Dinosaurs are fake and leads to atheism!

[Omniskeptical]

The flaws in radiometric dating are flawed beyond belief! Here's just a taste...

Scientist Realizes Important Flaw in Radioactive Dating​

Excerpt...

"As someone who has studied radioactivity in detail, I have always been a bit amused by the assertion that radioactive dating is a precise way to determine the age of an object. This false notion is often promoted when radioactive dates are listed with utterly unrealistic error bars. In this report, for example, we are told that using one radioactive dating technique, a lunar rock sample is 4,283 million years old, plus or minus 23 million years old. In other words, there is a 95% certainty that the age is somewhere between 4,283 + 23 million years and 4,283 – 23 million years. That’s just over half a percent error in something that is supposedly multiple billions of years old.​

​

​

Of course, that error estimate is complete nonsense. It refers to one specific source of error – the uncertainty in the measurement of the amounts of various atoms used in the analysis. Most likely, that is the least important source of error. If those rocks really have been sitting around on the moon for billions of years, I suspect that the the wide range of physical and chemical processes which occurred over that time period had a much more profound effect on the uncertainty of the age determination. This is best illustrated by the radioactive age of a sample of diamonds from Zaire. Their age was measured to be 6.0 +/- 0.3 billion years old. Do you see the problem? Those who are committed to an ancient age for the earth currently believe that it is 4.6 billion years old. Obviously, then, the minimum error in that measurement is 1.4 billion years, not 0.3 billion years!"​

​

​

Absurd consistency of uranium isotope ratio IF formed in space: Consider this from Walt Brown's Origin of Earth's Radioactivity chapter:

The isotopes of each chemical element have almost constant ratios with each other. ... Why is the ratio of 235U to 238U in uranium ore deposits so constant almost everywhere on Earth? One very precise study showed that the ratio is 0.0072842, with a standard deviation of only 0.000017. [There's less than one U235 atom, with its 700M year half-life, for every hundred U238s, with their 4.5B year half-lives.] Obviously, the more time that elapses between the formation of the various isotopes (such as 235U and 238U) and the farther they are transported to their current resting places, the more varied those ratios should be. The belief that these isotopes formed in a supernova explosion millions of light-years away and billions of years before the Earth formed and somehow collected in small ore bodies in a fixed ratio is absurd. Powerful explosions would have separated the lighter isotopes from the heavier isotopes.​

​

Some radioisotopes simultaneously produce two or more daughters. When that happens, the daughters have very precise ratios to each other, called branching ratios or branching fractions. Uranium isotopes are an example, because they are daughter products of some even heavier element. Recall that the Proton-21 Laboratory has produced superheavy elements that instantly decayed. Also, the global flux of neutrons during the flood provided nuclei with enough neutrons to reach their maximum stability. Therefore, isotope ratios for a given element are fixed. Had the flux of neutrons originated in outer space, we would not see these constant ratios worldwide. Because these neutrons originated at many specific points in the globe-encircling crust, these fixed ratios are global.​

Howabout the variability of half lives with electricity, proton and neutron bombardment? Or consider that magma doesn't click on a Geiger Counter, which implies magma is infinitely old?

 

[Omniskeptical]

Sure.



I don't know what that means.



I don't know what this means, either.

Do you know what entropy is?

@Stripe In terms of Themodynamics,it is the force of heat.

 

[Right Divider]

Howabout the variability of half lives with electricity, proton and neutron bombardment?

Or Z-pinch or other things.

 

[JudgeRightly]

It was free flying energy, now when it hits earth it is stored energy (or energy otherwise absorbed) and deflected energy, What was simple energy flow is now more complex. There is both degradation and creation of more complexity. Much less energy leaves than arrived but the potential for channeling the energy remains on earth ({temporarily}.

You're forgetting that the energy you're describing is already part of a much larger and more complex system than, as you put it, "The energy from the sun becomes more ordered but less powerful when it hits the earth. Some energy is stored and some is radiated back out."...

 

[JudgeRightly]

Or Z-pinch or other things.

Been rewatching that series recently. So good!

 

[Right Divider]

Been rewatching that series recently. So good!

Me too. Very well done.

 

[ok doser]

If you are just cow rowing ...

 

[ok doser]

Because you made that up and it's baloney.

74.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot

 

[Skeeter]

View attachment 2347

Nice. I pictured Derf rowing around his bovine buddies swimming in a nebulous swamp.

 

[ok doser]

Nice. I pictured Derf rowing around his bovine buddies swimming in a nebulous swamp.

Autocorrect is no bunnies friend

 

[Right Divider]

74.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot

I thought that it was more like 85.6%

 

[Derf]

Nice. I pictured Derf rowing around his bovine buddies swimming in a nebulous swamp.

My bovine buddies don’t have spots.
But they make great steaks and burgers.

