[_ Old Earth _] Dodwell's Curve

[dad]

"
Astronomer Dodwell was examining lists of winter/summer solstice shadow measurements (length of sun's noonday shadow on the longest and shortest day of the year) as recorded and left by ancient astronomers from as long ago as three thousand years. The mystery begins with the well-known fact that there seems something is wrong with these measurements. An apparent inaccuracy is present in these data that is totally out of character with the well-documented meticulousness of the remainder of the ancients' astronomical records and observations. Although the recorded shadow lengths are correct in respect to latitude position, they are wrong in respect to what modern astronomers think should be the axis alignment with the sun. What makes the idea of errors in these measurements odd is the fact that the ancient astronomers saw a religious significance in their astronomical calculations and therefore took them very seriously. Errors in their work beyond those imposed by the limitations of ancient observing methods are extremely unlikely. Also, the correctness of the latitude measurements give credibility to the accuracy of the axis-alignment data. Dodwell thought the "error explanation" of these figures must be wrong.
...
That Strange Curve of Observations

When George Dodwell sought to solve the mysterious discrepancy between historical records and modern astronomy, he reached some startling conclusions. Earlier it was pointed out that he made a graph of the solstice shadow-length observations recorded by the ancients. When he constructed a mathematical curve to fit the observations, he made some important discoveries.

First, the curve had a point of origin dating at about 2345 B.C. He concluded that something dramatic must have occurred at that time.

Second, the curve determined by Dodwell cross-checked with the proper archaeological dates for Eudoxus, Stonehenge, and the Solar Temple of Amen-Ra. Dodwell's astronomical curve gave correct dates for these instances, thus tending to validate his calculations. "

http://www.creationism.org/ackerman/...orldChap11.htm




If the flood was about 2500 years ago, that means sometime after a century after the flood, something happened. Something real big.

This agrees with my calculations, of a universe state change right at this very time!

http://www.ldolphin.org/setterfield/sfig2.jpg

 

[John]

The Bible dates place the flood at about 4000-4400 years ago, or so i thought :o

http://www.creationapologetics.org/creation.html <--- Good link.

 

[Barbarian]

Since there are continuously occupied settlements in Egypt and elsewhere that date prior to 4500 BC, one can only conclude that the Egyptians were monumentally inobservant to have missed the flood entirely.

 

[dad]

The Bible dates place the flood at about 4000-4400 years ago, or so i thought :o

http://www.creationapologetics.org/creation.html <--- Good link.

Well, to me, the precise flood date, or date of this supposed big change thing is not too important. Some say this, some estimate that. I generally go with Ushher's ideas, but am not dogmatic about it.

Looking at that, we see this.


"traditional Ussher flood date of 2450 BC"
http://www.stanford.edu/~meehan/donnelly/bibchron.html

If Correct, that means that this change happened in the days of Peleg, who was born 101 years after the flood, by the estimate I consider best, and correct.

So, what, Peleg was a lad of 3 or four, if Dodwell was close on his dates! Coincidence?

 

[dad]

Since there are continuously occupied settlements in Egypt and elsewhere that date prior to 4500 BC, one can only conclude that the Egyptians were monumentally inobservant to have missed the flood entirely.

Except from looking at the basis for the actual dating of these things, I discovered is it actually not known at all. It boils down to radioactive decay assumptions about the past. Period. That is faith based, if the universe, and laws were not the same. And, of course science cannot know that, so let's not build a house of cards on that one, now, shall we?

That leaves what? I have looked at the other things a bit as well, and am happy to report, that they are anything but reliable, that is why they leaned on radioactive decay methods.

There were people down Egypt way, yes, but apparently not when you imagine.

 

[John]

Also, Egyptians likes to exaggerate their" God-kings" ages and applied them, making their culture seem older. (we learned this in history class)

I believe that only the great pyramid and the sphinx were made pre-flood becuase they have great damage and the sphinx has what appears to be water damage. (from discovery channel special of Mars and the "Face on Mars" thing. )

 

[jwu]

Also, Egyptians likes to exaggerate their" God-kings" ages and applied them, making their culture seem older. (we learned this in history class)

The egyptian timeline isn't based merely on that though...

