100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Who invented who | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Who's Yeshua, your the 1st person I've ever heard have a bad word for ganesha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Tom4Uhere
on
Mon 05/28/18 01:18 AM
|
|
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? Truth proven in a laboratory and by mathematics never changes. The laws of physics never change. There are scientific principles established centuries ago and proven by university peer review boards that have never changed. It's when science has a point they want to hold on to that they, forever, continue to search for further proofs. Many of these are based on assumptions that never should have been made in the first place and evolution is filled with these types of assumptions. Carbon 14 dating is taught in grade school, junior high, high school, college and by all public service facilities (ex: PBS, NPR,etc.) as absolute scientific fact. One has to seriously dig into the subject to find scientists admitting C14 faultiness. During the mid 70's my uncle taught a 12 year old Sunday school class and added this information as curriculum. Some of the young students began asking tough questions of their teachers. Instead of evaluating what these students were saying the students were almost expelled from the school. School principals were calling the pastor of our Church DEMANDING this intellectual heretic (using their words) be stopped immediately: ... and this is science? The pastor responded in two ways: 1.He told the students when taking a test give the teacher the answers he's wanting. 2. He asked the principals "why can't the teachers offer scientific responses to these students"? FWIW, during the 80's and 90's is was fashionable for college professors to debate science individuals who believe in creation. After the year 2000 colleges and professors will no longer (in general) debate on this subject. They were embarrassed so badly they refuse to go head to head. Instead they use university and public media to criticize those who want to challenge them. University and public media refuse to offer opportunity for opposing responses. ... and this is science. Science is the quest for knowledge. Sometimes the results of that quest do become knowledge. Theory is also science. Sometimes theories yield results that become knowledge. Knowledge is understanding. Science acknowledges that not everything known is fully understood. It continues to quest for understanding by retesting and surmising the knowledge we assume. Just like there are readers of the Bible and scholars that study the Bible that have different understanding of the Bible, there are also people that have different understanding concerning sciences. I don't see religion and science as opposing absolutes. There is a whole range of in-betweens. My belief in God is not threatened by understanding of science. For me, both God and science works. People get so caught up in trying to be right they ignore the obvious right in front of them. As for Carbon-14 dating, Carbon-14 is only one form of dating thru isotopes. 2.1 Uranium–lead dating method 2.2 Samarium–neodymium dating method 2.3 Potassium–argon dating method 2.4 Rubidium–strontium dating method 2.5 Uranium–thorium dating method 2.6 Radiocarbon dating method 2.7 Fission track dating method 2.8 Chlorine-36 dating method 2.9 Luminescence dating methods Other methods include: argon–argon (Ar–Ar) iodine–xenon (I–Xe) lanthanum–barium (La–Ba) lead–lead (Pb–Pb) lutetium–hafnium (Lu–Hf) potassium–calcium (K–Ca) rhenium–osmium (Re–Os) uranium–lead–helium (U–Pb–He) uranium–uranium (U–U) krypton–krypton (Kr–Kr) The variation in the 14 C/12 C ratio in different parts of the carbon exchange reservoir means that a straightforward calculation of the age of a sample based on the amount of 14 C it contains will often give an incorrect result. There are several other possible sources of error that need to be considered. The errors are of four general types: ~ variations in the 14 C/12 C ratio in the atmosphere, both geographically and over time; ~ isotopic fractionation; ~ variations in the 14 C/12 C ratio in different parts of the reservoir; ~ contamination. In my post concerning carbon 14 dating I laid out why this method of dating is invalid. The severe limits that even scientists recognize. a. In the lead-uranium systems both uranium and lead can migrate easily in some rocks, and lead volatilizes and escapes as a vapor at relatively low temperatures. It has been suggested that free neutrons could transform Pb-206 first to Pb-207 and then to Pb-208, thus tending to reset the clocks and throw thorium-lead and uranium-lead clocks completely off, even to the point of wiping out geological time. b. In the potassium/argon system argon is a gas which can escape from or migrate through the rocks. Potassium volatilizes easily, is easily leached by water, and can migrate through the rocks under certain conditions. Furthermore, the value of the decay constant is still disputed. The moon rocks were potassium/argon tested and the dates given were 2.5 billion to 4 billion years old. This is a 55% error rate. Not exactly science. c. In the strontium/rubidium system the strontium-87 daughter atoms are very plentiful in the earth's crust. Rubidium-87 parent atoms can be leached out of the rock by water or volatilized by heat. All dating methods are based on conditions that have no contamination and assume conditions on earth have always been the same. All of these special problems as well as others can produce contradictory and erroneous