Archaeologists in Ethiopia discover 12 fossils around 4 million years old

by hawkaw 38 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hillary_step

  Barney,

  As far as the smartass forum assistant that told me to research it, research what? I dont' have a time machine, do you? Get real... Common sense tells me that science is hoopla. The only science I believe is the kind that has concrete proof. Otherwise, it should never even be concluded what the age of any artifact is.

  I am trying to think of a kind way of saying what I have to but cannot. Based on your post above, you are a complete ignoramus and unless you are careful, you always will be.

  HS

  PS - I am not a forum assistant, which makes your post wrong on *all* counts.
• 

  Leolaia

  LMAO, you are now!
• 

  hillary_step

  Barney,

  If you are not a forum assistant then why does it say "Forum Assistant" under your avatar??

  A left-over from the days when I was a Forum Assistant. Two years ago. The time cannot be exact as you did not have a time machine and cannot go back to that date and verify it.

  I really don't feel like getting into a pissing contest with you, so I will just ignore what you said.

  Please yourself.

  I called you an 'ignoramus' because you are obviously completely ignorant of the methodology and concepts of science. Like many JW's and many exiting JW's you have not done the hard work neccessary to research the subject but in true WTS fashion you draw uninformed opinions and present them as fait accomplit. This is called intellectual laziness, and it is not something that goes away naturally, it can only be driven away by actually taking the time to do the hard work of research. Ask Leolaia, she knows all about this process.

  Science has no emotion, it is not like religion, nor like pulling thoughts out of the air. It relies on a methodology.

  Best regards - HS
• 

  hillary_step

  Barny,

  I posted a new thread about people name calling and pointing out other peoples faults or what they think are faults...

  And I presume you feel that this post of yours has some merit? Has it? I have not read it. I do know that I did not think your disparaging the tenets of science was what I thought 'might' be a fault, within the confines of this thread it definately is a fault.

  HS
• 

  jaffacake

  After leaving Seventh Day Adventists I spent 30 years somewhere between non practising Christian and agnostic. I read more & more science as it seemed to take humankind closer to truth than anything else. Science generally keeps trying to test its own theories and prove themselves wrong. Stephen Hawking & others used to say they were getting close to the theory of everything - I don't believe it. But I have to say the most recent breakthroughs beyond even superstring theory and quantum mechanics leads me back to the gut feeling that God the creator must exist. I find the hardest thing about the Bible to accept the literal parts about creation etc. There is such a mix of the literal, history, parables, figurative stuff etc, how do we know which bits to take literally? My feeling is that Adam & Eve etc (and Satan as a fallen angel) are sort of parables about early humanity & nature of man. I think Satan is a parable about human nature and how this is different from the creator. As you can tell I dunno what I believe, but the Bible, especially New Testament seems so amazing I feel it is true, in some sense.
• 

  jaffacake

  Just seen other posts. Imagine telling fiolks of Biblical times about what we're doing here on the internet like this and what would they have thought. Science has achieved a lot (for good and bad) and how can we deny their theories work by the results achieved. You must admit its pretty clever. If someone predicts the future based on what planet in my star sign I'll yawn. But if a scientific theory "proves" itself by sending something to a planet millions of miles away to send pics back to us, it seems to me their theories seem to be working. Not just assertions like JWs.
• 

  toreador

  Very interesting thread. Thanks for posting the links hawkaw
• 

  stillajwexelder

  Science is based on knowledge - religion is based on faith - trying to keep an open balanced mind is not easy especially for some people
• 

  hawkaw

  You are welcome toreador and thank you for the kind words.

  I urge Barney and others who think like him to take a few minutes out of his life and actually read the definition of theory and law within science that I posted for him.

  I also urge him to carefully consider how scientists use isotopes to date objects and rocks. Once one understands that there is a specific process and that more than one isotope is used to confirm the first isotope (as well as using the correct isotope for the time period), one realizes this science is very conclusive..

  I also urge him to carefully review some of the links I have posted. Here let me take a quote from one of those posted links that I provided above that shows the elegant proof that the earth is old!

  (Dalrymple, 1991, p.377) - Nuclides currently produced by natural processes are tagged with a "P"

  Nuclide	Half-life (years)	Found in nature?
  V-50	6 x 10 15	Yes
  Nd-144	2.4 x 10 15	Yes
  Hf-174	2.0 x 10 15	Yes
  Pt-192	1 x 10 15	Yes
  In-115	6 x 10 14	Yes
  Gd-152	1.1 x 10 14	Yes
  Te-123	1.2 x 10 13	Yes
  Pt-190	6.9 x 10 11	Yes
  La-138	1.12 x 10 11	Yes
  Sm-147	1.06 x 10 11	Yes
  Rb-87	4.88 x 10 10	Yes
  Re-187	4.3 x 10 10	Yes
  Lu-176	3.5 x 10 10	Yes
  Th-232	1.40 x 10 10	Yes
  U-238	4.47 x 10 9	Yes
  K-40	1.25 x 10 9	Yes
  U-235	7.04 x 10 8	Yes
  Pu-244	8.2 x 10 7	Yes
  Sm-146	7 x 10 7	No
  Pb-205	3.0 x 10 7	No
  U-236	2.39 x 10 7	Yes-P
  I-129	1.7 x 10 7	Yes-P
  Cm-247	1.6 x 10 7	No
  Hf-182	9 x 10 6	No
  Pd-107	7 x 10 6	No
  Mn-53	3.7 x 10 6	Yes-P
  Cs-135	3.0 x 10 6	No
  Tc-97	2.6 x 10 6	No
  Np-237	2.14 x 10 6	Yes-P
  Gd-150	2.1 x 10 6	No
  Be-10	1.6 x 10 6	Yes-P
  Zr-93	1.5 x 10 6	No
  Tc-98	1.5 x 10 6	No
  Dy-154	1 x 10 6	No

