My point is and was , that we all exercise faith, but it takes more faith to believe a lie than the truth.

Nothing about competition whatsoever.

It baffles me how anyone could accept creation outside of the scope of intelligent DESIGN.

Lmao

Hell, I'm mystified why some think that people breathe oxygen.
I mean we do utilize the oxygen in the air for our body function but oxygen only makes up about 1/5th of the air we breathe.
We breathe Nitrogen.
But you tell someone that and they will sit there and argue with you.
Convinced that they breathe only oxygen.

There are people that think the United States is America. America is an entire hemisphere and the US is only part of America.
But, if you try to tell them that, they will sit there and argue with you.
Convinced that America is only the United States.

Beliefs can have some accuracy and still be merely a belief.
Beliefs are based on lack of knowledge and understanding (ignorance).

Ignorance is misunderstood and improperly used. People are stigmatized by the intent of the word that has little to do with what the word actually means. It causes offense to be taken when no offense is implied.
They are ignorant of the word ignorant.

This happens in belief all the time. People don't know what a word actually means and they rebel against it instead of finding knowledge and understanding. It perpetuates into significant barriers to accepting the knowledge and understanding needed to find what is actually occurring.

Ignorance can be over-come by enlightenment. Enlightenment requires some type of acceptance to the possibility that the belief could be inaccurate. Otherwise, no amount of enlightenment will alleviate ignorance.

It is evident that many have created their own god.

Whenever man gives God attributes that He doesn't have.

CLV 2Ti 3:16 All scripture is inspired by God, and is beneficial for teaching, for exposure, for correction, for discipline in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be equipped, fitted out for every good act.

Carbon Dating
First developed in 1945 by Willard Libby (1908–1980), a professor of chemistry at the University of Chicago. Fossils are dated by their position in the geologic column which originated around the time of Charles Darwin: 100 years before carbon dating was developed and not carbon 14. If carbon 14 dates violate the geologic column the numbers are ignored. More on this later.

Theory of carbon dating
Earths atmosphere is, roughly, 100 miles thick.

The earths atmosphere contains:
78% nitrogen
21% oxygen
0.93% argon
0.04% carbon dioxide
0.0000765% radio-active carbon (c14)

Source
https://www.space.com/17683-earth-atmosphere.html

The nitrogen molecules float through earths atmosphere. On the periodic table carbon (atomic weight of 12) and nitrogen (atomic weight of 14) sit next to each other. As solar wind (suns radiation) strikes the atmosphere the majority is absorbed by the magnetic field (van allen radiation belts) that surrounds the earthy.

The small amount that penetrates earths atmosphere strikes nitrogen molecules, dislodges 2 electrons, and produces carbon 14. Scientists estimate that 21 pounds (9.525 kg) is produced and dispersed every year. Not a very large amount. This modified nitrogen weights as much as carbon 12 but is considered carbon (carbon 14).

Carbon 14 combines with oxygen a to make carbon dioxide. Carbon 14 is considered radio active because it's unstable and tends to loose electrons with time. Half life is 5730 years. This unstable break down happens on a random basis. While happily floating around the atmosphere plants breath in carbon dioxide and produce oxygen.

Plants retain the carbon dioxide which means they contain carbon 14. Animals and humans come along and eat these plants. It is assumed that all living matter contains 0.0000765% of carbon 14. When living matter dies intake of carbon 14 stops and decay begins.

Living creatures experience carbon 14 decay but food intake replaces the small amount that decays. To radio carbon date a fossil the amount of c14 in the fossil is compared to the amount in the atmosphere.

Equilibrium
Carbon dating is applicable only to matter which was once living and presumed to be in equilibrium with the atmosphere.

Presuming the rate of production of carbon-14 to be constant, the activity of a sample can be directly compared to the equilibrium activity of living matter and the age calculated.

Accelerator techniques for carbon dating have extended its range back to about 100,000 years, compared to less than half that for direct counting techniques. One can count atoms of different masses with a mass spectrometer, but that is problematic for carbon dating because of the low concentration of carbon-14 and the existence of nitrogen-14 and CH2 which have essentially the same mass.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Nuclear/cardat.html

Notice the university's use of the word presumed! Likewise, notice the time limit published by this university professor: 100,000 years MAX. Yet carbon 14 dating is quoted for almost everything with numbers in the hundreds of millions and even billions of years.

