or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Society & Culture/Religion/Christianity
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| Great Pyramid Theories |
peddler2 |
08/18/07 |
If you base your religious beliefs on un-provable assumptions from science the word fact and belief get confused. Fact becomes what you believe and no evidence to the contrary will be considered. Sadly this trait is shared by atheist and pseudo-atheist New Agers over the age of the earth.
The evidence that can be interpreted as great ages is limited to starlight and time, radiometric dating and ice cores. The only one that cannot be easily dismissed is starlight but either way you interpret that evidence you share the problem so to choose one theory over another when both have the exact same problem is illogical. The ice cores have been completely refuted by counting the rings that “prove” WW2 airplanes which landed in Greenland have been there for 250k years. Radiometric dating has been disproved by helium diffusion and the fact that all the methods but 2 give greatly conflicting answers etc.
So you have I fairly good argument and two very weak arguments for great ages which can also be interpreted as young ages.. On the other hand there are 24 methods of dating that cannot be interpreted as long ages at all. One of them as Math said is history . Human history only foes back as far as the Bible says it does.There is no living thing that can be demonstrated to be older then the Great Flood, population, salt in the oceans, lunar regression, short ,period comets, long period comets, the magnetic cores of Earth as well as Venus ,Mercury ,Saturn Venus and Neptune, the spin of the earth ,continental erosion and on and on. Yet the atheist and the New Ager refuse to even look at all this evidence all the while considering themselves open minded.
Domino applies the same logic to the Great Pyramid
Different theories.
The Great Pyramid of Giza is the oldest and largest of the three smallest cok pyramids in the Giza Necropolis bordering what is now Cairo, Egypt in Africa, and is the only remaining member of the Seven Wonders of the World. It is believed to have been built as a tomb for Fourth dynasty Egyptian pharaoh Khufu (hellenized as Χεωψ, Cheops) and constructed over a 20 year period concluding around 2560 BC.[1] . It is sometimes called Khufu's Pyramid or the Pyramid of Khufu.[2]
In the Great Pyramid of Giza he discovered ancient graffiti in Relieving Chambers, with the name 'Khufu' and 'Khnum-Khufu' enclosed in cartouches. There has been some degree of controversy regarding the validity of the graffiti discovery and its potential forgery by Vyse and his colleagues [2], however given its precarious location it is hard to believe it could have been inscribed after construction
So there is a controversy there but regardless of which side is correct that does not prove who actually built it just who commissioned it.
http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/070391.html
An article in Harvard Magazine suggests that the workers were not slaves. I find the argument unconvincing and seeing that Harvard is spending a million dollars to disprove the existence of God one cannot consider them unbiased. The article itself snubs the Bible.
Neverthe less it shows that who built the Pyamids is not a known fact.
This site confirms the controversy.
http://www.sacredsites.com/africa/egypt/great_pyramid.html
The attribution to Khufu of the Great Pyramid is founded solely upon three very circumstantial pieces of "evidence":
The legends told to and reported by Herodotus who visited the pyramids in 443 BC
The funerary complex near the Great Pyramid with inscriptions citing Cheops/Khufu as
the reigning pharaoh
In the pyramid itself, on a granite slab above the ceiling of the main chamber, some
small, red ochre paint marks that have a slight resemblance to a hieroglyphic symbol for
the name of Khufu.
Yet another dissenter.
Who built the Great Pyramid?
One of the enigmas about the Great Pyramid is who built it. There are many theories, but certain factors have to be taken into consideration in answering this question. For example, the astronomical calculations found on the Great Pyramid determine that is was literally impossible for the Egyptians to have designed it.
Quoting Max Toth’s book points out his fact. "Nonetheless, Egyptians are thought to have been exceedingly backward in astrology; their meteorology and division of the seasons in their system has convinced researchers that no true system of cosmology could have originated among them. These researchers indicate that Egyptian astronomy was primitive (p. 192)."
