OEC and ID

[alphaparticle]

 

shiloh- you've stated this before and at this point is kind of meaningless rhetoric to me. You can accuse me of smorgasbord reasoning all day but you have yet to convince me that I am in error that way.

 

Looking- I should check out the Collins book.

So you do think it is up to man to decide which parts of the Bible are true and which parts are expendable? 

 

No. The truth is what it is, regardless of what we think or how in error we are.

 

1 cor 13:9, 10 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.

[gray wolf]

Well said.

[Enoch2021]

I've done some digging and found some accounts that run counter to the claims of that creation website.  I am not going to argue again about OE/YE creationism, ID etc, and cite opposing sources, however.  I do not think anyone benefits or is convinced by the arguments either way, so I respectfully bow out.

 

Too funny.

 

You see, I try and protect most people (out of kindness) from self-inflicted wounds.  In this particular case, from Ad Hominem attacks by providing many sub-references that are secular....but alas, it just doesn't work and I don't know why. 

 

The only conclusion I can come up with is when people start reading they see "Creation" or "Bible..." then immediately come to a conclusion without paying attention to detail.

 

So, having said that......are you implying that these Gentlemen/Ladies and their publishers are/were CREATIONISTS??  :

 

Mirov, N.T., The Genus Pinus, Ronald Press Co., New York, 1967.

 

Glock W.S., Studhalter, R.A. and Agerter, S.R., Classification and multiplicity of growth layers in the branches of trees, Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 140(1): p. 123, 1960

 

 

"I do not think anyone benefits or is convinced by the arguments either way, so I respectfully bow out."

 

I've also noted this statement a number of times.  IMHO, to minimize or eliminate this "bow out" I would suggest to simply eliminate Baseless Assertions.

 

 

Overall though, "Tree Rings" and there "divined" dates while interesting; are not a threat to the WORD of GOD they fit within the YEC "Window" , IMHO

[gray wolf]

You're not one for letting sleeping dogs lie, are you? lol  Always accusing me of making fallacious arguments.  Well I don't really think I did here, not on a person.  I correctly pointed out that the link you provided was a creationist website and references within the article will be seen with that lens.  About which I do not have a problem with; creation and science need not conflict . To my knowledge, I did not make a baseless assertion- - I simply spare others the quotes and source materials and rely on my own words.  I commented in another thread certain things in YEC that I have problems with.  The problem for me as a scientist will always be when we square the evidence to fit a basic assumption.  Whether it is an evolutionist doing this or a YEC advocate, it is counterproductive.  I will leave it at that.  

[LookingForAnswers]

 

I've done some digging and found some accounts that run counter to the claims of that creation website.  I am not going to argue again about OE/YE creationism, ID etc, and cite opposing sources, however.  I do not think anyone benefits or is convinced by the arguments either way, so I respectfully bow out.

 

Too funny.

 

You see, I try and protect most people (out of kindness) from self-inflicted wounds.  In this particular case, from Ad Hominem attacks by providing many sub-references that are secular....but alas, it just doesn't work and I don't know why. 

 

The only conclusion I can come up with is when people start reading they see "Creation" or "Bible..." then immediately come to a conclusion without paying attention to detail.

 

So, having said that......are you implying that these Gentlemen/Ladies and their publishers are/were CREATIONISTS??  :

 

Mirov, N.T., The Genus Pinus, Ronald Press Co., New York, 1967.

 

Glock W.S., Studhalter, R.A. and Agerter, S.R., Classification and multiplicity of growth layers in the branches of trees, Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 140(1): p. 123, 1960

 

 

"I do not think anyone benefits or is convinced by the arguments either way, so I respectfully bow out."

 

I've also noted this statement a number of times.  IMHO, to minimize or eliminate this "bow out" I would suggest to simply eliminate Baseless Assertions.

 

 

Overall though, "Tree Rings" and there "divined" dates while interesting; are not a threat to the WORD of GOD they fit within the YEC "Window" , IMHO

 

 

Random quotes taken out of context do not equate to science.

[Guest]

The problem for me as a scientist will always be how do we square the evidence with the basic assumption?

 

 

Scientific "Assumptive" Evidence Lands In The Dust Bin Daily

 

He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end. Ecclesiastes 3:11

 

So, As A Scientist Simply Observe, Model And Report

 

Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest. Ecclesiastes 9:10

 

Physicists have discovered a jewel-like geometric object that dramatically simplifies calculations of particle interactions and challenges the notion that space and time are fundamental components of reality.

 

 

“This is completely new and very much simpler than anything that has been done before,” said Andrew Hodges, a mathematical physicist at Oxford University who has been following the work.

 

The revelation that particle interactions, the most basic events in nature, may be consequences of geometry significantly advances a decades-long effort to reformulate quantum field theory, the body of laws describing elementary particles and their interactions. Interactions that were previously calculated with mathematical formulas thousands of terms long can now be described by computing the volume of the corresponding jewel-like “amplituhedron,” which yields an equivalent one-term expression.