results for the various radiometric dating systems. The above are just a few. Evolutionists know the problems and limitations but choose to believe their theoretical approaches.They refuse to consider that the assumptions they make could be faulty. They call inconsistent results a non-conformity. If the test results (Carefully done in a controlled environment) do not match what they are looking for (assumptions) they throw them out. Those who choose to believe in evolution vehemently dislike the alternative to evolution and will do anything to try and find another answer. Nice research, I can tell you have a grasp on the dating aspect. Its true that schools are pretty far behind the times on some science subjects. Its sad that is a fact but I personally can't do anything about it. Probably has a lot to do with funding. Plus, teaching cutting edge science is for college level minds. Schools k-12 are merely baseline material. Most kids will not have application in life for anything high tech. I'm not agreeing with your take on evolution and its not because of a dating method. Evolution just makes sense to me. Not to disprove creation but I see it in all life forms around me. Its plain as daylight. The whole debate plays out like two kids arguing over a favorite movie. To me, the entire Universe is an act of creation and evolution is how it plays out. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What's the deal with all this scripture quoeting, does it prove god, why is their never any mention of other religions or goddess's. If God/gods and goddess's do exist didn't they exist before 'scripture'. If I said God was talking to me and told me to write a book and I started quoiting this book to you, you would probably dismiss me as a lunatic This is a religious thread . And , yes most of us would think your a lunatic (as you say) if you claim you wrote a book that God told you to and you quoted from it. Why? Because God's Word is complete and has been. Why? Because "your book" would not be inspired by God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Very forgiving and understanding, its a valid point and I stand by it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who's Yeshua, your the 1st person I've ever heard have a bad word for ganesha. Yeshua is Jesus, and I was quoting those who once followed Ganesha and now don't because they believe it's a demon. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do you call Jesus yeshua , why do they believe ganesha is a demon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
iam_resurrected
on
Mon 05/28/18 09:14 AM
|
|
Why do you call Jesus yeshua , why do they believe ganesha is a demon it's His Jewish name. and if we are to correctly use the NAME, we should use it in context to fulfill the scriptures where He told us to use His NAME. example: He said to cast out demons in HIS NAME!! I am not arguing Jesus is the translated name. I just prefer the name by which others called Him while on earth. and I am not sure why they call Ganesha a demon. my guess is after being devoted to Ganesha it has failed them, brought them more harm than good, maybe even brought suffering rather than relief. but one thing is for certain, they no longer worship Ganesha. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Tom4Uhere
on
Mon 05/28/18 09:57 AM
|
|
Who invented who Caveman Bob invented God when he saw a meteorite strike and burn a bush. It glowed red hot. When he ran to get all his other cavemates to show them, it had cooled down. When they finally got to the burnt bush, the meteorite was no longer burning but it was still hot to the touch. Caveman Bob grunted what happened and everyone was like; Wow, Bob! So they squatted down and watched to see if it would do something else. As it cooled the meteorite cracked open. Well, since nobody had ever watched a rock crack open, they thought it was special so they gathered it up and erected a pedestal for it and used it to explain everything they couldn't explain. Everything was hunky-dory till another meteorite struck and this time Caveman Bill was the one that witnessed it. This one struck a tree and caught it on fire. This one didn't break open when it cooled. Caveman Bill imagined his rock was more powerful than Caveman Bob's rock. Some of the cavemates left Caveman Bob and his less powerful rock to go to Caveman Bill's cave because his rock was more powerful. They were all sittin around eating berries and drinking some yakpiss when an argument started over who's rock had more powers. So started the first ever religious war and men have been fighting it ever since. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
iam_resurrected
on
Mon 05/28/18 10:16 AM
|
|
Who invented who Caveman Bob invented God when he saw a meteorite strike and burn a bush. It glowed red hot. When he ran to get all his other cavemates to show them, it had cooled down. When they finally got to the burnt bush, the meteorite was no longer burning but it was still hot to the touch. Caveman Bob grunted what happened and everyone was like; Wow, Bob! So they squatted down and watched to see if it would do something else. As it cooled the meteorite cracked open. Well, since nobody had ever watched a rock crack open, they thought it was special so they gathered it up and erected a pedestal for it and used it to explain everything they couldn't explain. Everything was hunky-dory till another meteorite struck and this time Caveman Bill was the one that witnessed it. This one struck a tree and caught it on fire. This one didn't break open when it cooled. Caveman Bill imagined his rock was more