What Missionary Efforts Were Made To Convert Pre-Existing Population In America?

[Rob Osborn]

By local I do not mean one zip code. Most likely they needed the experience and needed to go somewhere else. To be out that long they probably were washed out into the ocean and landed somewhere else. Again, Noah did not know. It is also possible they needed the experience. Why did God let the saints haul the foundation of the Salt Lake Temple from a distant quarry and then have the whole thing crack so they had to start over?

nice theory but completely unsupported in all of scripture and doctrine.

[jkwilliams]

Now, if we only had another 65,000,000 years to validate the theory it would be something to behold indeed. Thats whats wrong with science- they set up parameters, hypothesis and theory that cant be falsified. Shouldnt even be theory under those guidelines.

Oh, for heaven's sake. When multiple means of dating overlap and confirm each other, that means it can be falsified.

And I note that your timeline of the earth's existence doesn't fit within the 25,000 year period the creationist argue for. Their dating of fossils goes back 25,000 years, though the problem is that they are using only C-14, whose half-life is 50,000 years, so that it's to be expected that the dates would be around that date. Beyond that, C-14 isn't accurate. Of course, the YEC crowd doesn't tell you that there are multiple accurate methods for dating well into the millions of years. Gee, I wonder why they want to focus solely on C-14? It's a mystery.

[The Nehor]

Whose trying to manipulate the data? Heck, creationists have been dating dinosaur bones for decades and all of them return dates in the thousands, not millions of years old. So whos really manipulating who?

Satan is manipulating Creationists by convincing them to "lie for God" or keeping them in profound and utter ignorance. He is doing it so that his dupes can make Christianity a laughingstock. It is working.

Let me repeat- "They found soft tissue in dinosaur bones" There is no known explanation by science to show why this carbonous material was preserved. So, its either magic or the dates are incorrect. So whose quack science am I to believe?

Actually they have explained it: iron. If the body was buried relatively quickly and cut off from the air then decay releasing iron can act like formaldehyde and preserve soft tissue. Last I heard they were working on a way to extract the iron so they can study the tissue but I have not kept up on the latest developments. Edited February 20, 2014 by The Nehor

[Rob Osborn]

Oh, for heaven's sake. When multiple means of dating overlap and confirm each other, that means it can be falsified.

And I note that your timeline of the earth's existence doesn't fit within the 25,000 year period the creationist argue for. Their dating of fossils goes back 25,000 years, though the problem is that they are using only C-14, whose half-life is 50,000 years, so that it's to be expected that the dates would be around that date. Beyond that, C-14 isn't accurate. Of course, the YEC crowd doesn't tell you that there are multiple accurate methods for dating well into the millions of years. Gee, I wonder why they want to focus solely on C-14? It's a mystery.

There is no way to falsify long ages. No one has a time machine.

[Rob Osborn]

Satan is manipulating Creationists by convincing them to "lie for God" or keeping them in profound and utter ignorance. He is doing it so that his dupes can make Christianity a laughingstock. It is working.

Actually they have explained it: iron. If the body was buried relatively quickly and cut off from the air then decay releasing iron can act like formaldehyde and preserve soft tissue. Last I heard they were working on a way to extract the iron so they can study the tissue but I have not kept up on the latest developments.

And how were they able to confirm that soft tissue surrounded in iron can be preserved for 65 million years?

[jkwilliams]

There is no way to falsify long ages. No one has a time machine.

I can only conclude that you do not understand science. It seems very strange that a Latter-day Saint would align himself with the Young Earth Creationists. Maybe it is just that you can't get past a rigidly literal view of scripture. Too bad, as there's a lot in there to learn if you set aside your presuppositions.

[jkwilliams]

Satan is manipulating Creationists by convincing them to "lie for God" or keeping them in profound and utter ignorance. He is doing it so that his dupes can make Christianity a laughingstock. It is working.

Maybe so. I have never had any affinity for fundamentalism, and I'm surprised that a member of the LDS church would align himself with them.

Actually they have explained it: iron. If the body was buried relatively quickly and cut off from the air then decay releasing iron can act like formaldehyde and preserve soft tissue. Last I heard they were working on a way to extract the iron so they can study the tissue but I have not kept up on the latest developments.

Correct. For whatever reason, Brother Osborn chooses to accept only the creationist spin on the research and not the research itself. Too bad.