Radio carbon dating inventor, Willard Libby, assumed that the amount of Carbon in the atmosphere was relatively constant. Scientists have calculated that the amount Carbon-14 in the atmosphere would become stable after 30,000 years. Libby’s tests showed that the amount of Carbon-14 entering the atmosphere was 12% greater than the amount decaying.

“"The troubles of the radiocarbon dating method are
undeniably deep and serious ... It should be no surprise, then,
that fully half of the dates are rejected. The wonder is, surely,
that the remaining half come to be accepted." (Lee, R. E.,
Radiocarbon, "Ages in Error", Anthropological Journal of
Canada, 1981, vol. 19, No. 3, p. 9)” (Ham, Snelling, & Wieland)

https://www.chem.uwec.edu/chem115_f00/nelsolar/chem.htm

If the earth has not reached equilibrium and carbon 14 is still increasing then all c14 dates are inaccurate. If the earth has not reached carbon 14 equilibrium it is under 30,000 years old: according to proven SCIENCE.

If all carbon 14 disappears after 100,000 years why is carbon 14 plentiful in coal? Likewise in diamonds?

Scientists, who are being honest, are saying that carbon 14 dating is taking it's final gasps. Yet, in public these same scientists "hold to the evolutionary line" because the alternative is unacceptable.

This is not science but a government and university sponsored religious belief. Faith in a theory. They choose, by an act of their will, not to believe because the alternative is unacceptable.

Exactly.

If interested I can continue to expose the unsolvable foundation problems of evolution. When scientifically examined it's house of cards comes crashing down.

हलो

Please do.
I enjoy your beliefs and wisdom.



@Dave

Umm, Carbon Dating is known as being unreliable in scientific dating. Has been for quite sometime? I wonder what your point is? That science changes over time?
Sure it does...?
What doesn't change over time is religion and beliefs founded in religion.
Despite new things being discovered religion chooses to ignore those changes in understanding.
Instead, attempting to preserve belief so it continues to fit.

The thing I question is how knowledge threatens God?

Adam and Eve were banished from Eden for partaking in the fruit of the tree of knowledge. That's what the apple represents.
Ever wonder why the tree of knowledge was there in the first place?
Now, before you try to tell me it was a test, at that time, before Adam and Eve committed the first sin, sin did not exist.
Now, you're gunna tell me that God knew they would sin.
Well, for God to have knowledge beforehand, wouldn't such a supreme being remove the tree of knowledge so His creations would have no opportunity to sin? Wouldn't God create a sense in man to aversion of sin?
I mean even man knows enough to take all the things that can hurt their children from their cribs. Why wouldn't God, creator of everything, knowing everything, know this?

Isn't it more reasonable to think that religion is man's method of control and obedience? That without blind faith they lose their control?
That as science and experience unlocks the reality so that we understand the Universe we exist in we change our 'beliefs' to reflect our knowledge.

No, we don't know everything about everything but we are looking to learn, which is more than what religion wants us to do. This is because as we learn more, we have doubts about the validity of the truths we have been told.

Its not a matter of specific instances, it is more. Its the over-all effect of reality not jiving with belief.
Yes, science gets it wrong sometimes but science keeps looking, keeps changing as we understand more.

Please don't

it doesn't. the concept of the scripture is rather obvious. God wants creation to do only a few basic simple suggestions.

1. believe...

that is as simple as it gets. God wants creation to believe He is real. This was part of the Gospel we read in the New Testament with people asking Yeshua, "what must we do to inherit the kingdom of heaven?" His reply, "just believe!!"



2. Make Him prove His words are true...

obviously, the key to get to this point is first believing!!

but once you are to that point in your idealism and faith, God states to put His word to the test. try Him to see if He is real, and see if things in your life improve since you have believed.

basically, He wants you to believe and then trust in Him.

in other words, you face a difficult situation. maybe you need finances, or need a miracle that is not just medical, but could be for a home loan or something to that effect. maybe a legal issue that requires several areas within the LAW [police-court-judge]. whatever it may be, God wants your belief and trust in Him to be the one you go to first.

example: before hiring an attorney, pray and see if the situation some how is resolved, or maybe a better attorney option is discovered where before it would not have.


conclusion:

being educated and discovering other idealisms does not offend nor cause God to shun/punish us. if He is our creator, then He already knows we will learn beyond the capability of others. but what He simply wants from us is belief and trust. to try Him first and ask, "I believe in you God. I believe you already understand my circumstances and dilemma. but I am coming to You as You ask of me to solve this problem.