I believe that only the great pyramid and the sphinx were made pre-flood becuase they have great damage and the sphinx has what appears to be water damage. (from discovery channel special of Mars and the "Face on Mars" thing. )

Why weren't they covered by the massive amounts of sediments which flood proponents claim that the flood laid down all over the rest of the world?

(actually i think i asked the same question before, but didn't get an answer...)

 

[John]

The egyptian timeline isn't based merely on that though...

True, but it plays a role.

Why weren't they covered by the massive amounts of sediments which flood proponents claim that the flood laid down all over the rest of the world?

(actually i think i asked the same question before, but didn't get an answer...)

Sorry in my comings and going i miss things, i am very busy,lol

The best answer i can give is that while the flood did dump vast amounts of sediment all over the world it did not cover the whole world in sediment.

If we stick to walt browns suggestion of a major super continent we would not really know where exactly Egypt was located in respect to what we see now, Egypt at that time was simply in one of tha many areas that had little or no sedimentary deposits. But of course the its impossible no know anything about the pre-flood world other then what the Bible depicts. The fact that we have strata implies that there was a flood, validating what Bibles historic nature.

 

[Barbarian]

Except from looking at the basis for the actual dating of these things, I discovered is it actually not known at all. It boils down to radioactive decay assumptions about the past.

Someone's had a little fun with your trust in them. The direct calibration of varves of known age in lake Sugetsu in Japan makes C-14 dating more precise than ever. But of course, that's not the only way we know of it.

That is faith based,

Evidence. We know varves form twice a year, one light and one dark, because of seasonal variations. We know this is true, because we see them forming that way. If you want to refute such evidence, you need to come up with another plausible mechanism, and then explain how it shifted to the present one, just when we showed up to observe it. Be honest with yourself, Dad. You're just touting your unsupported beliefs and assumptions, against the evidence. It's OK. Honest creationsts, like Kurt Wise and Harold Coffin admit it.

During the Arkansas trial, Harold Coffin, a Creation Research Society member from Loma Linda University, was asked about the Burgess Shale fossil site, which has been dated to the early Cambrian period:

"Q: The Burgess Shale is said to be 500 million years old, but you think it is only 5,000 years old, don't you?

COFFIN: Yes.

Q: You say that because of information from the Scriptures, don't you?

COFFIN: Correct.

Q: If you didn't have the Bible, you could believe the age of the earth to be many millions of years, couldn't you?

COFFIN: Yes, without the Bible." (Trial transcript, McLean v Arkansas, cited in Berra, 1990, p. 135)

If you want to take your rather unorthodox beliefs about what the Bible says, against the evidence, just say so. People have more respect for Coffin, as he told the truth as he saw it, without denying the facts.

if the universe, and laws were not the same.

Hey, maybe the flood fairies did it. This is where the atheists get their "flying spaghetti monster" stuff; they mock your "maybe it was magic then" speculation. Be a man, admit that the evidence is stacked against you, but you prefer your religious beliefs. It's honorable and honest. And denying it is neither.

 

[Barbarian]

The best answer i can give is that while the flood did dump vast amounts of sediment all over the world it did not cover the whole world in sediment.

Where?

If we stick to walt browns suggestion of a major super continent we would not really know where exactly Egypt was located in respect to what we see now, Egypt at that time was simply in one of tha many areas that had little or no sedimentary deposits. But of course the its impossible no know anything about the pre-flood world other then what the Bible depicts. The fact that we have strata implies that there was a flood, validating what Bibles historic nature.

In fact, the pyramids are sitting on what creationists consider to be "flood deposits." And Jericho has evidence of continuous occupation and building since about 8,000 BC. Catal Hyuk was a thriving city about 7500 BC. And neither shows any sign at all of flooding.

