Posts by uncle

12

C-14 MADE SIMPLE

by Amazing in

jw
friends

c-14 made simple .

i am reading with amazement the comments about c-14 dating.

thankfully, larc brought my older posts on this back to the top.

uncle_onion

Amazing

So are you saying that we dont know how much C14 we started with in a piece of coal but we do know how much we started with in a human bone?

Also I have copied this from a site and would like your comments:

Problem:
Dating methods (currently Carbon-14) are cited as definitely proving that man has been on the earth for at least 30,000 years. This age for man conflicts with Biblical chronology which dates the beginning of man's existence on the earth about six thousand years ago.

Solution:
In order to critically appraise the claim that C-14 "definitely proves" the age of man to be at least 30,000 years, a description of C-14 dating is required:
The C-14 method of dating is used to determine the age of vegetables and animal remains. The procedure rests on the fact that cosmic radiation in the upper atmosphere leads to the formation of a radioactive isotope of carbon with an atomic weight of fourteen, instead of the normal weight of twelve (C-14 instead of the normal C-12). Atmospheric carbon contains a small amount of radio-active C-14 which decays at a fixed known rate, but is continuously replaced by the formation of more C-14. The rate of breakdown is calculated in terms of the "half-life" which for carbon is 5,568 (plus or minus 30) years. After this amount of time, only half the original amount of C-14 will be left; after about 11,400 years, a quarter. Plants, by means of photosynthesis, and animals, by respiration and feeding on plants and one another, incorporate atmospheric carbon into their tissues, a process that is assumed to cease when the tissues die. As the C-14 disintegrates in the dead tissues and is not replaced, the ratio of non-radioactive carbon-12 to C-14 will slowly change, and its value at any time will depend on the time that has elapsed since the tissues died. Thus the age of the tissues can in principle be determined by comparing the ratio of non-radioactive carbon to C-14 in the tissue and in the atmosphere.1

The C-14 dating method is only reliable if the general assumption of the uniformity of nature2 is valid. Uniformity of nature is the belief that present causes solely have operated in the past. Within this general assumption are two particular assumptions:
That fossilized creatures when living had as much C-14 as similar things have today.3
That the rate of decay of C-14 has remained constant (i.e., that the rate of decay has not changed in the interval from when the creatures lived to the present day).

There are a number of technical problems involved in C-14 dating:
It requires relatively small effects to change the level of C-14. For example the burning of coal and oil which contain virtually no C-14 has, during the past century, lowered the proportion of C-14 in the atmosphere by an amount equivalent to 400 years. The explosion of hydrogen bombs between 1955 and 1961 increased the amount of C-14 by an amount equivalent to 1500 years.
The fossils are often contaminated by carbon from their surroundings - carbonates, humic acid, etc. Materials recovered from wet earth inevitably have been invaded by water containing carbonates, humic acid and even pitch. All these must be extracted from the sample with acid, alkali and organic solvents, and even after this some degree of contamination is possible.
Chemical and/or biological changes may have been going on in the fossil over the centuries changing its composition. The amount of C-14 in a fossil (for example, 6,000 years old) is a very small part of the total carbon, and contamination can have a big effect. It is instructive to notice that ever since the radioactive methods of dating were introduced, almost 50 years ago, their supporters have manifested great confidence in them. Yet most of the ages determined by the uranium methods prior to 1940 and by the C-14 method prior to 1960 have been discarded because it was concluded that the methods then in use were unsatisfactory.

