It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How can young earth creationism stand up to ice core data?

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
I just found a good website about the dating of ice cores. What's interesting is that they mention how they can be dated in other ways than just counting ice layers, which makes it very credible to me. If the earth was created just 6000 years ago, then how can ice sheets be dated back to 800,000 years?

www.antarcticglaciers.org...




posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   
That's an easy one...

GOD

Remember, that dude can do Anything, even condense billions of years of aging into 6000. At least that is what THEY told me when I was little.
edit on 1-8-2015 by wastedown because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: wastedown

Logical contradiction? Simple answer: MAGIC!

Only fools fall for this dumb logic.


+16 more 
posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328


The short answer is Geology supports an old Earth. The various forms of radiometric dating support old Earth, in addition to dendrochronology and ice core samples.

Beyond the obvious fact that the ice cores prove there was no global flood, we can measure the 16O/18O ratio of the water present tens of thousands of years ago, which acts as a climatic indicator, we can also measure the 1H/2H ratio of the water, which acts as a climatic indicator for the same reason.

Within this impermeable ice there's even more information, bubbles of the atmosphere become trapped. This allows us to analyze the past composition of the atmosphere, and quantify gasses which affect the climate, such as carbon dioxide (CO2) methane (CH4) and sulfur dioxide (SO2).

Also, as with any sediment, the ice cores will contain windborne particles including volcanic ash, pollen, and loess (dust produced by the action of glaciers).

Should we just throw all this information out the window and take the word of superstitious mystics who didn't even have a clue they were on a planet orbiting a star, or for that matter didn't even know the poles existed? Apparently if you ignore observed reality, and bury your head in the bible, you too can become ill-informed and delusional through religious dogma.
edit on fSaturday155582f554102 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   
It can't. Unfortunately I rank the young earth believers about the same as those who believe the earth is flat.

It's just ridiculous frankly.



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I understand your argument, understand why you believe in evolution, the age of the earth, understand why God is evil and why you make your choices.

I understand the argument about ice core drilling and dating the earth.

I have studied geology on a formal level, then I studied what issues geology faces.

I studied creation and the science behind what causes people to question evolution and old earth faith.

Rather than science accepting the problems offered by people who dont accept the atheist scientific religion and working on providing solutions, they just attack the person asking the question and dismiss the question

I read people like CB saying How Can

How Can is a question and you wont read a scientific argument against it
Well How Can a mature interested person like CB ask others to How can I.

Surely CB, YOU should find out yourself, chase an answer from both sides, weigh all the evidence and then come up with a assumption that you want challenged.

But no, you want all the other believers to rally behind you, star flag your thread and do a victory dance.

How can, you go find out. Use those tippy tappy fingers and find out why there is problems with ice core dating.

Its basic stuff.


Oh you might have to read an argument that conflicts with your faith and you cant do that, silly me.

edit on b2015Sat, 01 Aug 2015 18:24:08 -050083120156pm312015-08-01T18:24:08-05:00 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 06:49 PM
link   
and another thing, of all the replies you havnt got 1 answer from a fellow evo, just a bunch of backslapping atheist evolutionists running people down to make themselves feel good and better than the others.

Why would i argue with stupidity and ignorance.

If I was asked by a fellow creationist why people believed ice core drilling dated the earth old, I would tell them why, the truth according to the evolutionists theology.

I dont live in fear of what others think, in fear of others opinions, fear of passing on others knowledge or belief.



Your question wont be addressed because evolutionists are ignorant and terrified of what creationists think
edit on b2015Sat, 01 Aug 2015 18:52:51 -050083120156pm312015-08-01T18:52:51-05:00 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

So what exactly is your problem with the ice core dating methods?


originally posted by: borntowatch
and another thing, of all the replies you havnt got 1 answer from a fellow evo, just a bunch of backslapping atheist evolutionists running people down to make themselves feel good and better than the others.

[SNIP]

Your question wont be addressed because evolutionists are ignorant and terrified of what creationists think

Are you a bull?


originally posted by: CB328
If the earth was created just 6000 years ago, then how can ice sheets be dated back to 800,000 years?

Because the Earth was not created 6,000 years ago.


edit on 8-1-2015 by WakeUpBeer because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

Dead on. This one of the most damning things against young earth creationism. How will it stand up to ice data? It won't, but you can bet your bottom dollar that the YECers will deny this evidence, claim all methods of dating are faulty, and continue the war on science despite continuing to use products of science in their daily lives.



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 09:32 PM
link   
I've been watching a lot of documentaries lately about the old testament times and while it's very interesting, there are too many conflicts and loopholes to take it all literally. Just Nimrod alone has 4 or 5 differing histories according to Wikipedia, so obviously the bible isn't infallible, even ignoring all the scientific discrepancies.



