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.
Originally posted by twistedlogic
I don't understand what all the confusion is about. The dates have nothing to do with his calculations. I'll spell it out since some are having trouble with subtleties. The graph assumes Ussher's calculations of the earth's age to be correct, the graph then takes the observed geological timeline of fossils and rocks and makes them relative to Ussher's calculations. This is done to dramatize the illogical belief that the earth is not even 7000 years old. Ussher's works are relevant to this dramatization because he was one of the first (yah one of the first's and lived in the 1700's) to try and calculate the earth's age based solely on descriptions given in a COMPILATION of books and stories passed on through the ages. (the Bible)
Originally posted by twistedlogic
Wrong. Fossils and rocks are dated by the amount of radioactive decay that has occurred at the atomic level. Science Basics
Science Basics 2
More Science
Quick Fix Explanation
Quick Fix Explanation 2
Originally posted by twistedlogic
Wrong again. And i don't need a source for this one, i can explain it quite simply without "sciency" words for you.
Hubbles observations were true, but an illusion. The universe is believed to be around 14billion years old (you can even substitute your own beliefs and this will still work out) So the earth is believed to be around 14billion/7 thousand years old. The observable universe (the universe observable by light/through telescopes) is around 28billion/14thousand light years across with 14billion/7thousand light years on either side of us. The universe is larger than 28billion lightyears across but since existence has only been around for 14billion/7thousand years this gives the illusion that we are at the center of everything since the light has only had that amount of time to travel. Make sense?
Originally posted by twistedlogic
This is poetry and metaphors, no refuting needed because, well, it is poetry and metaphors...
Originally posted by twistedlogic
EXACTLY!! this is the nature of written word, so why hold it as fact? How do you make your decision to hold the 7 days literally over the second stories 1 day? How do you determine to take it literally at all?
Fossils are dated by rocks and rocks by fossils
Butt hurt much
Ahh so they are just made up to fit in with your imaginary time scale.
Fossils are dated by rocks and rocks by fossils
Search INDEX FOSSILS
Then
GEOLOGICAL TIME SCALE
Explain red shift???
Nah, thats crap and not an answer, its a cop out. Its crap.
I will decide what I take litteraly and what I dont
Originally posted by mazzroth
Enter stage left the fossil records not showing any evidence of transitional species - the sudden appearance of mankind and other anomalies that are easily accounted for with a software update here and there to fix up errors. The biblical records of people living long lives and Giants are merely sandbox reality memes played out for the purpose of...
Originally posted by borntowatch
Fossils are dated by rocks and rocks by fossils
Originally posted by winterkill
How come no one ever asks...Hey, are all those skeletons they keep saying are human ancestors just the skeletons of extinct ape species?
Seriously. Just cause you find another different ape skeleton doesn't in any way make it human. That's bad science.
Imagine we bury Danny Devito down twenty feet and Arnold down 10 and wait to have evolutionists dig them up in 10,000 years. Look, big huge guys developed from little guys, why they are almost twins.
Originally posted by winofiend
reply to post by Awen24
YOU SIR, I like.
well put post. Oh how I long to read things like this here, it's rare, but you prove it does happen.
Thank you!