Even if it be shown that there is a high degree of correlation between independent dating methods this does not in itself prove the age of man on the earth. The appearance of age may be due to the following factors:
God's creation was in equilibrium, hence the appearance of age.4
Conditions have not been uniform on the earth. The record in Genesis 1:6 states that on the second day the waters were divided into two parts, water below the heaven and water above the heaven. The accumulation of water "above the heaven" would form an outer band round the atmosphere. But this does not exist today, therefore it cannot be assumed that the cosmic ray intensity has been constant. Nor can it be assumed that there has been a stable equilibrium condition between atmospheric 14CO2 (Carbon-14 dioxide) and the reservoirs, primarily the oceans. Genesis 7:12; 8:2 state that in the great Noahic flood the heavens were opened for 40 days and presumably the above-the-heaven water returned to the earth. (Vast quantities of water are now stored as ice in the frozen polar regions.) The blanket of water vapour around the earth prior to the flood would be expected to reduce the ionising power of the sun's rays and the amount of C-14 in living things would be less than now.5 If C-14 in living things was less than it is now, then the geologists' assumption of the uniformity of nature and hence the age postulated for fossils on the basis of these dating methods will be erroneous - the original amount of C-14 being smaller than they calculate.6
The rate of decay of C-14 may also have been different under conditions before the Noahic flood.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:
See John Watts, "Carbon 'Fourteen' Dating", in "The Bible and Modern Thinking - Assent or Dissent?" The Testimony, Vol. 35, No. 417 (Sept. 1965), 352-353. Return

Lyell, sometimes referred to as "the high priest of uniformitarianism" and author of the famous textbook, Principles of Geology, wrote: " . . . all theories are rejected which involve the assumption of sudden and violent catastrophes . . . " Charles Lyell, Principles of Geology, 11th. ed. rev., (New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1892), 1,317-318. Uniformitarianism has been accepted in all major centers of scientific learning. Darwin built his theory of organic evolution upon the uniformitarian foundation which Lyell had laid. But the Apostle Peter denounces uniformitarianism (i.e., the belief that "all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation" 2 Peter 3:4). He cites God's divine intervention in the violent catastrophe of the Noahic flood (2 Peter 3:6) as evidence of its falsity. Return

This assumption was noted at a conference of radiocarbon experts: "Throughout the conference emphasis was placed on the fact that laboratories do not measure ages, they measure sample activities. The connection between activity and age is made through a set of assumptions . . . one of the main assumptions of C-14 dating is that the atmospheric radiocarbon level has held steady over the age-range to which the method applies." Science Digest, (Dec. 10, 1965), p. 1490. Return

The record in Genesis presents Adam as a fully developed man when newly made. Similarly the birds, animals and plants were created full grown. This implies that the soil in which the plants were to grow was already formed. Similarly the ocean would contain the salt and other chemicals to support its marine life. In other words, there must have been an equilibrium among the innumerable and complex interrelationships between the plant and animal kingdoms, the organic and inorganic realms. This can only mean that the world when created had the appearance of age. Obviously the apparent age of the world would not be the same as the real or actual age of the world. Return

Science Digest of Dec. 1960 reported that if the C-14 level in the atmosphere has not remained steady, " . . . it would most certainly ruin some of our carefully developed methods of dating things from the past . . . If the level of C-14 was less in the past, due to a greater magnetic shielding from cosmic rays, then our estimates of the time that has elapsed since the life of the organism will be too long." p. 19. Return

See G. Pearse, "The Weakness of Science Concerning the Origin of Man", Logos, Vol. XXXII, No. 12, (Nov. 1966), 411-419. Return

Download zipped HTML files for this section

42

A Bible contradiction?

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

another book i am reading called "the jesus mysteries" makes this claim:.

"according to matthew, jesus is born in the reign of herod, who tries to have him killed as a baby to prevent him becoming king of the jews.

herod who died in 4bce.........luke makes a similar point of having his jesus born 10 years later at the time of the census of 6ce.".

uncle_onion

Wendy

I feel that Luke was speaking about actually hating your brother. John is talking about putting "Christ" first and by using the word "hate" it is over emphasising.

UO

42

A Bible contradiction?

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

another book i am reading called "the jesus mysteries" makes this claim:.

"according to matthew, jesus is born in the reign of herod, who tries to have him killed as a baby to prevent him becoming king of the jews.

herod who died in 4bce.........luke makes a similar point of having his jesus born 10 years later at the time of the census of 6ce.".

uncle_onion

I have to go to work now so I wil be brief.

The scripture that I quoted has to be taken in context. Did you read the scripture Jan?

