Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 36991

A dozen seashell necklaces (or perhaps bracelets) were discovered in a cave in Morocco, North Africa. The discovery surprised archaeologists who dated the ornamental jewelry at 82,000 years old but previously believed that humans had not developed such art until around 50,000 years ago.

Dating such discoveries has led some Christians to wonder when God created humans. Many “progressive creationists” have gradually pushed their range of dates back: 10,000–25,000 years, then 10,000–35,000, up to 60,000, and sometimes up to 100,000 years.

A clear reading of Genesis, on the other hand, shows that mankind was created about 6,000 years ago, but all vestiges of the earliest cultures were destroyed during the Flood. These artifacts, found in post-Flood geologic formations, must be less than 4,500 years old.

The dating methods of secular archaeologists are based on incorrect assumptions, and the key to correct dates is the infallible Word of God.

Unknown, Answers in Genesis 11 Comments [3/31/2008 12:28:00 PM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Paradox
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1
Evilutionist

Multiple scientific verifications are nothing compared to the uneducated ravings of cavemen.

1/17/2009 12:21:54 PM

Canadiest

In other words if a creationist discovered this he'd say "huh? must be less than 4,500 years old, better destroy them just in case"

Can't do that with the Spinx though, can ya
Or a little something called CHINA

1/17/2009 1:44:53 PM

Lucretius

This always bears repeating when reading anything from AiG.
From their own Statement of Faith

No apparent, perceived, or claimed interpretation of evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.

1/17/2009 2:03:25 PM

Darwin

A pity that stupidity cannot be outlawed.

1/17/2009 2:15:04 PM

Lulzmonger

Too bad that there are so many things that just skullfucks that theory of yours.

Not only biology, but history. China for example.

1/17/2009 4:45:39 PM

Petter Häggholm

Presumably, even if this story is in any sense true, the seashells were dated -- so what we have is an alleged age of seashells that were used to make jewellery, not of the jewellery itself per se. These shells could be anywhere from freshly dead molluscs, to thousands and thousands of years old at the time of being turned into decorations.

Furthermore, carbon dating has been known to be an unreliable dating method for a few types of organisms, such as, notably, seashells.

12/14/2009 9:29:27 PM

Jack The Slipper

"A clear reading of Genesis, on the other hand, shows that mankind was created about 6,000 years ago"
I'd bet a weeks pay this guy can't say where in Genesis it says that.

7/15/2011 10:28:22 AM

Swede

Therese is no "clear reading" in Genesis. Did God create man first and then animals, or animals first and then man?
Evidence says man is over 300 000 years old, that old fairy tale book says 6000. "Who ya gonna call?"

7/15/2011 10:58:24 AM

Anon2

When I understand this weird blabber correctly, this fundie is trying to say:

"Science found human ornamental artifacts which are much older than previous scientific theories deemed to be possible, therefore science is wrong! Therefore mankind was created much more recent! Like it is said in the Bible! Hallelujah!"

7/15/2011 1:17:14 PM

Canadiest

And
A clear reading of Genesis will find NO DATE of the Earth or man nor will any other book of the Bible. The 6000 year old Earth is Dogma, an invention of a preist 150 years ago based on no dates or facts.

That you Fundies believe this is in the Bible, let alone Genesis, demonstrates one repeating trait of fundamentalism: None of you have ever read the Bible

7/16/2011 6:51:27 AM

Professor von SCIENCE!

Yeah, 6000 years old. I suppose you'd believe me if I told you that I'm going apple picking tomorrow with scooby-doo?

@Petter Häggholm; Well, that's actually an interesting fact. I can't speak to whether or not seashells are actually that age but I feel certain that Unknown is still and idiot willingy to ignore all of the other evidence.

7/11/2013 6:30:19 PM
1