[Rob Osborn]

I can only conclude that you do not understand science. It seems very strange that a Latter-day Saint would align himself with the Young Earth Creationists. Maybe it is just that you can't get past a rigidly literal view of scripture. Too bad, as there's a lot in there to learn if you set aside your presuppositions.

Oh, I am definately not a YEC. I do not believe the earth was created in 6  twenty four hour days. And I do understand science pretty well. Well enough to know that modern science as far as certain things go is way off.

[Rob Osborn]

Maybe so. I have never had any affinity for fundamentalism, and I'm surprised that a member of the LDS church would align himself with them.

Correct. For whatever reason, Brother Osborn chooses to accept only the creationist spin on the research and not the research itself. Too bad.

I choose to accept the word of God not the arm of flesh.

[The Nehor]

nice theory but completely unsupported in all of scripture and doctrine.

Beats the TARDIS ark theory that the ark was bigger on the inside then on the outside so it could store millions of pairs of terrestrial animals and plant life to preserve biodiversity and the food they would need for about a year on the ark.

Now, if we only had another 65,000,000 years to validate the theory it would be something to behold indeed. Thats whats wrong with science- they set up parameters, hypothesis and theory that cant be falsified. Shouldnt even be theory under those guidelines.

How do you manage to dress yourself in the morning?

[jkwilliams]

And how were they able to confirm that soft tissue surrounded in iron can be preserved for 65 million years?

It wasn't preserved. It was fossilized. The iron allowed it to keep its basic structure during the fossilization process.

Did you even read any of the research?

[The Nehor]

Oh, I am definately not a YEC. I do not believe the earth was created in 6  twenty four hour days. And I do understand science pretty well. Well enough to know that modern science as far as certain things go is way off.

If we were to have a debate on whether you understand science I would use your posts on this board for the "against" argument.

[jkwilliams]

Oh, I am definately not a YEC. I do not believe the earth was created in 6  twenty four hour days. And I do understand science pretty well. Well enough to know that modern science as far as certain things go is way off.

Given your unwillingness to educate yourself in current research, I don't put a lot of stock in your ability to evaluate science.

[jkwilliams]

I choose to accept the word of God not the arm of flesh.

It is possible to accept the age of the earth and still accept the word of God. I suspect you lack imagination.

[jkwilliams]

If we were to have a debate on whether you understand science I would use your posts on this board for the "against" argument.

We have multiple, overlapping means of dating the fossil record, and he ignores it all because some creationists used C-14 to date fossils to 25,000 years (an act which in itself is a deception, and they have to know it). Researchers discover fossilized soft tissue and explain how it came to be fossilized, and he rejects that because believing in its "preservation" somehow bolsters the case for a young earth.

I don't get it.

[CA Steve]

Is it just me or does anyone else see the irony of a discussion about the uncertainties of science, taking place on the internet?

Edited February 20, 2014 by CA Steve

[Rob Osborn]

Given your unwillingness to educate yourself in current research, I don't put a lot of stock in your ability to evaluate science.

I don't put much stock in historical science. When I compare what mainstream science has to say about things I find it at almost complete odds with all of scripture and prophets. I ask important questions about things that pertain to validating scripture. So far I see no evidence that contradicts scripture but yet I see lots and lots of mans understanding that contradict Gods word. Perhaps you could rephrase to say " I don't put a lot of stock in Gods ability to work within science"

[Rob Osborn]

We have multiple, overlapping means of dating the fossil record, and he ignores it all because some creationists used C-14 to date fossils to 25,000 years (an act which in itself is a deception, and they have to know it). Researchers discover fossilized soft tissue and explain how it came to be fossilized, and he rejects that because believing in its "preservation" somehow bolsters the case for a young earth.

I don't get it.

What I don't get is how scientists can claim to have found out how soft tissue can be preserved for 65 million years through unsupported and unobservable testing. And they are supposed to be scientists? I don't get it.

[Rob Osborn]

It wasn't preserved. It was fossilized. The iron allowed it to keep its basic structure during the fossilization process.

Did you even read any of the research?

The soft tissue wasn't fossilized. Fossilization is the absence of carbonous material and is the mineralized version of whats left after the carbonous material leaves.

[The Nehor]

Is it just me or does anyone else see the irony of a discussion about the uncertainties of science, taking place on the internet?

I once sat in a car with someone explaining to me that quantum physics could not work....while using a GPS to get where we were going. It was surreal.