A conversation that has me Stumped

1. 61

   Stump Parrishposted 13 years ago

   A good friend of mine and i were recently discussing history and the conversation turn to the age of the planet. My friend explained that he had watched a documentory that proved the earth was only 6000 years old and I laughed until I saw he was serious.
   
   I asked him how he explained the results of all the carbon dating tests on materials that are over a hundred thousand years old and he explained that he knew for a fact that carbon dating was an inaccurate science and proved nothing. Now folks, I went to the same high school as this guy and I can honestly state that we didn't have a carbon dater in our school unless you include the one white guy that dated a black girl publically. They called him a carbon dater behind his back.
   
   When I asked my friend what he was using for proof to back up his claims, he informed me that he believed in god and that was all the proof he needed for anything.
   
   I am pretty sure that he stated that his belief in a god gave him indisputable proof of every rediculous claim made in support of his religion.
   
   Ok, my question to you is this, WTF?

   replyreport
   1. 80

      pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The mind is a very powerful thing. Belief as strong as that may not require physical proof.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I understand the level of faith, I dont understand completely dismissing fact and reason to maintain it. This friend is a true southern baptist and makes no effort to hide his racism or dislike of homosexuals. Both of these are celebrated in his church. Not as openly as it once was but it is an all white baptist church for a reason.

         replyreport
         1. 80

            pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Perhaps it is the way in which the brain is hard wired. If the facts do not support the beliefs there is an instant dismissal mechanism in the brain that shuts down any or all evidence relating to the opposite of what one believes.
            
            Like the scientists at Chenobyl. Apparently their brains were so hard wired in the belief that nothing could ever go wrong, when it did, there was instant dismissal even though the evidence was more than apparent.
            
            This is when hard wired can become a very dangerous thing to others.
            
            As could be a church that advocates racism and segregation.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               He bleongs to an all white southern baptist church, racism and segregation are their bread and butter. That is one of two differences in me and him. I started school in the north and learned to think for myself. He went to school and learned everything by memorization. If he hasnt memorized it he has no way of thinking it out logically. The second is that he was raised in a southern baptist family that was about as screwed up as the rest of them. I was raised in a screwed up non religious family. We took the same drugs, it was the 70's remember, we took the same classes and dated some of the same girls. He came out a homophobic, racist and I tiurned out all lovable and cute.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Haha thats great for you!
                  
                  Experience is our greatest teacher in my opinion. All the memorizing and analyzing cannot ever replace lessons learned through real life experiences. Coming from a screwed up non religious family has its merits in more ways then one when you can still end up cute and lovable then!

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     How does one justify dismissing personal experience in favor of blind faith in what they read in a old book. This guy will go out of his way to avoid being anywhere near a homosexual. I cant help but think he is afraid of finding out he's wrong.

                     replyreport
                     1. 80

                        pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Yes, perhaps that is just it. He may not have personal experience with that which he is afraid of. Could turn out to be a blessing in disguise if he actually allowed himself to meet a homosexual and really get to know them. They are people just like you and I that have a different sexual preference is all. Alternately he may have had an experience but remains in denial of how he feels about it because of fear of being an outcast from those he deems to be important to him.
                        
                        Then again,
                        
                        He may not be that way inclined even though he might fear it. How would he know if he is never willing to confront his fears.
                        
                        There are many reasons a person does what they do especially when it comes to beliefs. If it is more useful to cling to beliefs that protect one from facing their fears they will continue to hold steadfastly to these beliefs. Sometimes it might take a shocking experience to help them to release the stronghold their beliefs might have. Beliefs that are sometimes not serving them, their loved ones or people they interact with in a beneficial way.

