Can the charts keep up?

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Benz

But there's a written record, and archeological evidence. I don't personally need to see something happen to believe it--enough that someone saw it and credibly recorded it. The point for this thread is that no human has testified to experiencing a pole reversal, so to assert that for sure it happened in some imaginary past is absurd.
But if you only believe the things you see for yourself, I sure admire your chutzpah!

I thought you had already discounted archaeological evidence as invalid and unreliable.

As far as Moses being the author of Genesis that is not the consensus among biblical Scholars. And interestingly enough, opinions on that have changed in the last 50 to 100 years so the idea that Moses was the sole author of Genesis seems to be just a theory.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Benz

But there's a written record, and archeological evidence. I don't personally need to see something happen to believe it--enough that someone saw it and credibly recorded it. The point for this thread is that no human has testified to experiencing a pole reversal, so to assert that for sure it happened in some imaginary past is absurd.
But if you only believe the things you see for yourself, I sure admire your chutzpah!

Ok it's no longer interesting and you left funny behind quite a while ago.
I simply have no more patience for an illogical zealot. You may wish to consider moving to the Ozarks. Blocked.

[Kelkara]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

You seem to not understand what a "peer" is in the review process. Doesn't mean lots of likes on Facebook, nor the acceptance of the unwashed multitude... it means review by persons of similar training and expertise, ones who are accepted in the community of folks engaged in similar works.

So, who are these peers who reviewed Moses's writings? Can we question them as to their proficiency in writing commandments or parting waters? See their published work?

Jim ... I was going to stay out of this too ... But the "peers" of Moses in this case are clear ... it's the likes of Buddha, Rama, Mohamed etc, even L Ron Hubbard ... they all published their works too. There seems to be very little consensus among any of them ... if only there were an independent means of investigating.


Interesting to see that Benz has now discarded his "question everything because they might be falsifying data" philosophy.


But now this thread really has nothing to do with boats ... So I'm out.

[Benz]

Originally Posted by skipmac

I thought you had already discounted archaeological evidence as invalid and unreliable.

As far as Moses being the author of Genesis that is not the consensus among biblical Scholars. And interestingly enough, opinions on that have changed in the last 50 to 100 years so the idea that Moses was the sole author of Genesis seems to be just a theory.

Archaeological evidence is there, and is valid: just that the conclusions drawn from it are often wrong, though I think it's easier to judge rightly of something that happened several thousand years ago (like the building of the pyramids) than of something that needs eons of time to have elapsed in order to be made credible. In fact, I don't deny the existence of evidence for nearly everything that's happened. What I disagree with is the conclusions often drawn from it.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Benz

But there's a written record, and archeological evidence. I don't personally need to see something happen to believe it--enough that someone saw it and credibly recorded it. The point for this thread is that no human has testified to experiencing a pole reversal, so to assert that for sure it happened in some imaginary past is absurd.

Everyone runs on faith to some extent. No single person can know everything; they must at some point trust that the people who tell them something have a solid basis for saying so.

For example, I believe in the theory of natural selection (aka evolution) partly because it satisfies what I observe, but mostly because the scientists who have published their studies have found both ancient (fossils) and modern (genetic experiments) evidence that supports it, and they went about it scientifically, with an abundance of data, study and reporting to show for it.

Here's why the idea of a 10,000 year old earth is a non-starter: no part of any scientific explanation would include the words "God did it" ( substitute the diety of your choice). It's never logically or scientifically valid to say "this is too haaaaard; I can't figure this out. It must have been done by the/an omnipotent being."

So I can safely ignore the concept of a 10,000 year old earth, because it's massively improbable compared to the prevailing scientific theories, unless you cop out by saying "God did it"... which is theology and not science.


QED

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Benz

But if you only believe the things you see for yourself, I sure admire your chutzpah!

Seem to have heard this said before by someone..
Now who was it.. 🤔

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Benz

But there's a written record, and archeological evidence. I don't personally need to see something happen to believe it--enough that someone saw it and credibly recorded it. The point for this thread is that no human has testified to experiencing a pole reversal, so to assert that for sure it happened in some imaginary past is absurd.
But if you only believe the things you see for yourself, I sure admire your chutzpah!

I thought you had already discounted archaeological evidence as invalid and unreliable.

As far as Moses being the author of Genesis that is not the consensus among biblical Scholars. And interestingly enough, opinions on that have changed in the last 50 to 100 years so the idea that Moses was the sole author of Genesis seems to be just a theory.

[Benz]

Originally Posted by skipmac

I thought you had already discounted archaeological evidence as invalid and unreliable.

As far as Moses being the author of Genesis that is not the consensus among biblical Scholars. And interestingly enough, opinions on that have changed in the last 50 to 100 years so the idea that Moses was the sole author of Genesis seems to be just a theory.

There is nothing questionable about evidence: as long as it is not tampered with, it is inert; just sitting there to be observed. What is questionable (haven't I just said this?) is what meaning is ascribed to it.

[AKA-None]

What is the evidence that nothing exists beyond 10,000 light years?

