Subject: A thought about the Flood |
Bible Note: Greentwiga Interesting stuff. I love scientists that know. Like when the scientist knew the Sun revolved around the Earth and that the Earth was flat, that it was impossible to break the sound barrier, that space travel would be impossible. When the dust on the moon had to be over 6 feet deep and nothing with mass could go the speed of light. Now they are saying the stars are exhibiting random patterns, that the stars aren't all moving away as explained by the big bang. But rather some are stationary and others are actually getting closer and they all appear to moving at different speeds. Your comment that you know of no scientist that questions any flaw in atomic dating. There have been many and they have been stated in white papers, scientific journals, and even reported in the media. So I’m not sure I can offer any proof you would accept. Let talk science for a moment. Isn’t it true if something can be proven is called a law or fact? And if something is theorized but hasn’t been conclusively be proven true is called a theory? I think you will answer yes to both of these. Can you tell me the atomic fact that established carbon dating or is it still based on the Atomic theory? Can you tell me the scientific fact that details the creation of the earth by any means? You say the biggest obstacle you encounter dealing with scientist is getting past the roadblock created by creationism (no pun intended). Let me tell you, you aren’t dealing with leading edge research scientist. They are refusing to step back and look at the holes and flaws in their research. Leading edge research scientists that are seeking truth considers all aspects/factors of the equation as truth until it can conclusively be proven wrong. Nothing yet has conclusively proven the creation account as stated in Genesis as wrong. EdB |