Dinosaurs | Imamother

↑ BlueRose52 ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 2:28 pm

gold21 wrote:

I thought the standard view on dinosaurs is that they did exist, prior to the Mabul. They were not taken into the Teivah. The Mabul aged the rocks and fossils and everything on the Earth and therefore everything appears older than it actually is.

No?

No, sorry. Using the explanation of "the flood aged everything to make it look older" falls flat when you know that there are countless other scientific sources for the world being billions of years old, independent of there being a world altering flood. (Not that that theory even makes sense scientifically on its own, but we can put that aside.) Some other sources for the world being much older than 5774 years:

* Cosmological - radiometric age dating of lunar and meteorite material
* Biological - DNA Phylogenetic research
* Astronomical - light traveling from distant galaxies takes millions and billions of years to reach us
* Astrophysics - measuring the rate of expansion of the universe

More detail on these various approaches can be read in the links and here: http://biologos.org/questions/.....verse

Of course, one can always use the "Hashem created the world already looking old" explanation (or other approaches) to resolve these difficulties.

↑ bigsis144

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 3:56 pm

BlueRose52 wrote:

I tried saying this on page 2, but you say it so much better.

↑ BlueRose52 ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 4:09 pm

Does anyone else here ever explore the 'Similar Topics' listing at the bottom of the thread pages? Usually I don't bother because the topics suggested don't seem to match up quite well, but in this case, it's a pretty accurate matching, and the corresponding discussion is almost identical. So no need to bother writing anymore, just go and read those old threads. It's all been said already!

↑ gold21 ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 4:14 pm

BlueRose52 wrote:

Oh, sure, I know the cosmological, biological, astronomical, and astrophysics age of the earth. Um, sure...
Um, OK...

I'm not even going to click on those links. You can make it sound all intelligent and everything, but I'm entitled to believe that which I believe. And I do believe it.

I'm gonna go now and unwind with my cozy Advanced Astrophysics textbook- such fun.

↑ mo5

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 4:23 pm

wispalover wrote:

I am not bashing, genuinely curious- do you, personally, believe in dinosaurs?

To answer - using the world believe kind of proves my point.
I don't yes or not believe in dinosaurs. I acknowledge they've found many bones and interesting fossil- but what conclusions to come to from those fossils- just not sure. They may t may have not existed in some form. Since it doesn't impact on my real life I have not felt te need to come to a definitive conclusion.
To answer marina - I don't need to believe in grandmothers they are an observable fact. At least for my kids.

↑ BlueRose52 ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 4:24 pm

gold21 wrote:

Of course, everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want. But you're not entitled to claim things that are demonstrably false. The ideas I listed weren't to get you to believe that the world is really that old. It was to demonstrate that one can't say the earth only looks old because of the mabul. That simply makes no sense whatsoever when you know the facts of these other age-measuring techniques, which would not have been affected by the mabul.

I really hope everyone understands the distinction I'm making, because otherwise this is going to turn into another war over me pushing kefira on amothers. I'm not. The only thing I'm trying to push here is logic. (Which I understand is also kind of kefiradik to some people... just kidding... LOL

)

I want to just explain it again, so it's clear:

One can say that despite the scientific evidence they still believe the world is only 5774 years old. That's fine. It's a belief, and you can choose to believe whatever you want.

But one can not say that the billions-year-old age appearance of the universe is explained by the mabul. That simply doesn't make any logical sense for the simple reason that there are indicators of that billions-year-old age from evidence which the mabul would not have had any influence upon.

↑ BlueRose52 ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 4:41 pm

I'm also going to add, because I suspect people will still be upset that I mentioned those scientific facts, that gold21 asked for that. This ties in to a separate thread going on about the appropriateness of bringing up questionable material and the motives of those who do so (gee... I wonder who they were talking about?).

I'm not just mentioning these things to poke a stick in the eye of all the more traditional amothers. I did it because she wrote, "I thought such-and-such explained the old age of the earth. No?"

The question was asked. So I answered.

Last edited by BlueRose52 on Thu, Jan 16 2014, 5:09 pm; edited 1 time in total

↑ BlueRose52 ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 4:46 pm

gold21 wrote:

Of course I believe the world is only 5774 years old- or whatever the Hebrew year is, I don't even know.

That's because it's a fact.

Well, I'll amend that statement to say- If you're frum and follow the Torah, then it's a fact.

So... to be clear, you're saying that if one doesn't believe the world is 5774 years old, then they aren't frum? Or a follower of the Torah? (Or both?)

Am I getting that right?

↑ sequoia ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 4:50 pm

gold21 wrote:

It's a good thing that my MO friend who is working on her PhD in evolutionary biology doesn't know that.

octopus ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 5:06 pm

Success10 wrote:

This is not an argument because according to our tradition, the world is 5774 years old. So it can't be 2 seconds old.

you realize this number is the age of the world since the birth of adam? the age of the world and the age of the universe are 2 separate things. the universe is much older than our world. Hashem created worlds before this one . dinosaur bones can be relics of past worlds. I have a problem with ppl saying Hashem dropped bones in order to confuse us. Is it one of Hashem's middos to operate in a way that's gneivas daas???to say that dinos never existed is outright kefira. are you saying Hashem wasnt capable of creating dinos???

↑ gold21 ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 5:18 pm

BlueRose52 wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about re: the appropriateness of bringing up questionable materials etc..
Sure, whatever you say.
Totally agree.

↑ gold21 ↓

Thu, Jan 16 2014, 5:24 pm

BlueRose52 wrote:

So... to be clear, you're saying that if one doesn't believe the world is 5774 years old, then they aren't frum? Or a follower of the Torah? (Or both?)

Am I getting that right?

Hmm.

I don't know the answer to that question.

Let me think a sec.

OK.

No, Im not saying that.

I'm not sure that I have ever heard of a frum person who believes in evolution, but I have no idea about how that would reflect on level of frumkeit.

#Clueless