I only had a quick glance at the list and that is the one that caught my eye.

There seems to be a lot of contradictions in the Bible but I feel that some of them can be explained.Some not the vast majority. At the end of the day I want truth but I want to arrive there by examining all the evidence and giving it a fair hearing from both sides.

UO

42

A Bible contradiction?

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

another book i am reading called "the jesus mysteries" makes this claim:.

"according to matthew, jesus is born in the reign of herod, who tries to have him killed as a baby to prevent him becoming king of the jews.

herod who died in 4bce.........luke makes a similar point of having his jesus born 10 years later at the time of the census of 6ce.".

uncle_onion

Very interesting "think" but some of those contradictions can be explained ie

Christians to hate their brothers - - Luke 14:26
Whoever hates their brother cannot have eternal life -
1 John 3:15. Thanks.

JH
Good point again.

uo

interesting!!!!

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

do you yahoo!?.

yahoo!

uncle_onion

I have this book which I am half way through.

Does anyone know anything about the red sea chariot wheels that are mentioned here

A Battle of Biblical Proportions
Scripture as fiction? A series of lectures in L.A. will air controversial view.

By TERESA WATANABE, Times Religion Writer
Los Angeles Times, May 11, 2001

The ancient tales present glorious scenes of a united monarchy of Israel familiar to every Bible reader: King David, so brave that he slew a giant. Solomon, so wise that he ruled a vast empire and built the first Jerusalem temple. But 3,000 years after the great monarchs are thought to have lived, their epic stories are at the center of a vitriolic debate today over how much is actually history.
On one side are most archeologists and modern biblical scholars, who believe that the Bible contains historical truth--although exactly how much is a matter of decided disagreement. On the other side is a small but emergent group of scholars who are gaining increasing public attention for their provocative views that the Hebrew Bible, also known as the Old Testament, is all or mostly fiction.
Based mostly in Europe, the revisionists have recently been joined in their skepticism by such well-respected Israeli archeologists as Israel Finkelstein and Ze'ev Herzog at Tel Aviv University. While these Israelis do not deny the existence of David and Solomon as some Europeans do, they argue that tales of a vast united kingdom are exaggerations and that the rulers were at best local tribal chieftains.
The controversy will be aired in Los Angeles beginning Monday, when the California Museum of Ancient Art presents the first of a four-part lecture series, "The Archeology of Ancient Israel." William Dever, one of North America's leading archeologists, will kick off the series with a lecture rebutting the revisionists and presenting the archeological evidence for the biblical portrait of David and Solomon.
"The revisionists have become ideologues who repeat their astounding claims without any evidence," said Dever, a professor of Near Eastern archeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona. "They are dangerous because they are dishonest, and they're not going to go away."
Finkelstein calls the attacks on him "an orchestrated attempt, when people have no ammunition, to disqualify my scientific observations with name-calling."
Herzog defends the revisionist positions as a willingness to analyze the evidence uncolored by any religious agenda to prove the Bible's historical veracity. "It is part of a scientific revolution, and younger scholars are more willing to accept revolution than older ones," he said.
Devout believers who view the Bible as the literal word of God may be aghast at any suggestion that the Good Book is not entirely historical. But Dever expressed concern that revisionist challenges to the Bible's historical veracity will only build, buoyed by the recent publication of the first popular book on the subject, "The Bible Unearthed" by Finkelstein and archeological journalist Neil Asher Silberman.
The book argues that the Hebrew Bible is a collection of ancient memories, fragmentary histories and rewritten legends. When it comes to the united monarchy, supposed archeological evidence for it is "no more than wishful thinking," the authors say.
The book has hit the top of archeological bestseller lists, is a selection for four book-of-the-month clubs and has inspired television documentaries now in the works by at least three national media organizations.
Although many scholars have questioned the Bible's veracity for decades, the foundation for the latest revisionist challenge to ancient Israel's history emerged in 1992. That's when Philip R. Davies of the University of Sheffield in Britain published a provocative book, "In Search of 'Ancient Israel,' " that argued that the Hebrew Bible was composed long after the fact and contains no real history.
Finkelstein, director of Tel Aviv University's Institute of Archeology, said he valued the work of Davies and others for stimulating the field with challenging questions.
"Even if they are wrong, the questions they raise are not only right but positive because it has made us think again," he said. The work has been resoundingly rejected by mainstream scholars and has deeply disturbed many people.
Jerome Berman, executive director of the ancient art museum, likened the revisionists to Holocaust deniers who are discounting a century of archeological evidence to try to erase Israel's ancient past.
At least some of the revisionists appear to have political agendas, Dever said, evident in such works as the 1996 book by Keith Whitelam of the University of Stirling in Scotland, "The Invention of Ancient Israel: the Silencing of Palestinian History." Those who raise questions about the biblical stories have been attacked for supporting enemies of Israel, but Finkelstein called such charges "absolutely appalling."
"I think there is room enough for all of us to be in the field and have scientific debates," he said.
Herschel Shan, editor of Biblical Archeological Review, dismisses the revisionists as a tiny group of scholars whose minimal influence is already starting to wane. But Dever is less sanguine. He wants to sound the alarm that their views are having an impact, creating a "storm of controversy" in the scholarly literature, national professional meetings and on the Internet.
Dever recounted one 1996 Society of Biblical Literature meeting where a leading revisionist, Thomas L. Thompson of Copenhagen, triumphantly announced that there was no ancient Israel or Judaism until the second century. Thompson's remarks were greeted with applause, Dever said, drowning out his protests.
"Everywhere I go, I find young Bible scholars taken in by their nonsense, and I'm just appalled," said Dever, who has taken them on directly in his new book, "What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?" The book, published this week, will be available for signing at the lecture.

