May 18, 1980: St. Helens Blows Its Top Off

Material from Mt St. Helens was carbon dated at a ridiculously old age. This is one example that carbon dating doesn't work. The trees floating in the lake afterward got water logged and started to float upright then started to petrify rapidly. Just like the polystratified fossils of petrified trees dug up today. Yet more evidence for the biblical flood.

amos

www.truthsjourney.com

No offence intended, but were you to omit such lines as the last, and get rid of the web link, people might engage and discuss with you. Sorry, but it's a plain fact.

That aside, could you explain 'polystratified', I'm a bit lost on that term. Some links to further info on the other stuff would be appreciated.

Your personal beliefs are your own, and that's fine. I'll read if you can point me in the right direction for more on the first few lines.

Thanking you in anticipation.

polystratified is a fossil running through multiple geological layers. Showing that these layers are not millions of years old. I understand people don't like religious conclusions however what is the point of knowing facts it they don't point you to the truth. And the truth is that the Bible is right on every single point. If it offends anyone then that's unfortunate. No offense intended.

You can find out more about this at www.drdino.com

Thank you for the explanation of 'polystratified'. You may well have something interesting to contribute, but adding that last link has turned me off. My loss, I know.

May I make a polite suggestion; Ask the question, then follow it on with pure science. After 20 or so posts, use the input to promote the more contentious aspects Wait until you have input to refute conventional thinking - in geek city, you will not last long if mentioning the Biblical view at the off.

Actually polystratification has been well explained by natural occurrences.

Something such as a large tree gets buried in a deep layer of softer soil materials and petrifies over a few millions of years. Then an erosional event occurs in the area unearthing the petrified wood but not destroying it since it is of a more resilient and harder mineral composition now than what once entombed it.

Later a second, third or more geological events happen over a period of time (millions of years again) building up the multiple layers of strata that no longer match the original one that caused the petrification process in the first place.

This is how we get the unusual petrified forest types of fossil formations. Burial, unearthing by natural events and multiple partial reburial events. The petrified forests we see now with tree trunks standing up over 20 feet high are presently just in the phase between unearthing and the next reburial stage.

Its takes less than a hundred years for things to petrifiy. Petrified sack of flour, pickle, cowboy boot. etc.

The tree would not be so much harder than the surrounding rock to last millions of years longer.

If there are millions of years between layers why aren't there any erosion marks between layers?

Amos

You have a point - I remember it from Blue Peter on TV.

"presently just in the phase between unearthing and the next reburial stage"

Sound like you might have been the kid who asked his Mom, on seeing a dust-bunny under the bed, and having heard "from dust we came and to dust we return", "Mom, is that guy under the bed coming, or going?"

I find the incredibly complex efforts those who are convinced of evolution will go to to explain events, with the incredibly unlikely probabilities involved, to be much less credible that the simple explanations of the Bible.

After all, Occam may not have had the Biblical Creation account in mind, but his Razor still has its edge.

It takes more faith to believe that we can from a rock billions of years ago then it does to believe in a a God.

And the truth is that the Bible is right on every single point.
That is an opinion , not a fact.

No, its a fact.

What about other peoples bibles/ religions?

What makes theirs wrong and yours the right one?

Because its true.

Thats what they say too.

SECULAR history has borne out the Biblical prophecies throughout history. That hasn't been true of the competing "Bibles". No matter what "THEY" say, if historical fact doesn't back it up, it's a hard sell.

The Bible has been shown to completely be backed up with history. Prophecies and all. Take the fall of Babylon for instance. Or the rise of Rome. Or Jesus. etc. etc. etc.

People just make excuses for why they don't "think" the Bible is fact. Because they don't want it to be true. Becuase them that means they have some rules to follow.

So how is having 20+ religious variations on basic Christianity, all reading the same book with each getting different interpretations from it that "their individual belief is the correct one and the rest are wrong", any different than any other religions and their factions a proof of its validity?

As far as historical truth goes its been shown that the present day bible has large sections that have been edited and rewritten or outright omitted many times over the ages when comparing it to what is believed to be the earliest and most accurate ancient biblical texts found throughout the world. Texts that also carry unbiased third party historical documentation in themselves that have been both scientifically and historically prooven accurate.

Don't get historical documentation and religious agenda mixed up. They are not the same. Biblical truth that holds its holy water is good. Religious propaganda and biased opinion is not.

The more than 20 variations is because most of the world's christianity does not follow what the Bible says. The Bible itself is accurate. Just most churches are corrupted. Interesting in making money and controlling people. Real christianity is far and few between. Most of the new versions of the Bible have been rewritten and cannot be trusted. The King James Version Bible is the best I know of. There is no significant difference between the earliest manuscripts and the KJV we now have. Lots of people say the Bible has been changed and I used to believe that but after looking into this I have found out this is wrong. The truth is that any modern version is corrupted purposely. You can watch www.yah-tube.com/videos/veith/TO_213B_Battle_of_the_Bibles/index.html to find out the history of Bible manuscripts.

The Bible is perfectly historically accurate.

The Bible is the only one that stands up to the facts.