 

[dad]

Also, Egyptians likes to exaggerate their" God-kings" ages and applied them, making their culture seem older. (we learned this in history class)

Good one. Also of note is that their records demand spirit beings! Anyone using those records must admit to the spiritual or they lose all there! My concept is that the spiritual was very much a part of the far past state of things.

I believe that only the great pyramid and the sphinx were made pre-flood becuase they have great damage and the sphinx has what appears to be water damage. (from discovery channel special of Mars and the "Face on Mars" thing. )

OK. I can see where one would believe that. Personally, I feel the laws of the past were different, so, slapping up the pyramids and Sphinx was a breeze post flood.

 

[dad]

Except from looking at the basis for the actual dating of these things, I discovered is it actually not known at all. It boils down to radioactive decay assumptions about the past.

Someone's had a little fun with your trust in them.

No, but forgive me if I have a little fun with the faith you have in what you think is science.

The direct calibration of varves of known age in lake Sugetsu in Japan makes C-14 dating more precise than ever. But of course, that's not the only way we know of it.

Nonsense. All you mean there is that the carbon levels, and decay state were not the same, and it matches somewhat, in your head only, with what you'd expect if they were the same. In reality, the carbon cannot be used for dating too far back at all. That leaves the layers. If we took, say, a different state universe, where fast deposition was the order of the day, of those thin layers, we could slap them down, actually post flood, without breaking a sweat. If we had, say, 40,000 layers, and we put down 2 a day, we would have about 37960. Now, if we put them down before the flood, and put the area of Japan near a place that was not greatly affected by the rapid post flood continental separation, why, the sky is the limit.

Evidence. We know varves form twice a year, one light and one dark, because of seasonal variations.

Fine with me, long as you want to keep your claims where we see this is the way it works!!! Now, if you want to claim a present universe state in the past, why, that is another story altogether. You would have to prove it. Too bad you can't!

We know this is true, because we see them forming that way.

I agree, it is true as far as how they now form. You appear to want to impose that into the great beyond, the far past. You will need to pony up big time for that one.

If you want to refute such evidence, you need to come up with another plausible mechanism, and then explain how it shifted to the present one, just when we showed up to observe it. Be honest with yourself, Dad. You're just touting your unsupported beliefs and assumptions, against the evidence. It's OK. Honest creationsts, like Kurt Wise and Harold Coffin admit it.

No, I do not need any such thing. You need to support science claims, however. Mr wise, and Mr coffin might have an opinion, but it happens to be dead, and not as clever as some might have supposed. There is no way to hold the laws of any different state universe to our temporal state one! In fact, heaven is not held to this temporary state heavens laws either. You just cannot hold the past or future to present laws unless you prove a same state past. You can't.

During the Arkansas trial, Harold Coffin, a Creation Research Society member from Loma Linda University, was asked about the Burgess Shale fossil site, which has been dated to the early Cambrian period:

"Q: The Burgess Shale is said to be 500 million years old, but you think it is only 5,000 years old, don't you?

COFFIN: Yes.

I see. Never heard of this guy. Am I supposed to be impressed?? The attempt to impose the death state of the present on the eternal realities of the created state is like trying to put the living in a coffin.

Q: You say that because of information from the Scriptures, don't you?

COFFIN: Correct.

No, not correct.

Q: If you didn't have the Bible, you could believe the age of the earth to be many millions of years, couldn't you?

COFFIN: Yes, without the Bible." (Trial transcript, McLean v Arkansas, cited in Berra, 1990, p. 135)

So??? Without God, and a creator, men can imagine whatever they like, it does no good.

If you want to take your rather unorthodox beliefs about what the Bible says, against the evidence, just say so. People have more respect for Coffin, as he told the truth as he saw it, without denying the facts.

I deny squat. If you want respect, support your claims.

Hey, maybe the flood fairies did it. This is where the atheists get their "flying spaghetti monster" stuff; they mock your "maybe it was magic then" speculation. Be a man, admit that the evidence is stacked against you, but you prefer your religious beliefs. It's honorable and honest. And denying it is neither.

It is not my beliefs that are in question here, the bible has been around the block a few times. It will be here long after your myths are forgotten, by the way. Your case is old news, and you will not be able to defend it.