 

[Stripe]

Entropy involves energy. The overall energy is depleted. The overall order decreases over time, but both order and disorder can be created within the system. An ocean carves a beach creating an intricate ordered coastline, but it tears up rocks decreasing order.

We can explain the processes that form littoral features.

You don't get to piggyback your nonsense in on a known process.

Explain how sunlight powers genetic development as we can explain why beaches form.

Wrong.

But you won't explain how.

Ninety-five percent of physicists endorse evolution. They understand entropy well. How can this be?

So you have no answer.

The process of evolution involves ... increased complexity.

We know your claim. Justify it in the face of the challenge.

I do not know the precise mechanisms that allowed microbial life to begin but I do now how it developed once started.

Then share your explanation.

Ninety-seven percent of scientists overall accept evolution. Why is that?

To give you something to talk about. Anything.

Anything but an honest appraisal of the facts.

 

[marke]

Dinosaurs are a big myth meant to entertain us by giving us the impression that some lively creatures roamed the earth before God's creation.

We all know God created the world and all life more recent than espoused in evolutionary theory, which claims life evolved without a creator, yet even those who ponder a biblical day may not be a 24 hour day, we would not assume that God called a day millions of years.

Dinosaurs are the first means of attack on the biblical account: God created the earth and made humans in His image, not taken from the lower animal's. If we assume dinosaurs existed millions of years ago then we would have to assume that life began long enough ago that some evolutionary theory would make sense.

While man did not evolve from lower animal forms, the belief in dinosaurs causes many to question the longevity of the earth. It can create doubts in one's faith.

What I have found upsetting is some people today claim dinosaurs are in scripture, yet this is faux modern interpretation of scripture, which means something else.

This video explains well what I mean and presents arguments about dinosaur belief in an honest and cogent manner.

No, dinosaurs once roamed the earth, proving the accuracy of the Bible.

 

[marke]

Yes. There were bigger elephant like animals that existed with early humans that may have gone extinct in the Flood. There were big lizards, but God changed them after the Fall into modern snakes.
Most of those old bones are mammal bones, not lizard bones.

Humans have never seen a fire-breathing dragon either, but does not mean they never existed.

Job 41

15 His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.

16 One is so near to another, that no air can come between them.

17 They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.

18 By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.

19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.

20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.

21 His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.

 

[marke]

Concerning Leviathan and bathmoth, they are large creatures God refers to but not fictional creatures like dinosaurs. The l leviathan is a crocodile and a big one. The video I posted in my op has a good explanation for these biblical passages.
Please don't accommodate the dinosaur nonsense with scripture. Let the heathens have thier obscene fantasies.

Crocodiles do not breathe fire as leviathan did.

 

[marke]

You make some good arguments here and fair rebuttal. Glad you participated in this thread JudgeRightly.
The main point I see is why believe in dinosaurs at all since their creators say they did live millions of years ago. Why incorporate them into your world view? Because they have evidence in models of beasts that have been constructed? Not one dinosaur skeleton was the complete beast. They are all filled in with other materials and lots of imagination.
The second thing, the laughable idea that an astroide killed them off, yet mammals were able to survive? At least if they held that God had not created real animals yet, I might understand, but they assume the dinosaurs evolved from the lower species as so, the animals and of course, us.
I think all the dinosaur nonsense is no more than an atheist way to get people to believe in an old earth and evolution.
Thanks for adding to the debate and taking it serious. I simply do not believe in dinosaurs for practical reasons.

The Chicxulub theory was invented in the early 1980s to explain the extinction of dinosaurs by an asteroid impact, which is nonsense. Dinosaurs once roamed the earth but they were not killed off by an asteroid impact in the Gulf of Mexico.

 

[marke]

When I was a child, I used to suspect that "fossils" were ordinary rocks that just so happened to be formed in the shape of bones. Prove me wrong!

Maybe you also believed in Santa. If so I cannot prove you wrong about any of your childish beliefs.

 

[marke]

I would never doubt your faith, I don't even doubt Robert Pate's faith. (Not to make any comparison). I know your a true person in the Body of Christ.
I also know you do not believe in the crazy idea that animals evolve. I cannot imagine man evolving from a dinosaur, yet that us what most paleontologist insist, we have common ancestors.
So I assume you believe God created dinosaurs because only God can account for real beings.
I think God thought of us while creating the world and made animals for our purpose. I see no reason for beasts we can't have dominion over and how could we manage such beasts?

Evolution is a lie. Dinosaur remains are not a lie. Dinosaur remains prove the earth is less than 50,000 years old by secular dating methods, which is an important refutation of evolution.

P.S. Is your avatar a pretty boy or what?

 

[marke]

How do you know that a fossil isn't just a rock that has been chiseled into the shape of a dinosaur bone by some crafty darwinist?

You shouldn't ask such silly questions without letting people know you are just joking. Otherwise, they will think you are stupid.