powerful than Caveman Bob's rock. Some of the cavemates left Caveman Bob and his less powerful rock to go to Caveman Bill's cave because his rock was more powerful. They were all sittin around eating berries and drinking some yakpiss when an argument started over who's rock had more powers. So started the first ever religious war and men have been fighting it ever since. probably not too far from the truth  but I do wonder something, what if one of these stories we have read is actually correct. what seems odd to me, the more science discovers the more proof about the Hebrew God there is. and when you compare science to other beliefs, it's as far west as it is east from correlating. but the science of engineering, mathematics [which was before science], archaeology, geology, misuse of dating methods, single cell samples never dividing on its own after being observed now for over 150+ years under the microscope, the universe, galaxies, planetary structure, DNA all have given more proof to the God of the Hebrews than anything else. in fact, the god of the gaps theory by Neil Tyson DeGrasse ended up now being we could be a simulated world with higher intelligence that created us....just WOW!! a complete 180 degree turn around...WOW!! the Pew Research Poll [the poll that is absolutely fact] has there are more scientists believing in God or Higher Power from their research than those claiming to be atheist. when atheist become believers because their research proves God exists, it's probably a good thing to pay attention. but still nonetheless, if there is a God and it's like the Hebrews described, there are a whole lot of people gonna be S.O.L.!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who invented who Caveman Bob invented God when he saw a meteorite strike and burn a bush. It glowed red hot. When he ran to get all his other cavemates to show them, it had cooled down. When they finally got to the burnt bush, the meteorite was no longer burning but it was still hot to the touch. Caveman Bob grunted what happened and everyone was like; Wow, Bob! So they squatted down and watched to see if it would do something else. As it cooled the meteorite cracked open. Well, since nobody had ever watched a rock crack open, they thought it was special so they gathered it up and erected a pedestal for it and used it to explain everything they couldn't explain. Everything was hunky-dory till another meteorite struck and this time Caveman Bill was the one that witnessed it. This one struck a tree and caught it on fire. This one didn't break open when it cooled. Caveman Bill imagined his rock was more powerful than Caveman Bob's rock. Some of the cavemates left Caveman Bob and his less powerful rock to go to Caveman Bill's cave because his rock was more powerful. They were all sittin around eating berries and drinking some yakpiss when an argument started over who's rock had more powers. So started the first ever religious war and men have been fighting it ever since. probably not too far from the truth but I do wonder something, what if one of these stories we have read is actually correct. what seems odd to me, the more science discovers the more proof about the Hebrew God there is. and when you compare science to other beliefs, it's as far west as it is east from correlating. but the science of engineering, mathematics [which was before science], archaeology, geology, misuse of dating methods, single cell samples never dividing on its own after being observed now for over 150+ years under the microscope, the universe, galaxies, planetary structure, DNA all have given more proof to the God of the Hebrews than anything else. in fact, the god of the gaps theory by Neil Tyson DeGrasse ended up now being we could be a simulated world with higher intelligence that created us....just WOW!! a complete 180 degree turn around...WOW!! the Pew Research Poll [the poll that is absolutely fact] has there are more scientists believing in God or Higher Power from their research than those claiming to be atheist. when atheist become believers because their research proves God exists, it's probably a good thing to pay attention. but still nonetheless, if there is a God and it's like the Hebrews described, there are a whole lot of people gonna be S.O.L.!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lol, then the cavemen accidentally discovered that the yaks had been eating mushrooms and had a series of startling revelations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What's the deal with all this scripture quoeting, does it prove god, why is their never any mention of other religions or goddess's. If God/gods and goddess's do exist didn't they exist before 'scripture'. If I said God was talking to me and told me to write a book and I started quoiting this book to you, you would probably dismiss me as a lunatic This is a religious thread . Yes, but not a Christian/Bible thread necessarily. And , yes most of us would think your a lunatic (as you say) if you claim you wrote a book that God told you to and you quoted from it. Why? Why? Because God's Word is complete and has been. That is just your belief, right? You can't "prove" your statement. Why? Because "your book" would not be inspired by God. And how could you possibly know that? Can you prove that your book is inspired by God? I don't think so. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who's Yeshua, your the 1st person I've ever heard have a bad word for ganesha. It's an affectation, calling Jesus "Yeshua." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
