SavedOnebyGrace Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 11 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,058 Content Per Day: 14.97 Reputation: 5,191 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/30/2023 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 1 hour ago, JohnD said: Back dating this constant decay Setterfield and Norman wrote a paper indicating that c. was as much as 10 million times faster 7 thousand years ago. Take the most distant star and divide its present light years distance by 10 million. Being a scientific person myself, I can easily account for the variance you are seeing in the recorded data. Measuring methods vary with technology. The technology of Galileo's time is quite different than the technology of today. The technology I specify as a Design Engineer determine the accuracy of what we are measuring or controlling. The different methods, researchers and equipment accuracies reflect our ever increasing technical ability for accurate measurements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnD Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 0 Topic Count: 905 Topics Per Day: 0.19 Content Count: 9,646 Content Per Day: 2.02 Reputation: 5,832 Days Won: 9 Joined: 04/07/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 3 hours ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said: Being a scientific person myself, I can easily account for the variance you are seeing in the recorded data. Measuring methods vary with technology. The technology of Galileo's time is quite different than the technology of today. The technology I specify as a Design Engineer determine the accuracy of what we are measuring or controlling. The different methods, researchers and equipment accuracies reflect our ever increasing technical ability for accurate measurements. I suppose you can document this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kan Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,661 Content Per Day: 0.49 Reputation: 1,292 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 12 hours ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said: You've picked three scriptures out of the dozens that Hazard listed to nitpick. It is you who cannot read and understand the literal scriptures that Hazard, Other One, and others have posted. You twist them to fit your preconceived narrative that some denomination minister preached some long time ago. It is pointless carrying on this dialog. YEC are driving people to atheism, not OEC. I have read all of his texts, and by his own word, he focuses on the three groups of text to support the theory. The other texts are not about the subject, and don't support the theory anyway, so we don't have to count them in. Happy New Year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kan Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,661 Content Per Day: 0.49 Reputation: 1,292 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 12 hours ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said: Your lack of discernment astounds me. There's nothing here to support evolution. I don't know why you keep bringing that up. It's blinded you to the truth in front of your eyes in Holy Scripture. If we can't agree to disagree, I can just ignore you in the future. Are young earth creationists members of a cult? I know the double flood, pre creation world, is not evolution, but since evolution came in, people have been scraping to get more flexible theories about creation to suit the long time spans, which they believe must have occurred before creation. That's what I was trying to say. We know that the age of the rocks as claimed by science, has nearly everyone convinced that the earth is much older than the Bible proports. And there is no shortage of people who have tried to lengthen the Bible account of creation. For instance, in the mid to late 1800's, the JW's made each creation day, one thousand years. They have gone to a lot of trouble to prove that from the Bible as well, but it doesn't make it right, especially since it it not based on a sound comprehension of the English language, let alone the tones of scripture. Yet the majority of their congregation are convinced that its true. What I am saying is that this new theory of the double flood etc, is as deceptive as the JW teaching. Once a person has bought into it, there is little chance of them seeing the scriptures any other way. But what could be considered, is that the saints have not picked up on the new theory in the past, not the disciples, or the prophets, or the great men of the Bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedOnebyGrace Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 11 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,058 Content Per Day: 14.97 Reputation: 5,191 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/30/2023 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 16 hours ago, JohnD said: I suppose you can document this? Of course. I can refer you to the university where I got my degree in Mechanical Engineering and the textbooks I used. I can refer you to the reference books I used on process control and measurement as a Mechanical / Design Engineer with 40+ years of experience. Nearly all of my experience has been on the technical side of engineering, including the use of lasers, electron microscopes, non-contact measurement techniques, process controls, etc. One of my hobbies outside of work and staying current with both chemical and mechanical engineering fields, is astronomy and the building and using of telescopes. I've been building telescopes since I was in grade school, a long, long, time ago. I also program in multiple languages. My IQ is 157, so I'm not the smartest person in the world, but I'm not a dummy either. (Not counting my patents, my military classified work is now being used in the Middle East on the ground and in the air. This was both electronics and optics work.) This is work I can't and won't talk about. I have moral, legal and ethical limits as to what I am allowed to talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedOnebyGrace Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 11 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,058 Content Per Day: 14.97 Reputation: 5,191 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/30/2023 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 14 hours ago, Kan said: I have read all of his texts, and by his own word, he focuses on the three groups of text to support the theory. The other texts are not about the subject, and don't support the theory anyway, so we don't have to count them in. Happy New Year. Well I'm pleased you read what others post back to you, in total. Happy New Year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedOnebyGrace Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 11 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,058 Content Per Day: 14.97 Reputation: 5,191 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/30/2023 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 14 hours ago, Kan said: I know the double flood, pre creation world, is not evolution, but since evolution came in, people have been scraping to get more flexible theories about creation to suit the long time spans, which they believe must have occurred before creation. That's what I was trying to say. We know that the age of the rocks as claimed by science, has nearly everyone convinced that the earth is much older than the Bible proports. And there is no shortage of people who have tried to lengthen the Bible account of creation. For instance, in the mid to late 1800's, the JW's made each creation day, one thousand years. They have gone to a lot of trouble to prove that from the Bible as well, but it doesn't make it right, especially since it it not based on a sound comprehension of the English language, let alone the tones of scripture. Yet the majority of their congregation are convinced that its true. What I am saying is that this new theory of the double flood etc, is as deceptive as the JW teaching. Once a person has bought into it, there is little chance of them seeing the scriptures any other way. But what could be considered, is that the saints have not picked up on the new theory in the past, not the disciples, or the prophets, or the great men of the Bible. The double flood pre-recreation world is traced back to the third century before Christ. So tying it to evolution, it is a disingenuous means of disregarding the Holy Scriptures that don't fit your preconceived narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kan Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,661 Content Per Day: 0.49 Reputation: 1,292 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 6 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said: ... My IQ is 157... My IQ is only just enough not to fall off a moving bicycle. That's pretty good don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kan Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,661 Content Per Day: 0.49 Reputation: 1,292 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 5 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said: The double flood pre-recreation world is traced back to the third century before Christ. So tying it to evolution, it is a disingenuous means of disregarding the Holy Scriptures that don't fit your preconceived narrative. It's new to me, and I haven't found it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedOnebyGrace Posted December 31, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 11 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,058 Content Per Day: 14.97 Reputation: 5,191 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/30/2023 Status: Offline Share Posted December 31, 2015 10 minutes ago, Kan said: My IQ is only just enough not to fall off a moving bicycle. That's pretty good don't you think? IQ is just a worldly measure of intelligence. I've really been in awe of some people I've conversed with on various Christian forums. Christian knowledge far outweighs IQ. Don't sell yourself short, and I won't get a big head that is undeserved as a Christian believer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts