Why radioactive decay dates beyond around 4300 years are invalid

[RV_Wizard]

On 3/22/2024 at 4:38 AM, RdJ said:

Noah took two giraffes on a boat because there was a local flood.

Personally, I would have preferred that he swat both mosquitos.

Edited March 24, 2024 by RV_Wizard

[dad2]

On 3/21/2024 at 6:56 AM, The Barbarian said:

 You see, creationists, faced with the fact that the Ark would not have been even close to big enough to hold seven pairs (or two for unclean) of all the animals existing on the Earth today, suppose that there was some kind of hypersuperevolution that produced all the others in a few thousand years.    But if they were right, that would mean new species popping up every month.

 

Why would it have taken a whole month? Since we do not know how adapting used to occur, we can't know how long it would have taken. I personally assume that living creatures likely could have adapted. In other words if Ham went south to a warmer climate, perhaps his skin and other things could have adapted while he was alive still. If a bird needed to adjust their migration routes or diets etc why might that not have happened to them while still alive back then? We don't know the exact blend and nature of laws that existed then. It actually seems possible to me that many creatures sort of got 'frozen' or locked in to their instincts and migrations etc and that the world and nature probably changed. Yet they still had their 'old' instincts and etc. We see eels, for example migrate thousands of miles out to a place near where the continents were joined together today (Sargasso Sea) Why? It is almost like they have built in habitual instincts to go and breed there, despite it making no apparent sense in this present world and nature.

 That brings to mind a question. Could animals in the former nature have been in more direct and instant communication with God or nature or whatever so that they could adjust and adapt on the fly as needed?

Looking at the future in the bible, (which I think is the actual key to the far past, rather than the present being the key) there is evidence supporting this concept. Frightening evidence. There is coming a time in the end when animals will all change their 'normal' behaviors (built in instincts) and attack mankind! 

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, dad2 said:

Why would it have taken a whole month? Since we do not know how adapting used to occur,

Actually, we do.  Wheat, for example, evolved over a few hundred years under human selection in pre-Hebrew times.   Same as today.   

1 hour ago, dad2 said:

I personally assume that living creatures likely could have adapted. In other words if Ham went south to a warmer climate, perhaps his skin and other things could have adapted while he was alive still.

No.    Individuals don't evolve.  Populations do.  

1 hour ago, dad2 said:

If a bird needed to adjust their migration routes or diets etc why might that not have happened to them while still alive back then?

Lack of evidence, among many other things.   Imagination is no substitute for reality.  Sorry.

1 hour ago, dad2 said:

That brings to mind a question. Could animals in the former nature have been in more direct and instant communication with God or nature or whatever so that they could adjust and adapt on the fly as needed?

And one more unscriptural miracle to save your imaginary stories?     Once you get to call in a miracle to cover every goof, any story is equally believable.

1 hour ago, dad2 said:

Frightening evidence. There is coming a time in the end when animals will all change their 'normal' behaviors (built in instincts) and attack mankind! 

You've just substituted animals for the boogeyman.   C'mon.

 

[The Barbarian]

On 3/21/2024 at 7:28 PM, RV_Wizard said:

What was the level of the sea when those mountains were covered?  Which mountains did Genesis exclude when it said "And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered?"

You're still trying to fit reality with the ancient Hebrew ideas of the universe.   That passage assumes a flat earth with a dome shaped sky with windows in it through which rain fell.   Only one side of a spherical earth could be under heaven as the Hebrews considered it. 

You see, creationists, faced with the fact that the Ark would not have been even close to big enough to hold seven pairs (or two for unclean) of all the animals existing on the Earth today, suppose that there was some kind of hypersuperevolution that produced all the others in a few thousand years.

On 3/21/2024 at 7:28 PM, RV_Wizard said:

1. The ark contained about 1.88 million cubic feet of interior room.

You might want to read the YE John Woodmorappe Noah's Ark; a Feasibility Study.

On 3/21/2024 at 7:28 PM, RV_Wizard said:

There are fewer than 34,000 species of known, land-dependent vertebrates in the world today.

Woodmorappe showed that the ark would not have room for that many animals with food for a year. 

He suggested maybe 2000, "kinds" that evolved by hyperevolution after the ark landed.

On 3/21/2024 at 7:28 PM, RV_Wizard said:

3. Only two of each "kind" were required.

Seven.    Only unclean animals were by twos.  Is there ANYTHING in the Bible that you AGREE with?

 

[The Barbarian]

There's an easy way to solve this problem; build an ark, load it up with the requisite animals and people and let it float for a year to see what happens.

Creationist steadfastly refuse to do this.   Fo reasons we already know.

 

[dad2]

Quote

Actually, we do.  Wheat, for example, evolved over a few hundred years under human selection in pre-Hebrew times.   Same as today.   

Source?

Quote

No.    Individuals don't evolve.  Populations do.  

No one asked what animals 'do'. The issue is what happened long ago.

[dad2]

2 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

There's an easy way to solve this problem; build an ark, load it up with the requisite animals and people and let it float for a year to see what happens.

Creationist steadfastly refuse to do this.   Fo reasons we already know.

 

No God involved? He designed the ark. He brought the animals to it. He closed the door on the ark. He provided all that was needed.

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, dad2 said:

He designed the ark. He brought the animals to it. He closed the door on the ark. He provided all that was needed.

Then it should be easy for creationists to build an ark, load it up with the requisite animals and people and let it float for a year to see what happens.

We all know why they won't.   

 

[dad2]

11 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

Then it should be easy for creationists to build an ark, load it up with the requisite animals and people and let it float for a year to see what happens.

We all know why they won't.   

 

Yes we do, because God never told us to. I don't question the operation He conducted in the flood. He knew how to design a boat and etc. Your armchair second guessing God in a doubtful spirit means nothing.

[The Barbarian]

Then it should be easy for creationists to build an ark, load it up with the requisite animals and people and let it float for a year to see what happens.

We all know why they won't.  

38 minutes ago, dad2 said:

because God never told us to

Because you know what would happen.  

38 minutes ago, dad2 said:

Your armchair second guessing God in a doubtful spirit means nothing.

I'm merely pointing out that your revision of His word would not survive a test of your assumptions.