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 09:56 PM
link   
My question is: Why do atheists/evolutionists think the bible says the earth was created 6000 years ago? Have they read the bible? Probably not. Presumably they are quoting other certain people who claim to be Christian, who probably haven't read the bible either.

The bible speaks of creative days, when God created certain things. These "days" are not literal 24 hour days like we think of as a day, but rather "eras" encompassing an unknown span of time. "With the Lord a day is LIKE a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." (2 Peter 3:8)

The earth is most certainly millions, even billions of years old. The bible and science coincide with accuracy.

The bible indicated the earth was round long before science discovered that, "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth." (Isaiah 40:22)



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheChrome

The bible speaks of creative days, when God created certain things. These "days" are not literal 24 hour days like we think of as a day, but rather "eras" encompassing an unknown span of time. "With the Lord a day is LIKE a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." (2 Peter 3:8)




man.
that is super convenient.
always seems to work that way with the bible though.

so god didnt really create everything in 6 days then?
it was an unknown amount of time?

then why say six days?
why not say god created the heaven and earth in an unknown amount of time. and then he rested for an unknown amount of time?

so many questions. so few answers



posted on Aug, 1 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   


Why do atheists/evolutionists think the bible says the earth was created 6000 years ago?


You must be new to the forum. At least half the people here are Christian fundamentalists and many of them believe the young earth theory.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 03:44 AM
link   
I will tell you how! Because your convincing ice core data is wrong!
. You want proof? Well the proof is in the pudding. If there model for measuring time is correct, then how can this be possible?www.nytimes.com... to: CB328



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 04:57 AM
link   
It's clearly obvious the Earth isn't physically 6000 years old! It is interesting how the Nag Hamadi texts point to this being the moment in time the Archon invasion occurred! This is also when the Jewish calender dates back to..the Jews were also created at this time as they are rh negative reptilian hybrids..

I contend this timeline may have something to do with when the Moon was towed into orbit (ancient accounts tell of how the Moon was not always in place) and at this point the Saturn-Moon matrix was implemented. So the material hologram may have been created at this point,so in a sense yes the world was created then,or should i say hi-jacked.

So the reptilian invasion occurred 6000 years ago and they founded the Sumerian culture at this time and this is where modern history takes off and all our elites and royals descend from this time incidentally! The Venus cataclysm i believe may have played a part? If you are familiar with Wes Penres' work? you will know that hollowed out planetoids are a method used to invade other planets..Velikovsky was also onto this.

That's all i have to say about that..



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 05:04 AM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77

That was all a joke, right?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: EndOfDays77

That was all a joke, right?


Please tell me that it's a joke.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   
borntowatch pops up, this is promising. I have something for you:

I'm agnostic (not atheist) and I believe in the scientific method. I believe in some sort of "afterlife" and I would never say that a "creator", no matter what it is, is impossible. Now you tell me:

- Science provides proof, raw data, and constantly tries to negate itself to create more accurate / valid theories. We call this the scientific method;
- Religions base their beliefs in 2nd/3rd/4th (...) hand accounts and a few books that provide 0 proof, 0 data, expecting us to believe in "their word".

How people like me, believers in the scientific method, prayers to a religion that you call "Science"?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: EndOfDays77
It's clearly obvious the Earth isn't physically 6000 years old! It is interesting how the Nag Hamadi texts point to this being the moment in time the Archon invasion occurred! This is also when the Jewish calender dates back to..the Jews were also created at this time as they are rh negative reptilian hybrids..

I contend this timeline may have something to do with when the Moon was towed into orbit (ancient accounts tell of how the Moon was not always in place) and at this point the Saturn-Moon matrix was implemented. So the material hologram may have been created at this point,so in a sense yes the world was created then,or should i say hi-jacked.

So the reptilian invasion occurred 6000 years ago and they founded the Sumerian culture at this time and this is where modern history takes off and all our elites and royals descend from this time incidentally! The Venus cataclysm i believe may have played a part? If you are familiar with Wes Penres' work? you will know that hollowed out planetoids are a method used to invade other planets..Velikovsky was also onto this.

That's all i have to say about that..


Please go on...



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 03:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: traintrain
I will tell you how! Because your convincing ice core data is wrong!
. You want proof? Well the proof is in the pudding. If there model for measuring time is correct, then how can this be possible?www.nytimes.com... to: CB328



Ironically scientist are currently using radar and Isotopes in the ice core samples to identify Greenland's annual snow accumulation. 6-10 feet of ice a year is consistent for that area and one would expect planes to be under 260 feet of ice after 46 years.
Also, you fail to realize the ice core samples we are talking about are from depths reaching 9,000 feet and better! That's over a mile!
edit on fSunday152983f291003 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join