[Inanna]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Old news.. its been wobbling for decades.. the concern over the last decade has been its getting worse prompting some to think in terms of a flip.
No one knows the effects this may have.. no one knows if its happened in the past and what effect if any it had.
Earth flip is not new.

Polarity has changed frequently during geological times, some experts claim we are in good timing for another one, you will have to look at your upside down to match your compass

[jimisbell]

Originally Posted by Benz

But since you insist on the citation of published sources, I will tell you that it is impossible for ANYTHING to have happened Choose-your-favorite-amount-of-millions of years ago, because the universe is not more than 10,000 years old.

OOOOps. This is my first post. I have been reading this thread "religiously" (Pun intended) from the beginning and have been wondering why this had not come up earlier. I AM a Christian and I am a Scientist (Astronomy, Geology, Seismology, Radio Astronomy). I have read the bible. And this sentiment is not in the bible. One can read the bible in such a way to think it says that but it isnt there. To come to this conclusion, you must believe the ALL THE KNOWLEDGE of that day is in that one book. That book is only explaining one subject. It does not explain other subjects and should not be expected to. Libraries contain many books. Would you expect a book on Relativity to inform you about the life of a man that lived 2000 years ago? So why would you expect a book about Jesus to inform you about Relativity?


My hope is that this does not become a Christian bashing thread but that instead, non believers can realize that there are scientists (with degrees and careers) that are also believers and see science as offering proofs of statements made in the bible.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by jimisbell

My hope is that this does not become a Christian bashing thread but that instead, non believers can realize that there are scientists (with degrees and careers) that are also believers and see science as offering proofs of statements made in the bible.

Good post. There shouldn't be conflict if religion sticks to the "why", and leaves the "what", "when" and "how" to science.

[LargeMarge]

Originally Posted by WhiteHill

Busy time for geomagnetists:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00007-1

And a busy time for salvage workers.

One example is the navigation officer of USS Guardian driving the mine-sweeper through a Restricted Area == a Heritage Park == in the Philippines while park rangers frantically warned the ship to change course, while the bridge crew claimed Sovereign Immunity, then grounding the 227ft ship on a coral reef. The US$227 millions ship was 'decommissioned' with extreme prejudice at a cost exceeding us$227 millions.

(The inevitable answer to the inevitable question "Why do American tax-payers need to mine-sweep a foreign Heritage Park?" is "No comment" from American government agents.)

Another example is the navigation officer of USS Fitzgerald ramming a cargo ship because she was having a tiff with the CIC officer because she was in a hissy fit with the bridge crew. Seventeen people were killed.

Sometimes, incompetence == or arrogance == can't be transfer-blamed on charts and wayward instruments.

[wtmf]

I saw on Discovery that a geologist PROVED pole flip by pointing out the way the particles or something was alingned In different patterns in the walls of the Grand Canyon. FACT Alanta Georgia airport had to recalibrate their radar to compensate for the movement of the magnetic North Pole. Get an automotive GPS and when you leave port hit the HOME button asyou head out to sea. staying on that Latitude get you to the entrance.

[svmariane]

Originally Posted by Benz

There is nothing questionable about evidence: as long as it is not tampered with, it is inert; just sitting there to be observed. What is questionable (haven't I just said this?) is what meaning is ascribed to it.

Originally Posted by jimisbell

My hope is that this does not become a Christian bashing thread but that instead, non believers can realize that there are scientists (with degrees and careers) that are also believers and see science as offering proofs of statements made in the bible.

Okay, fair enough.

About the comments "because the universe is not more than 10,000 years old" and being "published in the Book of Genesis, by Moses, who's genealogy gives a timeline for the age of the universe." Ummmm...

Which version of the Bible? Updated in which year? Which translation?

Took me only a minute research to find this from an article discussing the Bible's origins: "The Masoretes also added vowel points (called niqqud) to the text, since the original text contained only consonants. This sometimes required the selection of an interpretation, since some words differ only in their vowels their meaning can vary in accordance with the vowels chosen." (Emphasis mine.) Thus, "From the 6th century to the 10th century CE" the Bible was being edited and revised just by that particular group of like-minded individuals, and we know that there were other revisions. (The King James version being just one result.)

The point being that the word of god should not need editing, revision, or interpretation (though we probably have to deal with errors of translation) but the Bible was edited and, for example, thou shall not murder become transformed into thou shall not kill. But by whom and why? (I mean, c'mon... weren't the Ten Commandments originally designed specifically for ease of understanding?) Was that revision based on newly discovered data - or a subjective thought from a hung-over monk?

A thousand years ago mankind knew nothing of carbon-dating techniques, nor understood that it is based on the radioactive decay of an isotope of carbon. We learned and updated our teachings. Perhaps it's time for yet another update of the Bible. Perhaps 10 thousand years was originally given as 10 million years and somebody slipped up during transcription. Shame there's nobody around from back then whom we could ask, no?

James

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI1JJZuopig

If you like delving into things, google this: "bible translation timeline chart".