Waging War Over David and Solomon
The time of David and Solomon in the 10th century BC has emerged as the raging battleground between the two sides. For earlier periods, many archeologists have given up trying to find material evidence supporting such stories as the Creation, the Flood, the Exodus and Joshua's conquests--and even Dever believes that they are at best a mix of myth and probably unrecoverable history. (Some researchers continue to search for evidence and have recently reported findings of an ancient, cataclysmic flood in the Black Sea, for instance, or coral-encrusted remains of what they believe are chariot wheels of a pharaoh's vanquished army in the Red Sea.)
The later periods are indisputably historical because of clear-cut archeological evidence and corroboration in nonbiblical records. Beginning with King Ahab, who lived around 850 BC, a century after David and Solomon, the Israeli kings are consistently mentioned in Mesopotamian and other Near Eastern records, according to Steven Feldman, managing editor of Biblical Archeology Review.
The middle period between the two has become what Finkelstein called "the last bastion" of scholarly dispute. "What we have with the united monarchy is enough evidence to make it plausible but not quite enough to make it convincing," Feldman said. "It is just ambiguous enough to leave room for doubt."
In his lecture and slide presentation Monday, Dever said he intends to discuss the revisionists and detail the evidence supporting the united monarchy. Among other things, he said, three massive and similar entry gates excavated at the ancient biblical sites at Gezer, Hazor and Megiddo dated to Solomon's time support biblical stories of his vast central bureaucracy and building programs.
Finkelstein, however, argued that the gates cannot be tied to Solomon because similar structures have been found outside his territory and after his reign, and that his own analysis indicates that they were built at different times at least a century later.
Solomon's temple, which some revisionists regard as fiction, will most probably never be found, since it is believed to lie directly under the Dome of the Rock, an Islamic holy site known by Jews as the Temple Mount. But Dever said that the temple's every detail as described in the Bible can be corroborated through the discovery of sites with similar features in Syria and elsewhere.
In the second lecture, on May 21, William M. Schniedewind, chairman of UCLA's department of Near Eastern languages and cultures, will explore how the discovery of ancient inscriptions has shed light on Israel's past. The most famous is the 1993 discovery at Tel Dan in northern Galilee of a 9th century BC inscription that refers to the "House of David" and 'King of Israel." The inscription created a sensation as the first extrabiblical reference to David and proof of his existence, but some revisionists have refused to accept that view and argue the inscription could be read as a place-name.
Other lectures will feature Lawrence Geraty of La Sierra University in Riverside, who will speak about a possible Israeli tribe at Tell 'Umayri east of the Jordan River, and John Monson of Wheaton College in Illinois, who will detail how an ancient temple at 'Ain Dara in northern Syria shares several common features with descriptions of Solomon's temple in Jerusalem.
The California Museum of Ancient Art, founded in 1983 with a focus on Egypt, Mesopotamia and the Levant, has sponsored 130 lectures on everything from the Dead Sea Scrolls to women of the ancient world to ancient Egypt. The upcoming lecture series will focus on the period of 1200 to 600 BC.
"The three kings of the united monarchy--Saul, David and Solomon--are the people that formed the state that produced the Bible," Berman said. "Certainly for any Christian, Jew or Muslim, it is important to know how this lineage started and how these rulers came about."

* * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions $2 Million Sweepstakes - Got something to sell?
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To Send messages use the following in the TO field:
[email protected]

To unsubscribe send mail To:
[email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

42

A Bible contradiction?

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

another book i am reading called "the jesus mysteries" makes this claim:.

"according to matthew, jesus is born in the reign of herod, who tries to have him killed as a baby to prevent him becoming king of the jews.

herod who died in 4bce.........luke makes a similar point of having his jesus born 10 years later at the time of the census of 6ce.".

uncle_onion

Another book I am reading called "the Jesus mysteries" makes this claim:

"According to Matthew, Jesus is born in the reign of Herod, who tries to have him killed as a baby to prevent him becoming King of the jews. Herod who died in 4BCE.........Luke makes a similar point of having his Jesus born 10 years later at the time of the census of 6CE."

So it seems that we have a contradiction here. Any ideas?

UO

2

Jesus and Daniel 9:25

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

i am trying to fathom out whether the bible is inspired or not?.

daniel 9:25 talks of the time when the messiah was expected to appear.

were the jews expecting this?

uncle_onion

I am trying to fathom out whether the Bible is inspired or not?

Daniel 9:25 talks of the time when the messiah was expected to appear. Were the jews expecting this? The reason that I am asking is that I am reading a book that states that the Jews were looking for a messiah that would lead them against the Romans. Many men tried to be this person. So using this reasoning, could not the OT be a book that should be taken seriously?

UO

12

C-14 MADE SIMPLE

by Amazing in

jw
friends

c-14 made simple .

i am reading with amazement the comments about c-14 dating.

thankfully, larc brought my older posts on this back to the top.

uncle_onion

I printed off your reply Amazing and found it very informative and answered a lot of my questions. However I have a few more to ask you:

1. What about the claim that Coal still has C14 in it when it is supposed to be 000s of years old?

2. The shroud of turin C14 was meant to be highly out? (I have not done any research on this one but it was an arguement used by a Christian friend)

3. What about the mouse head that I mentioned in my other posts that measured different readings on different parts of its skull?

If poss can you e mail me?

Uncle Onion

15

I have been rumbled!

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

i tried to join witnet and used a different nick name.

the idea being that i could try to "help" the confused.well i got rumbled.

this is the email that i recieved back:.

uncle_onion

I think it may have been my e mail address but he must have looked at this site to recognise my name. I will have another go!!

UO

15

I have been rumbled!

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

i tried to join witnet and used a different nick name.

the idea being that i could try to "help" the confused.well i got rumbled.

this is the email that i recieved back:.

uncle_onion

I tried to join Witnet and used a different nick name. The idea being that I could try to "help" the confused.Well I got rumbled. This is the email that I recieved back:

I am aware of your affiliation with Jehovahs-witness.com. This is a site that is not recommended by Witnesses Online.com and as your post reflects an opposing view of Jehovah's Witnesses you are hereby added to our banned list.

This is the only response you will recieve from us.

Ray Jacobs
Witnesses Online.com

So you never know who is watching!

UO

uncle_onion

Posts by uncle_onion