                        replyreport
   2. 70

      Titen-Sxullposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      To be fair the half-life of Carbon 14 is only about 5700 years, carbon dating can't be and isn't used to date things older than that. For really old materials there are other dating types such as radiometric dating:
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating
      
      As for your WTF question:
      
      As a former Creationist myself I know what it's like to be as closed-minded and ignorant as your friend is. People like that exist in a vacuum of anti-evolution anti-science propaganda. When you feed from the mouth of madness you have a tendency to regurgitate what you've swallowed. There are lot's of pseudoscientific documentaries out there on everything from Nostrodamus to Nazi UFOs so it isn't surprising that this friend found a documentary to support his delusion.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I will readily admit that I am not that familiar with the carbon dating process. It doesn't matter which segment of scientic study you select, people who graduated high school here in the bible belt still believe the bible is an accurate depection of the history of our planet. No matter how many times something is proven to be incorrect with the devoutly religious they can always manage a hearty, well everything else is in the bible is correct, so there, take that. The amazing part of all this is that they smuggly walk away thinking they out smarted you and won the debate. I understand that the school systems down here suck but that is no reason to completely dismiss everything you were taught in your science class. Speaking of science classes in high school. I don't remember any students standing up and complaining about what we were being taught about the planet earth and it's age. This was in the 70's when people protested everything. religion kept it's mouth shut and let the schools teach the triuth. Religion gets an assist with the planned deterioration of our educational system. Stupid kids grow into stupid parents that teach their children the earth is only 6000 years old and that we never made it to the moon, ect. Amen.

         replyreport
      2. 63

         pisean282311posted 13 years agoin reply to this

         @Titen-Sxull  i agree...

         replyreport
   3. 60

      logic,commonsenseposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah, I had a relative that did not believe we landed on the moon.  Thought it was all faked!
      Some people!

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         To admit that we made it to the moon would give credibility to science and they need to keep themselves convinced it is all a hoax. Most do this by inserting their fingers in their ears and chanting, lalalalalalalalalala when the subject comes up.

         replyreport
   4. 60

      mike6181posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      This is funny!  I read some comments above and cannot help but come to the conclusion that toleration of a view is not easy for some.  Empirical science requires observation and repeatability to be able to test any proposition or theory.  That's why "LAW of science" is used instead of "THEORY of science".  No one can actually test the accuracy of carbon dating in looking back - simply because no one knows if uniformity of decay is an accurate concept.  One theorist (yes, a creationist) held it as quite possible that the initial burst of energy during creation may have been much greater rate of energy loss than seen today.  In short, the jury will remain out on how old the earth is.  Even the ancient dating of its beginnings is a matter of faith, let alone the "young earth" theories. 
      
      No one is more "scientific" and all are assumptions requiring faith to subscribe to them.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Perhaps I did select the wrong way of dating the planet. It has been awhile since i read anything about it and was too lazy to check. The fact that he mentioned he had heard that carbon dating was false was his only bit of knowledge about it. He dismissed it not because of the reasons you mentioned but bcause it disagreed with his sunday school teacher and he really likes the little old lady.

         replyreport
   5. 67

      6 String Veteranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Well, can you prove carbon dating? Your claims might sound as silly to your friend as his are to you.

      replyreport
      1. 88

         Paragliderposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Carbon dating is good up to around 10 half-lives, or 60,000 years approx, not 1 half-life as was stated earlier. The margin of error (statistically calculated) at 10 half lives is typically +/- 1000 years, but even supposing the error to be 10 times greater, we can still say some dead organic materials are definitely older than 50,000 years.
         So even if carbon dating was the only method we had (which it's not!) it still blows the 6000 years claim clean out the water.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Thx para glider, Been preoccupied and didn't have time to start a search. I mentioned that I should have selected another form of dating but I guess we hadn't finished with that subject. I dont claim to be a scientist but I knew that carbon dating dispproved the 6000 year claim.
            
            The issue in my opinion is not the margin of error in the accepted forms of dating artifacts, it is the belief that all the answers to all the questions that will ever be asked have already been answered if you believe it hard enough.
            
            How often do you hear the religious discredit carbon dating when the results date an object to about 2010 years. When it matches the story they wish to promote, carbon dating is accepted without question.

            replyreport
   6. 58

      Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Childhood religious indoctrination takes down yet another one.

      replyreport
   7. 57

      C.J. Wrightposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Shortly after carbon dating was accepted, there were "issues" found with some of the testing methods. Specifically with sample size. With the development of accelerator mass spectrometry most of those concerns have been addressed.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Shortly after the bible was written people discovered that there were issues with it's non-tested claims. They discovered that the earth was in fact round. They discovered that the earth was not the center of the universe and that the sun didn't revolve around it. By reducing the level of education of it's followers they feel there is no need to address the errors that are discovered daily.
         
         I understand that the carbon dating process might not be 100 percent accurate and  I am aware that science will continue to improve it.
         
         How are they going about improving the process of using a 2000 year old book to determine the age of anything? Science constantly seeks to prove what they assume to be correct. Religion sticks it's head in the sand and screams I cant hear you, I dont believe you, you cant make me think if I dont want to. Amen

         replyreport
         1. 57

            C.J. Wrightposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Why does it bother you so much, what others believe? My comment was offering a "reason" why some doubted carbon dating. I also stated that the reasons for doubt were addressed by science. My intent was to answer the question, "WTF?".

            replyreport
2. 61

   Jim Hunterposted 13 years ago

   "carbon dater"?
   
   You couldn't find anything else more offensive?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Didn't realize you were so sensitive Jim. lol. That was a line I heard around school and it was used in exactly the same context as I used it.  This politically correct crap that so many scream for when it suits them is rediculous in my opnion. I believe we should use the entire language and I am not in favor of any kind of censorship. Right wing or left wing. No one has the right to expect to go thru life never being offended. Those on here who seem to yell the loudest are the ones who seek to keep others as second class citizens, So you have no problem denying segments of society basic human rights and yet expect to never be offended, Typical. the right doesn't think denying the homosexual community their rights is offensive to them, correct?  I am pretty sure that the doctors who have been murders were just a little offended right before they were killed.

      replyreport
3. 63

   pisean282311posted 13 years ago

   well I am neither surprised nor shocked with this...we can't help it...people would doubt very science they use to live there day to day but believe a book which someone told them is divine..it is easy to believe unknown author than contemporary scientists...i guess..

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I love how this guy, hates multiple segments of mankind, breaks laws and comandments and considers himself capable of and required to judge all mankind. The number of comandment a christian breaks each and every day has no bearing on their standing as a christian. It sure doesn't seem to change them or stop them from breaking them. The comandments serve one purpose in America. They give the christians something to ignore and a basis for judging all other people, Amen.

      replyreport
      1. 63

         pisean282311posted 13 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
      2. 0

         Travis_S_Musicposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         That would be those I consider way too into it, and I can't stand them. I am a believe as you already know. But I don't agree with those that think they have the right to judge people so harshly. I'm different from a lot of believers, or I used to be. I was the kid wearing all the black, the chains and spikes, the big black hair and the make up and everything. Everyone swore I was the devil's son! I've had people come up to me and say "If I never met you, I would have always thought you were going to be that one crazy guy that pulled out a knife and started killing every one."  I recall one day in the mall, looking at the theology section, an older lady came up to me and started talking to me about religion. She then stated "First you need to clean yourself up and get rid of all that garbage you're wearing. Then you can really believe in God." I didn't take too kindly to that, so I just said "Well lady...your eyebrows are fake, and you're wearing more make up than me. And you're judging me because I don't look real?" And I left after that. haha...not all of us are completely crazy (:

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I am finding christians every day that actually improve the decaying image of christianity. I dont know if they are few and far between or just afraid to speak out against the fundamentalists that are intent on detroying the world as we know it. Most seek to return to the rule the church had over the people when we were in England. None alive remember it and assume their ancestors didn;t know what they were running from. They continue to yell for more and more religion and dont care if religion is the problem.

            replyreport
4. 61

   kessposted 13 years ago

   Can you truly know a thing without seeing it from within and without...?
   Can you accurately measure a thing without getting beyond it....?
   
   How many of you actually "Know" what "Time" is?
   
   If so, then what was before the beginning...?
   What comes after the end...?
   