 

[Barbarian]

OK. I can see where one would believe that. Personally, I feel the laws of the past were different, so, slapping up the pyramids and Sphinx was a breeze post flood.

The great thing about fantasy, is anything you want to be possible, can be. But we know how they cut out the blocks and how they moved them. No sign of "special laws" to make it easy.

 

[Barbarian]

No, but forgive me if I have a little fun with the faith you have in what you think is science.

Well, let's take a look...

Barbarian observes:
The direct calibration of varves of known age in lake Sugetsu in Japan makes C-14 dating more precise than ever. But of course, that's not the only way we know of it.

Nonsense. All you mean there is that the carbon levels, and decay state were not the same,

No, that's wrong. Because the varves are laid down two per year, we can precisely date any given varve. By checking the C-14 in each level, an absolute calibration curve can be obtained.

and it matches somewhat, in your head only, with what you'd expect if they were the same.

In reality, the carbon cannot be used for dating too far back at all.

Less than 100,000 years, in any case. That's why C-14 is rarely of use with fossils.

That leaves the layers. If we took, say, a different state universe, where fast deposition was the order of the day, of those thin layers, we could slap them down, actually post flood, without breaking a sweat. If we had, say, 40,000 layers, and we put down 2 a day, we would have about 37960. Now, if we put them down before the flood, and put the area of Japan near a place that was not greatly affected by the rapid post flood continental separation, why, the sky is the limit.

Would be, if it wasn't for the bilayer structure. One layer has summer pollen, and one is deviod of pollen each winter. So you'd have to find a way to explain how summers and winters rapidly speeded up so many seasons would happen daily, and then slowed down precisely when we showed up to see them.

Barbarian observes:
Evidence. We know varves form twice a year, one light and one dark, because of seasonal variations.

Fine with me, long as you want to keep your claims where we see this is the way it works!!! Now, if you want to claim a present universe state in the past, why, that is another story altogether. You would have to prove it. Too bad you can't!

So far, every time we test it, it shows that is the case. Of course, a dishonest God could have created the universe yesterday, and planted false evidence to make it look like it was billions of years old. But if He did a perfect job of it, then for all practical purposes, it would be billions of years old. And I cannot accept your notion that God is dishonest.

If you want to refute such evidence, you need to come up with another plausible mechanism, and then explain how it shifted to the present one, just when we showed up to observe it. Be honest with yourself, Dad. You're just touting your unsupported beliefs and assumptions, against the evidence. It's OK. Honest creationsts, like Kurt Wise and Harold Coffin admit it.

No, I do not need any such thing.

You do if you want any of us to take you seriously. If you can't support your claims, then you can't expect anyone to believe you.

You need to support science claims, however. Mr wise, and Mr coffin might have an opinion, but it happens to be dead, and not as clever as some might have supposed.

Dr. Wise and Dr. Coffin. They may be YE creationists, but they are not simpletons. And they are honest about the basis for their beliefs.

During the Arkansas trial, Harold Coffin, a Creation Research Society member from Loma Linda University, was asked about the Burgess Shale fossil site, which has been dated to the early Cambrian period:

"Q: The Burgess Shale is said to be 500 million years old, but you think it is only 5,000 years old, don't you?

COFFIN: Yes.

I see. Never heard of this guy. Am I supposed to be impressed??

Doesn't matter. He's actually trained in paleontology, and knows the facts. He has a big lead on you in that respect.

Q: You say that because of information from the Scriptures, don't you?

COFFIN: Correct.

No, not correct.

It's true. He bases his idea on faith in his reading of the Bible. He gets to decide what he thinks, dad.

Q: If you didn't have the Bible, you could believe the age of the earth to be many millions of years, couldn't you?

COFFIN: Yes, without the Bible." (Trial transcript, McLean v Arkansas, cited in Berra, 1990, p. 135)

So???

So he's an honest creationist. He admits his belief is based in his religion,and that without that, the facts would make him believe otherwise.