The fact is that the pyramid is there. Everything else is conjecture. We were not there and have no clear historical record. The majority of academia wants to convince people the Bible is untrue. So they dismiss any evidence that suggests it is and presents their own opinion as fact.
|
Clarification/Follow-up by Pericles on 08/18/07 9:34 am:
pedliar2
"If you base your religious beliefs on un-provable assumptions"
ALL religious beliefs are based on un-provable assumptions. There is no "if" in that sentence!
---
"Fact becomes what you believe and no evidence to the contrary will be considered."
What a total bullshit!
What normal people consider a FACT is data that has been proved by the scientific method to be correct, and that can stand repeated check and recheck of that data.
What you believe can NEVER become a fact without objective supporting evidence.
Negative "evidence" is no evidence.
Example : "God exists" is a totally invalid claim as it is based on belief and the absence of objective proof that God does not exist.
To prove a thesis the claimant has to prove his or her claim in an objective way. ALWAYS!
---
The rest of your post had such a high lunacy level, that no further comment is necessary, other than that it is total crap.
;)
Clarification/Follow-up by Pericles on 08/18/07 9:34 am:
pedliar2
My advice to you : it's around 10.30 AM W.European time now.
That's at least 02.30 AM in the western USA, so my advice to you is : no more ravings :
GO TO BED !
;)
Clarification/Follow-up by peddler2 on 08/18/07 2:17 pm:
Perk
At some point religious beliefs are un provable but your problem is you cannot see where science ends and religion begins.
Also you fail to see the difference between fact , scientific theory , a scientific model and the religious beliefs of some scientist. Such as the other day when 50 years of the so called human evolution model got flushed down the toilet where it belongs the scientists still proclaimed evolution as fact and atheism as the only true religion.
Science rarely proves anything and the fact you don't know that shows your total ignorance of the subject. A scientific theory requires repeatable testability. But all it takes is a scientist to come up with an experiment to disprove it to make it null and void.
There is no repeatable test that shows that one animal can become a different kind of animal and absolutely no evidence it ever has happened or that it is even possible, yet you believe. That is religion, not science.
There is no such thing as supporting evidence in the sense you imagine. Evidence must be interpreted and you are incapable of grasping that due to the brain washing you received diquised as education. Everyone has the same facts and they do not speak for themselves. The best scientific answer is the best interpretation, both sides have the same evidence. Either way it does not prove anything in most cases it only reaches conclusions.
For instance the evolutionists decides based on religious beliefs that there is no God so any evidence that is best interpreted as supporting the idea that a greater intelligence than his created something is dismissed regardless of the best interpretation of evidence.
To wit a dinosaur bone. The evolutionist believes based on the time scale placed on these bones back in the first part of the 19th century when there was no such thing as radiometric dating that it is at least 65 million years old. He does no scientific testing to determine the age of the bone because there is none that could verify such a great age. C- 14 dating only goes back 60ka so He looks around until he finds a nearby rock and tortures the data from it until he arrives at a date that fits his preconceived belief.
The creationist performs a c-14 test on the bone just to prove what he already knows and that the bone is not millions of years old and in every single instance the creationist is correct. The same applies to diamonds and coal which have to be millions of years old to fit evolution theory and they always contain c-14.
The evolutionist says the creationist is stupid for testing a rock or a bone that is millions of years old and covers his eyes and stuffs his ears and pretends the c-14 test was negative.
Like you they don't want to get confused with the facts.
One piece of evidence, 2 starting assumptions, 2 results. The creationist is correct because his starting assumption is correct.
Clarification/Follow-up by Mary_Susan on 08/18/07 7:06 pm:
Religion is fantasy and lies. It toxifies the brain of those who want to learn how to think!
Case in point: peddler. Clarification/Follow-up by peddler2 on 08/18/07 10:42 pm:
Mary
No one is more religious than you. You believe science has proved your religion is correct but you know nothing of nor do you care to know about science.
That is a deep and very blind religious belief.
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
