A Debate Before My Comments Under Video Were Done

I was watching a video, my first comment here was on the ongoing commenting, and I got in a debate before watching it to end. BBL on rest of it./HGL

Hans-Georg Lundahl

1:44 "But of course, there are things in the Earth called fossils."
...
1:52 "Even the ancient Greeks and Romans knew about fossils,"
"[and they explained them]"
1:56 "as the remains of the giants and monsters from their mythology."

• 1) Were they entirely wrong?
• 2) Would an evolutionist think they were wrong, and why?
• 3) Would a Christian think so, and why?

As a Christian, while I think some of the fossils were misidentified (elephantine fossils misconstrued as the remains of Cyclopes), I have no overall reason to believe Greek mythology overall didn't happen at all, and I have no overall reason to think men never walked earth in times recently before Classic times, with giant men and the behemoths known now as sauropods.

Nor would I be the least concerned with denying Hercules may have killed a few monsters.

May Ling

"Giant men" never existed. That is why not a single skeleton was ever found.

Sauropods never lived in time of humans; sauropods died out 145 million years ago.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@May Ling " That is why not a single skeleton was ever found."

Rarity is an option, plus one skeleton of the Uberibatitan Ribeiroi is so deficient it could theoretically be the skeleton of a pre-Flood giant.

"sauropods died out 145 million years ago."

That is not a valid date.

May Ling

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
You are extremely uninformed or willfully deceptive.YES; no giant human skeleton was ever found; NONE ever existed.There were more than 1000+ sauropod or dinosaur fossils unearthed. More are found every day. Not one was tested to be younger then 50 million years.

Uberibatitan Ribeiroi lived about 70 million years ago. No humans ever lived in the time of sauropods or dinosaurs. Humans (several species) only date back 7 million years.

All evidence disproves a global flood. Several human civilizations existed for the past 50,000 years with no flood in their history. A global flood is a creationist propaganda for children.

You say "it could be" ---- "could be" is no evidence. I was born in a garage, I could be car, but probably not.

Wendy Blue

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
You claim that sauropod extinction 145 million years ago is not a valid date? 145 million years is accurate. Sauropods are a clade of saurischian dinosaurs. (very long necks, long tails, small heads, and four thick, pillar-like legs) - they are not representative of dinosaurs; it is a special class of dinosaurs.

Sauropods have fallen into rapid decline at the end of the Jurassic period, around 145 million years ago—pushed to the evolutionary sidelines by new and improved herbivorous dinosaurs.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@May Ling "YES; no giant human skeleton was ever found; NONE ever existed."

Heard of Wadlow?

"There were more than 1000+ sauropod or dinosaur fossils unearthed."

Possible, but some are in such a state that they theoretically could be bones of sth else, like extreme (ultra-Wadlow) giant. As one at least of the three skeleta of Uberibatitan Ribeiroi.

"Not one was tested to be younger then 50 million years."

Except of course when Creationists come into the play and carbon test. THEN not one was tested as old as 40 000 years.

"Uberibatitan Ribeiroi lived about 70 million years ago."

According to a wrong dating obtained by a wrong dating technique.

"No humans ever lived in the time of sauropods or dinosaurs. Humans (several species) only date back 7 million years."

7 million years is also a non-date, also obtained by very misleading dating techniques.

"All evidence disproves a global flood."

On the contrary, all evidence considered carefully by creationists and not just taken as preented by your evolutionist next door science teacher, supports the global flood. All evidence relevant to the case, that is.

"Several human civilizations existed for the past 50,000 years with no flood in their history."

No human civilisation has a written history going back 50 000 years.

Also, 40 000 years (carbon dated) to 35 000 years (carbon dated) seems a space after which you find no more Neanderthal body remains, dito Denisovans, dito Flores hobbits. Yes, I know about the Gibraltar cave, but it's Mousterian goods that is younger than that.

This makes 40 000 BP a good candidate for carbon date of Flood, meaning it should somehow match a real date of 2957 BC, meaning the C14 level was c. 1.4 percent modern carbon back then.

@Wendy Blue "You claim that sauropod extinction 145 million years ago is not a valid date?"

I claim dates older than 5199 BC or possibly 5500 BC, not much older, are not valid dates.

Wendy Blue

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
So you just grab the dates out of thin air? I did not realize that you can make up your own calendar? What is your evidence of a 7,000 - 8,000 year old earth, and what is the source of your information?

Why not list a single peer-reviewed science article that backs up your claim? Just a single one, then we can have a discussion.