  Look again at the table above. Notice how every single nuclide with a half-life greater than 80 million years is found in nature; every single nuclide with a half-life less than 80 million years is not found in nature unless it is currently being produced by nature. Does that tell you something?

  You're looking at prime evidence in favor of an old Earth! Those radioactive nuclides with half-lives below a certain value have, in the turning of the ages, decayed away to nothing. The only survivors are those which can be created by nature.

  Could this be a chance arrangement? Not likely. The odds against being able to draw a line anywhere which divides the nuclides in the above table so that all the nuclides above that line are found in nature by chance while all those below are not, is 536 million to one! (To be fair, we don't count those nuclides that nature can create.) Actually, in testing for a 10,000 year-old Earth, we should extend the table downwards to include nuclides with a half-life of 1000 years or more. They should all be present if the earth is only 10,000 years old. If you do extend the table, you will find that none of those nuclides, save those made by natural processes, are found in nature. The odds (based on an eligible list of 56 nuclides) against that are 72 quadrillion to one! Any takers?"
• 

  hooberus

  http://www.trueorigin.org/camplist.asp#dating

  DATING ISSUES

  Aardsma, ?Myths Regarding Radiocarbon Dating?
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-189.htm

  Austin, ?Excess Argon at Mount St. Helens?
  http://www.icr.org/research/sa/sa-r01.htm

  Austin, ?Excessively Old ?Ages? for Grand Canyon Lava Flows?*
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-224.htm

  Austin and Humphreys, ?The Sea?s Missing Salt?
  http://tccsa.tc/articles/ocean_sodium.html

  Austin & Snelling, ?Discordant Potassium-Argon Model and Isochron Ages?*
  http://www.icr.org/research/sa/sa-r03.htm

  Batten, ?Tree Ring Dating?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp

  Baumgardner and others, ?Measurable 14C in Fossilized Organic Materials?
  http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf

  Brantley, ?Dating in Archaeology: Challenges to Biblical Credibility?
  http://www.apologeticspress.org/defdocs/rr1993/r&r9311a.htm

  Brown, ?Unique Enigmatic Helium?
  http://www.grisda.org/origins/25055.htm

  Brown, ?Radioisotope Age?
  http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr20_01.htm

  Brown, ?Amino Acid Dating?
  http://www.creation-science-prophecy.com/amino/

  Brown, ?Ancient DNA?
  http://www.mhrc.net/ancientDNA.htm

  Brown, ?Carbon 14 Dating?
  http://www.creation-science-prophecy.com/C14.htm

  Brown, ?Mitochondrial Clock? (abstracts of articles)
  http://www.mhrc.net/mitochondria.htm

  Brown, ?Can Tree Rings Be Used to Calibrate Radiocarbon Dates??
  http://www.grisda.org/origins/22047.htm

  Chadwick, Various Questions Re: Radiometric Dating
  http://origins.swau.edu/q&a/radio/default.html

  Chaffin, ?Accelerated Decay: Theoretical Models?
  http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/RATE_ICC_Chaffin.pdf

  Chaffin, ?A Mechanism for Accelerated Radioactive Decay?
  http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/37/37_1/chaffin/acceldecay.html

  Christian Answers Net, Various Questions Re: Radiometric Dating
  http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-radioactive.html

  Christian Answers Net, Carbon 14 & Other Radiometric Dating Methods
  http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c007.html

  Giem, ?Carbon-14 Content of Fossil Carbon?
  http://www.grisda.org/origins/51006.htm

  Giem, ?Carbon 14 Dating Models?
  http://www.grisda.org/origins/24050.htm

  Ham, Sarfati, and Wieland, ?How accurate is Carbon-14 dating??
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/carbon_dating.asp

  Harrub and Thompson, ?The Demise of ?Mitochondrial Eve? ?
  http://www.apologeticspress.org/docsdis/2003/dc-03-01.htm

  Harrub and Thompson, ?How Many Times Does ?Mitochondrial Eve? Have to Die??
  http://www.apologeticspress.org/inthenews/2003/itn-03-03.htm

  Hasel, ?Recent Developments in Near Eastern Chronology and Radiocarbon Dating?
  http://www.grisda.org/origins/56006.pdf

  Humphreys, ?Nuclear Decay: Evidence for a Young World?
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-352.htm

  Humphreys and others, ?Helium Diffusion Rates?
  http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/Helium_ICC_7-22-03.pdf