what seems odd to me, the more science discovers the more proof about the Hebrew God there is. There is no "proof" about the Hebrew God or any other God. No "proof." There is only belief. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
BlakeIAM
on
Mon 05/28/18 02:07 PM
|
|
Who's Yeshua, your the 1st person I've ever heard have a bad word for ganesha. It's an affectation, calling Jesus "Yeshua." Yeshua Ha Mashiach= Jesus the Messiah Yahweh= the Great I AM , our Lord our God Yeshua Ha Mashia= Jesus our Saviour The Lord Jesus Christ= I AM is our Saviour , our King (this is the one I refer to Him as) In the OT there are several other names ,but the one I listed our the main ones for the OT and the last on the list is the main one for the NT . Emmanuel = God with us (referring to Jesus Christ) ⚘ As anyone can clearly see by the names and interchange of names/titles , Jesus Christ is God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What's the deal with all this scripture quoeting, does it prove god, why is their never any mention of other religions or goddess's. If God/gods and goddess's do exist didn't they exist before 'scripture'. If I said God was talking to me and told me to write a book and I started quoiting this book to you, you would probably dismiss me as a lunatic One of the many criticisms against Christian believers is "the church's" middle ages teaching that the earth was flat and that everything rotates around the earth. Just wanted to lay to rest where that concept came from. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Urantia Book is a collection of spiritualistic channelled writings (as per claims from William Sadler) mostly from the 1930s, compiled and published in 1955. The Urantianism was founded by two former Seventh-day Adventists--Chicago psychiatrist William Sadler (1875-1969) and his brother-in-law, Wilfred Kellogg (1876-1956), a businessman. The Urantia Book was delivered to William Sadler by seven spirit beings in 1934.
The writings combine Christianity with a cosmology of extraterrestrial spirit beings. The book presents an elaborate pseudo-history of the universe (the book actually claims there are many universes, superuniverses, and so on), and that the name of planet Earth in this cosmology is "Urantia". In the Urantia Book Jesus was the most important spirit being in this universe who came to "Urantia" (Earth) to solidify his superior status, but the ideas of original sin or any need for Jesus to atone for human sins are rejected. In this, it departs from biblical theology. The Urantia Book is an amalgamation of the Theosophical literature of the late 19th century or early 20th century: There are sticking similarities. The Urantia Book contains pronouncements on evolution, cosmology, physics and quantum mechanics, which Martin Gardner ( former Scientific American mathematics columnist) finds deeply flawed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What's the deal with all this scripture quoeting, Seems to me this is a religion forum. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Urantia Book is a collection of spiritualistic channelled writings (as per claims from William Sadler) mostly from the 1930s, compiled and published in 1955. The Urantianism was founded by two former Seventh-day Adventists--Chicago psychiatrist William Sadler (1875-1969) and his brother-in-law, Wilfred Kellogg (1876-1956), a businessman. The Urantia Book was delivered to William Sadler by seven spirit beings in 1934. The writings combine Christianity with a cosmology of extraterrestrial spirit beings. The book presents an elaborate pseudo-history of the universe (the book actually claims there are many universes, superuniverses, and so on), and that the name of planet Earth in this cosmology is "Urantia". In the Urantia Book Jesus was the most important spirit being in this universe who came to "Urantia" (Earth) to solidify his superior status, but the ideas of original sin or any need for Jesus to atone for human sins are rejected. In this, it departs from biblical theology. The Urantia Book is an amalgamation of the Theosophical literature of the late 19th century or early 20th century: There are sticking similarities. The Urantia Book contains pronouncements on evolution, cosmology, physics and quantum mechanics, which Martin Gardner ( former Scientific American mathematics columnist) finds deeply flawed. Interesting, thanx for the enlightenment. While I have heard of Urantia I never knew what it was. Does this reflect your own beliefs or are you just offering the information without connection? I find it fascinating. Doesn't really effect my own beliefs but still interesting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
The Wrong Alice
on
Tue 05/29/18 09:16 AM
|
|
Thank you for telling me who Yeshua is/ was. I'm aware this is a religious thread. Perhaps a thread on the quoiting and definition of scripture would be helpful. When I was in primary school, we were taken to a church, a synagogue, a mosque and a Hindu temple. I was raised to have a respect and tolerance of all religions but to be wary of Jehovah's witnesses and the lucky heather lady. Some times people on here remind me of Jehovah's witnesses as it seems they want me to blindly accept their notions and seem to have little tolerance for anyone that has different beliefs to them. No I don't want a magazine thank you or go to bible study. I have to admit I find some religions a little sexist as there seems to be no goddesses. Religions with more than 1 god have fascinated me since I was a child, perhaps because I was raised in a culture where their was only one. My grandma always prayed to Mary.
|
|
|
|
|