   To those who research to know ..how many turtles are you going to stack before you reach the conclusion which says " I do not know" ?
   
   To those who read the book to know...how many more stories created from the one you need to hear before you reach the same conclusion... "I do not know"  ?
   
   From the beginning you destined to error simply because you have not yet discern the difference between those things which belong to time and those which belong to the timeless....

   replyreport
   1. 88

      Paragliderposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      This seems to reduce to:
      "Since it's impossible to know everything it's hardly worth trying to learn anything"
      Not a position I would advocate.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         kessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         This is your assumption not mine
         I know that  all things are already open and made plain to those who know Truth.

         replyreport
         1. 88

            Paragliderposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry, but that is just posturing. Tell me the difference between 'truth' and 'Truth'.  And remember that capital letters were invented by men.

            replyreport
         2. 88

            Paragliderposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Is a lamp post open? Is a closed door open? Is a ruined lighthouse open? Is a wax impression of Florence Nightingale's teeth open?
            Please demonstrate how Ben Nevis has been made plain? To me, it still seems mountainous.
            There's a difference between poncing about with words and making sense.

            replyreport
   2. 61

      Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Can you truly know a thing without seeing it from within and without...?
      Can you accurately measure a thing without getting beyond it....?
      
      There seems to be two ways of learning this truth today. You can use scientific principles to determine what the truth about something is or you can pull the bible out and quit thinking. I keep forgetting that sheep herder knew all the world will ever need to know. They knew the earth was flat and the sun revilved around it. No matter how many of these claims made by primative people 2000 years ago are proven false, the majority still knows in their heart that every other wor remaining is absolute truth.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         kessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         In the piece you quoted I was specifically refferring to time.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            My mistake, I wasn't aware of that. It would also seem to be apply to truth. Too many people choose to look at the truth from only one side, how it applies to them.  these people have no problem ignoring the reality of their how their truth applies to, or affects others.  Humans were able able to measure the amount of truth in the claim that the earth wasn't the center of the universe by looking at the world thru thru a scientific creation the telescope. We were able to get beyond the religious superstitions by measuring it against reality and the world we inhabit. Some of are able to do this while others hold onto their right to go thru life minus intelligent thought..

            replyreport
5. 0

   china manposted 13 years ago

   Having put all the effort into writing this for another thread I didn't want to waste it so transplanting it here as an anwer to the WTF part of the OP
   
   However the logic and reality issue is the point I would say.  I don't agree that subjective reality is only perception but that is by the way, what is happening is that faced with the death of god from Nietsche's observations on society, the only thing that can keep the 'reality' of a god alive is to change the reality itself.
   
   Before 1500 there 'was' a god, pretty much everyone 'knew' that. The only hope left for them is to turn the clock of society back - and that requires defeating the forces that killed god in the first place, science and reason.  So you are arguing from two different realities, not having the same argument between them.
   
   This process is not confined to the sheeple that we meet here, it is actively being pursued as a mission way up the line.  They send their Professors of Philosphy here to guest lecture, and what we get is a contortion of old thinking twisted to form some kind of pseudo rational base for pre-determination.  I gave a series of guest lectures at the same places and one of them involved the evolution of christian art. When I went to the big online collections (Rothschilds and Co) I found all the relevant art gone, although at that time the placeholders were still there.  It was extremely difficult to find the christian art that shows it evolution from 2D to 3D ANYWHERE.  I havent looked lately but I would surmise it will be the same situation.
   Many other things are happening of this nature that are not noticed unless you especially go looking for something.
   
   I have come to the conclusion that 'they' are trying to push us back to the dark ages where we can be controlled by fear, ignorance and superstition and 'they' will go back to the comfortable and all powerful positions of lords ladies and bishops. And of course this time around 'they' will be the only ones privy to real knowledge and so not so easily overcome as last time around.

   replyreport
6. 61

   kessposted 13 years ago

   to some i will akways be poncing about with words and to others i will make perfect sense.
   how one recieve it depends on who that one is..

   replyreport