Up for at strange little thread at MAD?

[_moksha]

Here is a strange little thread at MAD, started by our former star poster Runtu. The comments make it fun to read.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showtopic=37700


Did you know that even the slightest information can sow the seed of doubt? Neither did I till... well, just read it.

[_collegeterrace]

Here is a strange little thread at MAD, started by our former star poster Runtu. The comments make it fun to read.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showtopic=37700


Did you know that even the slightest information can sow the seed of doubt? Neither did I till... well, just read it.

Carbon dating is not reliable unless it supports the proposed historicity of the Book of Mormon by the mo'pologists.

[_bcspace]

Carbon appears to be mentioned only once in the thread so far and it had nothing to do with what you just said. Brant Gardner had some intereting thoughts. Very pro LDS. Where is the doubt?

[_collegeterrace]

Carbon appears to be mentioned only once in the thread so far and it had nothing to do with what you just said. Brant Gardner had some intereting thoughts. Very pro LDS. Where is the doubt?

I understand that most of the thread is making fun of, and attacking John(runtu).

I was just pointing out that most LDS will discount the carbon dating of the skeletal remains due to the age(13k+ years old) and could cause problems with the other side of the equation, that being the church is true.

[_bcspace]

I have no problem with carbon dating or the Church.

[_collegeterrace]

I have no problem with carbon dating or the Church.

What may I ask, are your views on a worldwide flood?

Discoveries like this push a worldwide flood back even further in the timeline.

[_The Dude]

The article Runtu quoted is very typical of popular science writing. Every tiny blip that might not fit the accepted paradigm is praised as a shattering discovery... if it holds up.

[_bcspace]

I have no problem with carbon dating or the Church.

What may I ask, are your views on a worldwide flood?

Discoveries like this push a worldwide flood back even further in the timeline.

I trend to a local Flood, such as the filling of the Black Sea. Someone also suggested a "slosh" in which the hemispheres were not covered at exactly the same time and perhaps not very deep. I still prefer a local Flood.

Admittedly, this is a seeming contradiction of LDS doctrine in which the Flood is said to have baptised the earth. However, doctrine is not necessarily scripture and this, imho, may be a doctrine created more out of traditional interpretation than revelation and therefore subject to change with new revelation.

I also accept evolution as the way God created man and find no contradiction between it and LDS doctrine and scripture.

[_Gazelam]

"Thus saith the Lord: Noah I am going to flood this valley. Go and take two of every animal and move them over to the next valley so that they don't drown, for a remanant of the seed of this valley must be preserved ...Amen"

[_bcspace]

God: Noah! Thou shalt build thyself an ark, measuring 300 cubits in length!
Noah: [Jotting this down with a jumbo marker] 300 cubits, give or take.
God: Exactly 300! And thou shalt taketh two of every creature!
Noah: [Writing it down] Two creatures.
God: Two of EVERY creature!
Noah: Even stink beetles?
God: Especially stink beetles!