Barbarian observes:
If you want to take your rather unorthodox beliefs about what the Bible says, against the evidence, just say so. People have more respect for Coffin, as he told the truth as he saw it, without denying the facts.

(denial)

Doesn't matter, dad.

Barbarian on weird doctrines creationists use:
Hey, maybe the flood fairies did it. This is where the atheists get their "flying spaghetti monster" stuff; they mock your "maybe it was magic then" speculation. Be a man, admit that the evidence is stacked against you, but you prefer your religious beliefs. It's honorable and honest. And denying it is neither.

It is not my beliefs that are in question here,

Yep. They are on the table, and you aren't doing such a good job of supporting them.

the bible has been around the block a few times.

But your weird interpretation of it hasn't.

Take a tip from Wise and Coffin. Admit the truth. It's good for your soul.

 

[dad]

OK. I can see where one would believe that. Personally, I feel the laws of the past were different, so, slapping up the pyramids and Sphinx was a breeze post flood.

The great thing about fantasy, is anything you want to be possible, can be. But we know how they cut out the blocks and how they moved them. No sign of "special laws" to make it easy.

The fantasy is imagining the tens of thousands of workers needed to build the pyramids, and that your unprovablr same state past was in effect! Obviously, cause it sure ain't science.

There is simply no reason to disbelieve the bible in light of that fact. Nor it's future and past.

 

[dad]

No, that's wrong. Because the varves are laid down two per year, we can precisely date any given varve. By checking the C-14 in each level, an absolute calibration curve can be obtained.

No, they are now laid down year to year. Big difference. You need this same state universe laws to make it work the same in the future or past. By past, of course I refer to before this temporal universe state began, likely about 4400 years ago. In case you missed it, right exactly where the evidenced curve of the astroner predicts something happened!!!

Less than 100,000 years, in any case. That's why C-14 is rarely of use with fossils.

That would only be true if science did more than believe and assume in a certain state of the universe in the past. As we stand, that is myth.

Would be, if it wasn't for the bilayer structure. One layer has summer pollen, and one is deviod of pollen each winter. So you'd have to find a way to explain how summers and winters rapidly speeded up so many seasons would happen daily, and then slowed down precisely when we showed up to see them.

Matters not at all. The unknown parts of the day, and night easily could have resulted in the same pattern. A windy part, for example blowing in the pollen!! Or blowing it away!! You NEED a same state to lock in present ways things work.

So far, every time we test it, it shows that is the case. Of course, a dishonest God could have created the universe yesterday, and planted false evidence to make it look like it was billions of years old. But if He did a perfect job of it, then for all practical purposes, it would be billions of years old. And I cannot accept your notion that God is dishonest.

We test in the fishbowl of the present state universe only. You must know that. Since no change within it is called for, no dishonesty can exist.. The problem is within PO science false assumptions.

You do if you want any of us to take you seriously. If you can't support your claims, then you can't expect anyone to believe you.

It isn't me that can't support a science claimed same state it is you!! I have lots of historical and biblical suport.

Dr. Wise and Dr. Coffin. They may be YE creationists, but they are not simpletons. And they are honest about the basis for their beliefs.

I don't care how wise you think they are, their use of the present death state leads only to a coffin.

Doesn't matter. He's actually trained in paleontology, and knows the facts. He has a big lead on you in that respect.

Nonsense, that is actually why his comments are imbecilic.

It's true. He bases his idea on faith in his reading of the Bible. He gets to decide what he thinks, dad.

But not what God says.

So he's an honest creationist. He admits his belief is based in his religion,and that without that, the facts would make him believe otherwise.

Honestly mistaken is still wrong.

Barbarian on weird doctrines creationists use:
Hey, maybe the flood fairies did it. This is where the atheists get their "flying spaghetti monster" stuff; they mock your "maybe it was magic then" speculation. Be a man, admit that the evidence is stacked against you, but you prefer your religious beliefs. It's honorable and honest. And denying it is neither.

Rather than blather, why not prove the same state myth that is the PREMISE for all all all so called science claims??