  Humphreys and others, ?Helium Diffusion Age of 6,000 Years Supports Accelerated Nuclear Decay?
  http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/41/41_1/Helium.htm

  Lorey, ?Tree Rings and Biblical Chronology?
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-252.htm

  Major, ?Dating in Archaeology: Radiocarbon & Tree-Ring Dating?
  http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/rr1993/r&r9310a.htm

  Malcolm, ?Helium in the Earth?s Atmosphere?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/v8n2_helium.asp#auth

  Oard, ?Antiquity of landforms: objective evidence that dating methods are wrong?
  http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/tj14n1_landforms.asp

  Overn, ?Isochron Rock Dating is Fatally Flawed?
  http://tccsa.tc/articles/isochrons2.html

  Pitman, ?Amino Acid Racemization Dating?
  http://naturalselection.0catch.com/Files/aminoaciddating.html

  Pitman, ?Ancient Ice?
  http://naturalselection.0catch.com/Files/ancientice.html

  Pitman, ?Carbon-14?
  http://naturalselection.0catch.com/Files/carbon14.html

  Pitman, ?Fossilized DNA?
  http://naturalselection.0catch.com/Files/fossilizeddna.html

  Pitman, ?Radiometric Dating Methods?
  http://naturalselection.0catch.com/Files/radiometricdating.html

  Plaisted, ?The Radiometric Dating Game?
  http://www.trueorigin.org/dating.asp

  Plaisted, ?The Radiometric Dating Deception?
  http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/deception.html

  Plaisted, ?Reply to Dr. Henke and Others? (Re: Radiometric Dating)
  http://www.trueorigin.org/henke1.asp

  Plaisted, ?Problems With Isochrons?
  http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/isochron.html

  Plaisted, ?Mitochondrial DNA Mutation Rates?
  http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/mitochondria.html

  Roth, ?Some Questions About Geochronology?
  http://www.grisda.org/origins/13064.htm

  Sarfati, ?Blowing Old-Earth Belief Away? (atmospheric helium)
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1401.asp

  Snelling, ?Dating of Somerset Dam?
  http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/ICCSOMERSETDAM_2-AAS.pdf

  Snelling, ?Radioactive ?Dating? in Conflict?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/382.asp

  Snelling, Radioactive ?Dating? Failure?*
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/docs/cenv22n1_dating_failure.asp

  Snelling, ?Excess Argon: The ?Achilles Heel? of Dating Volcanic Rocks?
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-307.htm

  Snelling, ?Dubious Radiogenic Pb Behavior Places U-Th-Pb Mineral Dating in Doubt?*
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-319.htm

  Snelling, ?The Cause of Anomalous Potassium-Argon ?Ages??
  http://www.icr.org/research/as/as-r01.htm

  Snelling, ?Crustal Rocks and the Problem of Excess Argon?
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-309.htm

  Snelling, ?Dating Dilemma: Fossil Wood in ?Ancient? Sandstone?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/docs/v21n3_date-dilemma.asp

  Snelling, ?U-TH-PB Dating: An Example of False Isochrons?
  http://www.icr.org/research/as/uthpbdating.html

  Snelling, ?Young Radiocarbon Date for Ancient Fossil Wood?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/docs/v22n2_geology.asp

  Snelling, ?The Failure of U-Th-Pb 'Dating' at Koongarra, Australia?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/tj_v9n1_koongarra.asp

  Snelling and Woodmorappe, ?The Cooling of Thick Igneous Bodies on a Young Earth?
  http://www.icr.org/research/as/igneousbodies.html

  Snelling, ?Isotope Systematics and Recent Andesite Flows?
  http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/ICCMt_Ngauruhoe-AAS.pdf

  Snelling and Armitage, ?Radiohalos: A Tale of Three Granitic Plutons?
  http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/ICCRADIOHALOS-AASandMA.pdf

  Snelling and others, ?Radioisotopes in the Diabase Sill at Bass Rapids?
  http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/ICCBassRapidsSill_2-%20AAS_SA_and_WH.pdf

  van der Heide, ?Bacterial Life in Ancient Salt?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/Magazines/tj/docs/v16n2_bacteria.asp

  Vardiman, ?Ice Cores and the Age of the Earth?
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-226.htm

  Vardiman, ?Rapid Changes in Oxygen Isotope Content of Ice Cores?
  http://www.icr.org/research/lv/lv-r02.htm

  Vardiman, ?The Helium Escape Problem?
  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-143.htm

  Walker, ?Radioactive Decay Rate Depends on Chemical Environment?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/v14n1_radioact.asp

  Webster, Jr., ?Genesis and Time: What Radiometric Dating Tells Us?
  http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr21_01.htm

  Woodmorappe, ?Molecular Clocks Can Run Very Fast?
  http://www.rae.org/clocks.html

  Woodmorappe, ?Billion-fold Acceleration of Radioactivity Demonstrated in Laboratory?
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2001/0321acc_beta_decay.asp

  Woodmorappe, ?National Geographic magazine joins the dating game?
  http://www.trueorigin.org/natgeo_jw01.asp