-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
How Do Creationists Explain 50,000 Year Carbon Dates?
- Thread starter ChristB4Us
- Start date
37818
Well-Known Member
Carbon dating does have to be calibrated. But not as explained. Using an actual known age of the like organic source.
Radiocarbon dating - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Alan Dale Gross
Active Member
Recently created rocks from volcanos have been dated 50,000 years old, by carbon dating.
ChristB4Us
Member
But how can they even find an actual known age of the like organic source when everything has to be "tainted" by the event of the Biblical global flood?
Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. 12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.
What can cause the fountains of the great deep to be broken up, inferring how the earth was being watered by that mist since creation, hinting at Old Faithful at Yellowstone but apply that to the Mid-Atlantic Ridge which is now under the Atlantic Ocean. There may be other mountain ranges under the oceans that has that similar unusual formation as that mid Atlantic Ridge, but it is a clue. All that water underneath the earth that was being used to water the earth by a mist at various intervals, comes gushing out.
Asteroid impacts on the earth. Science placed these impacts at different time period according to the evolution theory but when we know the earth is really about 6,000 years old, then the only time those asteroids could have hot the earth was at the time of the Biblica global flood.
What can cause the mist that watered the earth since creation to suddenly disappear for the windows of the heaven to be opened that would case rain upon the earth for 40 days and 40 nights that started the moon slowly moving away from the earth?
Asteroid impacts on the moon. Since the moon governs the rise & fall of the tides, imagine its start in moving away from the earth due to those asteroid impacts on the moon which would cause the mist on earth to rise to condense into clouds for the first time to rain on the earth. That greenhouse foggy world would suddenly have the windows of the heavens opened.
When evolutionary science deny the Biblical global flood, they are disregarding the change in the rate of decay caused at that time, even with the earth's magnetic field. That false science based the accuracy of their dating methods that there was no global calamity within the last 55,000 years.
Is it any wonder why living mollusks has been carbon dated 2,300 years old dead or how some fossilized dinosaur bones have been carbon dated 1,000 years old to 100,000 years old. Contenders would say but science would never carbon date those things, but they can look on the internet and find that science did it anyway and those are the results.
Thanks for sharing and confirming how unreliable those dating methods are.
Maybe our newly elected government will get rid of critical race theory, LGBTQ+ theology, and all that which divides the American people out of the public educational system but I hope they will see the evolution theory for what it is, the beginning of woke, as dividing by shaming the potential seekers away from God & the Bible by lying about the evolution theory as if it has been proven true when it never was in the first place. Currently, this false science is now lying as if the Law of Biogenesis was never one of the laws of science. I remember it from my high school in the late 70's & early 80's and so there is no way they can make me doubt that in my mind no matter how many "convenient misinformation" on the internet says otherwise.
1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
37818
Well-Known Member
adamjedgar
New Member
I tend to take theological positions when it comes to debating naturalism, i do that because ultimately, Christians are Christians because they seek salvation...not how old a dinosaur bone really is.
It does not matter to me that some scientists have a large quiver of evidences with which to deny my "still small voice" quantities, but that is just the point...
When Elijah was in the cave after running from Jezebel, God caused tremendous rage in the elements (earthquakes, wind etc) to occur all around that cave but Elijah did not sense God in any of those things.
Then a still small voice spoke, Elijah recognised his creator and moved out to the entrance of the cave where God said to him "what are you doing here Elijah?"
It is these "still small voice" evidences that i think we should seek, and when i look at the great work that Answers in Genesis and Creation Ministries International are doing (among others), there are plenty of little evidences of the literal reading of the Bible.
Now on to the theology part:
If Christ referred to Noahs flood, and the apostle Peter makes mention of it as well, I would argue that we have two New Testament witnesses who support the Mosaic record. Given Christ is God, I honestly do not think its conceivable he was making it up.
It does not matter to me that some scientists have a large quiver of evidences with which to deny my "still small voice" quantities, but that is just the point...
When Elijah was in the cave after running from Jezebel, God caused tremendous rage in the elements (earthquakes, wind etc) to occur all around that cave but Elijah did not sense God in any of those things.
Then a still small voice spoke, Elijah recognised his creator and moved out to the entrance of the cave where God said to him "what are you doing here Elijah?"
It is these "still small voice" evidences that i think we should seek, and when i look at the great work that Answers in Genesis and Creation Ministries International are doing (among others), there are plenty of little evidences of the literal reading of the Bible.
Now on to the theology part:
If Christ referred to Noahs flood, and the apostle Peter makes mention of it as well, I would argue that we have two New Testament witnesses who support the Mosaic record. Given Christ is God, I honestly do not think its conceivable he was making it up.
Excellent points. And there having been a worldwide flood, absolutely every aspect of geology would have been completely changed. Modern science has absolutely no way, no methodology to determine what the earth was like before the flood, and what exact changes took place with the flood. This makes the "50,000 years" of the OP completely moot.
Hello!
Curious, is carbon dating only "unreliable" when it conveniences your presuppositions or prejudices?
Is carbon dating all of a sudden reliable when used to determine age of Biblical and theologically related manuscripts (dead sea scrolls, etc.)?
MattTheCricketBat
New Member
One thing I'll say here is that if you are willing to reject science because it doesn't fit your interpretation of the Bible, you simply do not believe in science or understand how it works. Also all of us, unless we have studied biology extensively, are woefully underqualified to make statements that deny the consensus of the scientific community. I contend that the Torah isn't meant to be taken literally, and was written with that in mind (or at least was written by people from a pre-science era where the actual specifics are less important than the story being told - one of mankind's rebellion against God and God's plan for redemption).
carbon dating very unreliable method to get accurate dating, assumes many things that would not be true due to a i flood and changing atmospheric conditions
Proper science matches the biblical account, while very long term evolutionary process does not
Godisgracious1031
Member
I believe the Bible, no matter what science says, and that's falsely so called science. I believe the flood, I do not believe in evolution, I believe God said, let us make man in our own image. I believe God said so and so, and so be it. Alleuia!