then, and they could often get mixed-up ideas of what other places were like, with no way of correcting those notions.

There isn't ANY writing found on dinosaurs' bones, and there is NO pottery found with them. What was true of that Mesozoic megafauna was also true of the Cenozoic megafauna until the end of the Pleistocene.

(writings on dinosaur bones...)
But one could still recognize that it is a form of writing.

How are radiocarbon, tree rings, lake varves, and ice layers "fallible", "corrupt", and "manipulatable"? They can't be worse than the Bible, which has a LOT of demonstrated errancy.

(Archeologists and Charles Hapgood's maps)
That's what many crackpots claim, that mainstream scientists are closed-minded "orthodox oxen". But for every heresy that eventually gets accepted, there are lots of heresies that do not make it and that we seldom learn anything about.

Bertrand Russell: An Outline of Intellectual Rubbish
But if there is no evidence that it had happened, then why bother?

When they have hardly ever submitted anything to some mainstream journal?

Those creationist claims are evidence-free crybaby self-pitying rhetoric.
Why so? What would you prefer instead?

What is that great unified entity, "man"?