Yep. They are on the table, and you aren't doing such a good job of supporting them.

No need to, unless you want to first admit science cannot tell us the state of the future and past, and we look elsewhere.

As a bible case, I can stand up to any challenge. At least I think so, from all I have seen so far.

But your weird interpretation of it hasn't.

But it has kicked some theory butt in the blocks it has went.

Take a tip from Wise and Coffin. Admit the truth. It's good for your soul.

A tip from God, forsake the foolish, and live.

 

[Barbarian]

The fantasy is imagining the tens of thousands of workers needed to build the pyramids,

Actually, it's documented fact. Egyptian records show that there was a draft of able-bodied men from every community, and that they were organized into teams for different purposes. In the quarries, there remains graffiti from various team, extolling their virtues.

There are large cemeteries for men who died working on the pyramids, discovered in 1990.

and that your unprovablr same state past was in effect! Obviously, cause it sure ain't science.

Ironically, the basis for all science is uniformitarianism, the idea that the rules today have been the same since the beginning.

There is simply no reason to disbelieve the bible in light of that fact.

And yet you do.

 

[dad]

Actually, it's documented fact. Egyptian records show that there was a draft of able-bodied men from every community, and that they were organized into teams for different purposes. In the quarries, there remains graffiti from various team, extolling their virtues.

There are large cemeteries for men who died working on the pyramids, discovered in 1990.

Right, but you need to show that they were there to build the very early large pyramid, and sphinx. Not just that, eventually, a lot of workers were needed for subsequent things!

From what I see, there were not thousands but hundreds of remains near the pyramid, and not that near, really, either.

"The lower part of the cemetery contains about 600 such graves for workmen and 30 larger tombs, perhaps for overseers. The tombs come in a variety of forms: stepped domes, beehives, and gabled roofs. Two to six feet high, the domes covered simple rectangular grave pits, following the configuration of the pyramids in an extremely simplified form. One small tomb featured a miniature ramp leading up and around its dome. Could the builder have intended it to represent the construction ramp of a royal pyramid? "

http://guardians.net/hawass/buildtomb.htm

Now, remember that if a different state existed in our past, the dates would be more skewed as we appraoched the time of change.
"everything we have found at Giza dates the pyramid and the sphinx to Dynasty 4, about 4600 years ago." (same link)

So, it is possible that these folks that died were doing something other than building the great pyramid. Obviously. I see nothing remotely compelling about the case they were the builders.

Whoever built them, if they were built less than a century and change after the flood, would not need ten thousands of workers, if the past creation state was in effect.

Although it may have taken hundreds, still, I think you would need evidence that the dead folks found here, are the ones!!

Ironically, the basis for all science is uniformitarianism, the idea that the rules today have been the same since the beginning.

Ironically, that is exactly the basis, and that basis has no foundation in any actual evidence whatsoever. Strange, that. To be founded on something potentially so fickle.

No wonder most of the universe dubbed unknown dark stuff, and they actually think it sailed out of a tiny speck!!!

And yet you do.

I do??? How does that one work, where you claim I disbelieve the bible??

 

[Barbarian]

There was no "past creation state"; that's just a non-scriptural story you made up to make your beliefs more plausible.

And if 30,000 workers were on duty on the pyramids for 30 years, one would expect hundreds of fatalities, which would explain why these people were buried on site, rather than back in the communities from which they were drafted.

 

[dad]

There was no "past creation state"; that's just a non-scriptural story you made up to make your beliefs more plausible.

How would you know?? Is there a new heavens coming?? Tell us all about how the universe is your oyster here.

And if 30,000 workers were on duty on the pyramids for 30 years, one would expect hundreds of fatalities, which would explain why these people were buried on site, rather than back in the communities from which they were drafted.

If smif. One would also expect a lot of dead people after lifespans got shorter. One would also expect a lot of laborers many years later, after the pyramids were build, doing other stuff. After all, it would be a lot tougher after the split!!

You cannot date dem bones to the precise sphinx date, can you? So, wild speculation is pretty useless. Yes, a lot of people died, so what.