Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Archaeologists: Carbon-dated camel bones contradict biblical accounts (Original Post) ashling Feb 2014 OP
Shhhhh.. don't you know we're not allowed to contradict the Bible.nt uriel1972 Feb 2014 #1
Carbon dating is bogus! Avalux Feb 2014 #2
I just saw that Kali Feb 2014 #8
My question to the loons: Avalux Feb 2014 #9
Good thing that carbon dating is just science sharp_stick Feb 2014 #3
I read that a long time ago - but it makes perfect sense that the Bible has this mistake. hedgehog Feb 2014 #4
The bible is not a reliable source. Iggo Feb 2014 #5
With the fundies this won't get you over the hump. kairos12 Feb 2014 #6
Maybe they'll correct this in the next edition... HarveyDarkey Feb 2014 #7
They were confused. Autumn Feb 2014 #10
Well, if you want something else Xyzse Feb 2014 #11
This is not new information Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2014 #12
Well, I never said that it was late breaking news ashling Feb 2014 #13

Avalux

(35,015 posts)
2. Carbon dating is bogus!
Thu Feb 6, 2014, 12:00 PM
Feb 2014

Creationist nutjob Ken Ham made that very clear in his 'debate' with Bill Nye the other night. He also thinks natural laws of physics were different in the past, therefore justifying his belief that the earth is 6k years old.

Kali

(55,007 posts)
8. I just saw that
Fri Feb 7, 2014, 01:30 AM
Feb 2014

you can't prove anything about the past because YOU WEREN'T THERE!!!

Man, those people scare the shit out of me.

fucking loons

Avalux

(35,015 posts)
9. My question to the loons:
Fri Feb 7, 2014, 11:57 AM
Feb 2014

Was anyone there to witness their account of creation? How do they know the bible's 'historical' account is accurate? And to that I'm sure their answer would be that god told them. It's magic!!!

hedgehog

(36,286 posts)
4. I read that a long time ago - but it makes perfect sense that the Bible has this mistake.
Thu Feb 6, 2014, 01:32 PM
Feb 2014

If rich people in your day have herds of sheep, goats, cattle and camels, and if Great-great-great.....great grandpa was a rich dude with herds of animals, and you have no access to Wiki, it's reasonable to assume that Great (etc) had camels.

Xyzse

(8,217 posts)
11. Well, if you want something else
Fri Feb 7, 2014, 02:06 PM
Feb 2014
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2553798/Earliest-human-footprints-outside-Africa-discovered-NORFOLK-800-000-year-old-imprints-shed-light-movement-ancient-ancestors.html

The earliest footprints left by humans outside Africa have been found in estuary mud in Norfolk.

Described as 'the most important discovery on British shores', the 800,000-year-old footprints were found in Happisburgh after being exposed by sea tides.


Scientists believe the footprints are evidence of the earliest known humans in northern Europe, previously only revealed through the discovery of animal bones and stone tools.

Lydia Leftcoast

(48,217 posts)
12. This is not new information
Fri Feb 7, 2014, 02:57 PM
Feb 2014

Years ago (like when I was in college, so a lot of years ago), I was reading a commentary on Genesis, and in discussing the story of Abraham's servant meeting Rebecca at the well and asking her for some water. He has prayed that God show him who would be a good wife for Isaac by asking that the young girl he asks for water also offer to provide water for his camels. The commentary said something like, "At the time this story is supposed to have been taken place, there were no camels in the Middle East. The original version of the story probably featured donkeys instead of camels."

So no camels in the Middle East? I knew that over forty years ago.

I love it when atheists go "nya-nya-nya" at something in the Bible that isn't literally true. Mainline (a technical term for the non-fundamentalist denominations) Christians have known that for hundreds of years. In fact, the tradition of interpreting the Bible on many levels is as old as Christianity itself, according to a friend of mine who is an expert on the ancient world.

It's like the atheists need a caricature to react to.

It's similar to what the Soviets anti-religious campaigns did. They actually thought that they easily wipe out religion by pointing out that the Bible wasn't literally true. It didn't work, because in the Orthodox Church in particular, they've always been more about allegory and mysticism than about Biblical literalism.

ashling

(25,771 posts)
13. Well, I never said that it was late breaking news
Fri Feb 7, 2014, 03:08 PM
Feb 2014


I gather that you went to a religious affiliated college in the 70s. I was at Millsaps College (Methodist) 70 -75.

I remember taking Old Testament. The first thig the professor did was hold up a bible . . . and drop it on the floor.
Latest Discussions»The DU Lounge»Archaeologists: Carbon-da...