now, in my own experiences, God has shown me what to do well before time was up [court was due, which attorney to hire]. so, I have discovered that by putting God first because my belief and trust, He has never let me down nor failed me. Now, have I won every time or always end up where I thought I should be, NO, but as time went on I also learned why. and when I discovered why, I learned I would have been in an even bigger mess than the mess I was already in. He ultimately minimized the damage.

but in my honest opinion, God has no issue with the knowledge I have obtained and discovered. I believe He has allowed me to communicate with some whom others would not be able to. and generally, that all had to do with knowledge vs the lack of.

Just curious,
If there is a god, why did he pick this planet to start life on?,
Has he done it on any other planets?

Why?
Does your God have self-esteem issues?
Mine doesn't but then, its God.

What is happening is man is assigning man-like insecurities to God and trying to justify them.

My God doesn't care about lawyers or love.
My God runs the entire Universe.
I'm merely part of the whole.
No more significant than a grain of dust.
Its man's delusion of grandeur that religions play on.

the real question should be, why is earth at a distance from Sol to where it can both obtain and sustain life? why are there enough planets, stars, moons to keep our gravitational pull and inertia through laws like electromagnetics keeping us specifically at such a distance we can achieve life?

even Hawkings made the claim, if we basically was 1 human hair closer to Sol we would collapse, and if we were just 1 hair further we could not obtain life. but yet, why is it we are perfectly in place in order to have life?

and to me [as a mathematician], I definitely see we are no accident, but we are here for a purpose. and thankfully, astrophysicists have defined, just how immaculate it is for us to be on a planet perfectly in place in order for us to be among the living.

if I created a theory, to which millions of people adapted to their lives, it would be my desire to want to be the one who answers anyone's questions pertaining to my theory.

I see God being the same way. He just wants to be involved. if you are going to believe, why would you not involve something you do believe in? involvement, proves you actually do in fact believe!!

That question would hold more meaning if we hadn't found other stars with Goldie-locks zones.
Goldie-locks zones happen at every star star system. Right now we can't understand why only some star systems have planets orbiting within the Goldie-locks zones.
It likely has something to do with gravitational interactions of the dust and debris during that star's condensation.


You should probably check your facts on that one.
First, the Earth is in a diminishing orbit around the Sun due to gravitation and Hawking was a man that had theories. Theories, no matter how complex, are not reality. Personally I disagree with Hawking on many things and so does a lot of trained scientists. So just mentioning Hawking is not an automatic given.


And what purpose is that? Go ahead, explain it to us.

In a Universe filled with chaos, the only place in all reality is Earth and the only purpose is for human beings. C'mon, really?
Do you even have an idea of the expanse and complexities involved?
The Moon, something you have live your entire life with is 250,000 miles away and has conditions on it that are foreign to everything you have ever experienced. Then you have the rest of this tiny, yes, tiny star system of debris which we have JUST BARELY begun to explore.

We have NO IDEA what exists outside our star system let alone what exists in other star systems. Hell, we barely understand our own planet or our own bodies. To assume anything is ludicrous.

The fact that you are a mathematician means absolutely nothing to reality.
Reality doesn't care. It is, that's it, it is. Reality doesn't care if you can justify it. It doesn't care if you believe in it. Reality just is.

I see your comparison as purely mankind in origin.

if I created a theory, to which millions of people adapted to their lives, it would be my desire to want to be the one who answers anyone's questions pertaining to my theory.
Lets ignore the possessive nature of your statement for a bit.
This type of thinking is dependent upon the need for justification.
Why would God need to justify anything to its own creation? Why would it be important for such an omnipotent being to seek approval thru justification. Just doesn't make sense?

He just wants to be involved.
Um, if it is God and it did create everything in the Universe it is already involved. Its already involved with everything. From how and when a mountain turns to sand to how and when your love-life unfolds and everything else. Even things you don't even know exist yet.

See my God needs none of the justifications of man. Requires no justification at all. It is, no matter how many believe or none at all.

Hey iam_resurrected,
You do know these are my own opinion and if you have contentment in your beliefs I have no problem with that.
I don't want you or anyone else thinking anything except what you want to think.
I'm just arguing a point for discussion purposes.
Its nothing personal.