 

“The degree of efficiency is mind-boggling,” said Jacob Bourjaily, a theoretical physicist at Harvard University and one of the researchers who developed the new idea. “You can easily do, on paper, computations that were infeasible even with a computer before.”

 

The new geometric version of quantum field theory could also facilitate the search for a theory of quantum gravity that would seamlessly connect the large- and small-scale pictures of the universe. Attempts thus far to incorporate gravity into the laws of physics at the quantum scale have run up against nonsensical infinities and deep paradoxes. The amplituhedron, or a similar geometric object, could help by removing two deeply rooted principles of physics: locality and unitarity. https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/

 

And Avoid Mocking The Holy Spirit

 

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NIV)

 

As He Shows Us

 

“But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. John 15:26 (ESV)

 

The Christ

 

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Ephesians 3:9 (KJV)

 

~

 

Be Blessed Beloved Of The KING

 

The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:

The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:

The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.

 

And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them. Numbers 6:24-27 (KJV)

 

Love, Your Brother Joe

 

Praying~!

[Guest]

Random quotes taken out of context do not equate to science.

 

 

Random Quotes Taken Out Of Science

 

How foolish can you be? He is the Potter, and he is certainly greater than you, the clay! Should the created thing say of the one who made it, "He didn't make me"? Does a jar ever say, "The potter who made me is stupid"? Isaiah 29:16 (NLT)

 

Does Not Equate

 

Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding irreverent, empty speech and contradictions from the "knowledge" that falsely bears that name. John 6:20 (HCSB)

 

To Truth

 

But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

 

For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

 

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 1 Corinthians 15:20-22

 

~

 

Be Blessed Beloved Of The KING

 

"Most certainly I tell you, he who hears my word, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life, and doesn't come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. John 5:24 (WEB)

 

Love, Your Brother Joe

[Enoch2021]

You're not one for letting sleeping dogs lie, are you? lol  Always accusing me of making fallacious arguments.  Well I don't really think I did here, not on a person.  I correctly pointed out that the link you provided was a creationist website and references within the article will be seen with that lens.  About which I do not have a problem with; creation and science need not conflict .  I am sorry for bringing the subject up, better to internalize and work it out on my own.  I commented in another thread certain things in YEC that I have problems with.  The problem for me as a scientist will always be when we square the evidence to fit a basic assumption.  Whether it is an evolutionist doing this or a YEC advocate, it is counterproductive.  I will leave it at that.  

 

 

You're not one for letting sleeping dogs lie, are you? lol

 

That would not be me Sir

 

Always accusing me of making fallacious arguments.

 

I didn't accuse you.  I said that you DID and SUPPORTED it.  Always?....no, just when you do it.

 

Well I don't really think I did here, not on a person.  I correctly pointed out that the link you provided was a creationist website and references within the article will be seen with that lens.

 

 

Ad Hominem attacks can be against a Person, Group, or Organization.  It's an attack or dismissal that is based on emotion not anything substantive.  Yours was textbook.  

 

I also provided the references that weren't apart of "Creationists" conclusions.  Which were apparently dismissed.

 

creation and science need not conflict .

 

The Organization in question is Chalk Full of Scientists.

 

 

The problem for me as a scientist

 

 

You're a Scientist?

 

Whether it is an evolutionist doing this or a YEC advocate, it is counterproductive.

 

 

I disagree. IMHO, It's appears it's only counter-productive when the Baseless Assertions are called on the Carpet.  Then when it's finally whittled down on these forums and are exposed for their lack of substance....the Baseless Assertion postulator cry's foul or heads to the "Last Port in the Storm", which includes:

 

1.  it's harmful to the Body of Christ

 

2.  Conjures some ill-conceived Insult or Slight

 

3.  Muddies the Water with insignificant most often irrelevant subject matter

 

4.  Overt or Implied Insults

 

Have I missed anything? (Note: you have done neither of these to this point)

 

 

One of my Missions in Life is.....

 

(1 Thessalonians 5:21) "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

 

As you've most likely noticed, I won't be letting that one slide anytime soon.

[LookingForAnswers]

For those that like to prove things, here is the actual science behind dendrochronology.

 

http://www.geog.psu.edu/sites/default/files/Maxwell%202011-%20comparison%20of%20two-techniques.pdf

 

dendrochronology is a bit deeper than each ring equals one year like the YEC site tired to imply.

 

Also, the quote from Dr Mriv was taken out of context and he did not question the determined age of the trees.  I am trying to find a quote of this that I can use and should have it by the end of the night.

Edited February 13, 2014 by LookingForAnswers

[gray wolf]

Peace be upon you. Yes I am a medicinal chemist. You've probably taken some of the medicines I've helped bring to market.

PM me if you want to continue the discussion and I will tell you about my reservations. The cause of Christ is not served by quarreling and personal exchanges.