Any claim made which is not supported by evidence is no different from a lie, and it is dismissed as such.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Wendy Blue "What is your evidence of a 7,000 - 8,000 year old earth, and what is the source of your information?"

The Bible, as per LXX version.

May Ling

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
Robert Wadlow is just a tall human 8' 11" Not from a race of giants or anything to do with Nephilm as claimed in the bible. There were about a dozen more people who were close to that size.

"Except of course when Creationists come into the play and carbon test. THEN not one was tested as old as 40 000 years."

Produce one peer-reviewed article that describes the evidence of dinosaur fossil being carbon tested and showed the result it being less then 40,000 years old. Who wrote it? Who did the peer-review and where was it published?

If you cannot, then you are lying (BTW carbon testing is inaccurate for items over 50,000 years and is not used for older items). There are about 20 radiometric dating, which can measure up to billions of years.

Northern China had continuous civilization for the past 20,000 years. The last 7,000 years is recorded in documents preserved today. No global flood. Australia goes back 50,000 years of history with no global flood.

Again, present a single piece of evidence for a global flood?

"Also, 40 000 years (carbon dated) to 35 000 years (carbon dated) seems a space after which you find no more Neanderthal body remains, dito Denisovan"

Now you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Did you not start with the following statement:

"I claim dates older than 5199 BC or possibly 5500 BC, not much older, are not valid dates."

Now you are claiming skeletons of 35,000 - 40,000 years? which is a lot older than what you claim as the only valid date range? Are you confused?

BTW in spite of your confusion, the facts are that we have remains of Neanderthal (fossils of Neanderthals) in Europe dated between 450,000 and 430,000 years ago.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@May Ling "Robert Wadlow is just a tall human 8' 11" Not from a race of giants"

Sufficiently tall to be considered a giant.

"Not from a race of giants or anything to do with Nephilm as claimed in the bible."

As far as we know, the nephelim were human.

"Produce one peer-reviewed article that describes the evidence of dinosaur fossil being carbon tested and showed the result it being less then 40,000 years old. Who wrote it? Who did the peer-review and where was it published?"

You know as well as I do that most peer reviewed journals boycott Armitage.

It so happens, CMI actually does peer review.

That means, this is in fact peer reviewed:

Radiocarbon in dino bones
by Carl Wieland | Published: 22 January 2013 (GMT+10)
https://creation.com/c14-dinos

"If you cannot, then you are lying"

If I hadn't been able to, that would still not be a lie. It would just not fit your criteria of scientific credibility, which is sth else than truthfulness.

"(BTW carbon testing is inaccurate for items over 50,000 years and is not used for older items). There are about 20 radiometric dating, which can measure up to billions of years."

All methods except carbon dating lack even relative credibility. OK, thermoluminiscence, but it goes off a tangent a bit less far back than carbon does. Mungo man is carbon dated c. 20 000 BP, but thermoluminiscence dated (if I recall correctly) c. 40 000 BP.

"Northern China had continuous civilization for the past 20,000 years."

Carbon dated, I presume.

Now 18,000 BC [carbon dated!] is within the post-Flood lifespan of Noah on my recalibration of carbon dating.

"The last 7,000 years is recorded in documents preserved today."

More like last 4000 years. Perfectly compatible with Flood being before that.

Creation vs. Evolution : Recorded History of China Too Old For Us?
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2017/10/record-history-of-china-too-old-for-us.html

"Australia goes back 50,000 years of history with no global flood."

Thermoluminiscence or sth, yes, but carbon says 20 000 years, meaning within Noah's post-Flood lifespan.

40,000 BP (carbon only) = Flood, 2957 BC.
9600 BC (carbon) = beginning of Babel, 2602 BC.

"Now you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Did you not start with the following statement:"

That statement was about real dates. I consider the carbon dates inflated, but they come in a correct sequence.

Carbon dates have been coinciding with real dates for last 2500 perhaps 3000 perhaps nearly 3500 last years, but before that, with lower and rising carbon levels, the carbon dates are inflated, and more so, the further back you go.

"Now you are claiming skeletons of 35,000 - 40,000 years? which is a lot older than what you claim as the only valid date range? Are you confused?"

Not the least, I underlined that 35,000 and 40,000 years are carbon dates = NOT identic to real dates.

One of these carbon dates corresponds to 2957 BC as a real date. Namely, the year of the Flood.

"we have remains of Neanderthal (fossils of Neanderthals) in Europe dated between 450,000 and 430,000 years ago."

• 1) That is not the end of them.
• 2) Those dates are not carbon dates and they are in fact worthless, unlike carbon dates which at least give a relative sequence that is correct, if much inflated in dates.