I honestly believe the big bang could be true but like one guy I heard say, I just know who banged it. I try to stay very open minded because I learned when I get too focused on things I am often wrong lol

This fireweed honey… they place the hives in areas 3 years after a burn when the fireweed blooms.

Such a unique flavor. ❤️

It is impossible for anything to come from nothing. For anything to exist at all there has to be something eternal. It's common sense and people who argue against this are lying to themselves.

Romans 1:20-21 English Standard Version 2016 (ESV)

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

#Jesus #WordofGod #Christian #Bible #Scripture #Wisdom #worship #biblestr #bibleverse #Christ #God

“My beloved Jesus, I offer You my heart and I consecrate to You all my affections, my soul and all its faculties, and my will so that it may be united to Yours. Unite my intentions, my words, and my actions with Yours, and vivify them with Your Holy Spirit. Let me undertake nothing save from the motive of love for You. My beloved Jesus, make every action of mine one of adoration, love, and submission to Your holy will.” (St. Margaret Mary Alacoque)

“When people suppress God’s truth long enough, their conscience is seared

(1 Timothy 4:2) through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared,

their hearts become hard,

(Romans 2:5) But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.

their spiritual discernment gets dull, till they can’t understand things that used to be obvious.”

—John Ferrer

#Jesus #WordofGod #Christian #Bible #Scripture #Wisdom #worship #biblestr #bibleverse #Christ #God

It's a thing with small holes in it to let hot water through to steep (brew) tea and then can easily pull the leaves out of the cup so you can drink the tea without getting the leaves stuck in your teeth.

Good morning, #nostriches!

What kind of tea diffusers do you prefer? I finally got some loose leaf tea but don't have a good way to steep it.

#gm #goodmorning #plebchain #grownostr #tea #teastr #asknostr

Hmmm should be follows by default. Can you send a screenshot of the filter edit dialog after a refresh?

Congratulations on the book! Where are they available online?

I do think some of the UFO stuff might be true, but your point is taken — they want to equate critical thinking with magical thinking.

nostr:note1cg9vyus9ut8gkvuyjucc53knk7yfd4x0h4cavng50yhprpwnpmhqgvu5kp

Gm.

I spent my evenings writing 30,000 words of science fiction over the past week.

Definitely fun, and the most fiction I’ve ever written. Prior to this I would write like a sample chapter, whereas this was like 8 chapters.

Good morning

Happy Lords Day

#biblestr

everything you just said makes total sense to me based on my understanding of chemistry and radiochemistry and physics

i think, though, that based on much, rich, geological and rocks used in construction especially in the area of Egypt suggest that there may be errors somewhere in the record of timelines for the patriarchs

in contrast to radiocarbon dating, rock-based age estimations are far less susceptible to assumptions especilaly where the question is about "how long can - for example - sandstone stand in the face of typical erosion from the environment"

this is a much easier question to answer because there is so much corroborating evidence, especially contemporaneous and nearby structures, and rock formations of similar composition that will experience weathering stresses and so forth

they are still a little circumstantial, but far less circumstantial than radiocarbon, and i just saw a good little presentation relating to this and the ancient, mostly granitic structures at the core of many of the egyptian statues and structures that strongly suggest that at least some of them were built around 12000 years ago, or earlier

the presenter also points out that regarding the environmental factors that could have played into it, that around 5000 years ago the weather changed a lot in the region, the river became less wet, and its course, and number of streams changed, so, this can reduce the period, but probably not by so much as a question about radiocarbon dating of a flood-dumped load of preserved things might, in the context of the poor evidence about the actual C14 rates of accumulation on the surface, versus the weathering that might be washing it away

it may not actually disagree, fundamentally, except on the one point of the "creation of man" question, and this is also why i strongly recommend you look at Jubilees and Jasher for some other extant and relatively prevalent accounts of the time of Adam, because Jasher is very explicit and detailed, the book is quite long, almost maybe as many words in it as the entire old testament, and it has some small differences, as i have mentioned, it does not accuse Rebecca of encouraging explicit deception from Jacob, she does not make him the furry wraps or anything, it sorta implies that Isaac was that past it that he didn't notice

the bedrock, the stuff formed from volcanoes, and fire, in general, are reliable sources of dating, in comparison to sedimentary and carbon dating

it may well be that the entire record of Genesis is pretty much accurate, except for that first part that claims that this was the beginning of our kind, but it also implies that people lived before this, and there was a LOT more history going back that has great relevance to understanding our current historical circumstance (like more details of the War in Heaven)

everything you just said makes total sense to me based on my understanding of chemistry and radiochemistry and physics

i think, though, that based on much, rich, geological and rocks used in construction especially in the area of Egypt suggest that there may be errors somewhere in the record of timelines for the patriarchs

in contrast to radiocarbon dating, rock-based age estimations are far less susceptible to assumptions especilaly where the question is about "how long can - for example - sandstone stand in the face of typical erosion from the environment"

this is a much easier question to answer because there is so much corroborating evidence, especially contemporaneous and nearby structures, and rock formations of similar composition that will experience weathering stresses and so forth

they are still a little circumstantial, but far less circumstantial than radiocarbon, and i just saw a good little presentation relating to this and the ancient, mostly granitic structures at the core of many of the egyptian statues and structures that strongly suggest that at least some of them were built around 12000 years ago, or earlier

the presenter also points out that regarding the environmental factors that could have played into it, that around 5000 years ago the weather changed a lot in the region, the river became less wet, and its course, and number of streams changed, so, this can reduce the period, but probably not by so much as a question about radiocarbon dating of a flood-dumped load of preserved things might, in the context of the poor evidence about the actual C14 rates of accumulation on the surface, versus the weathering that might be washing it away

it may not actually disagree, fundamentally, except on the one point of the "creation of man" question, and this is also why i strongly recommend you look at Jubilees and Jasher for some other extant and relatively prevalent accounts of the time of Adam, because Jasher is very explicit and detailed, the book is quite long, almost maybe as many words in it as the entire old testament, and it has some small differences, as i have mentioned, it does not accuse Rebecca of encouraging explicit deception from Jacob, she does not make him the furry wraps or anything, it sorta implies that Isaac was that past it that he didn't notice

the bedrock, the stuff formed from volcanoes, and fire, in general, are reliable sources of dating, in comparison to sedimentary and carbon dating

it may well be that the entire record of Genesis is pretty much accurate, except for that first part that claims that this was the beginning of our kind, but it also implies that people lived before this, and there was a LOT more history going back that has great relevance to understanding our current historical circumstance (like more details of the War in Heaven)

Yes, carbon comes from Helium burning stars, specifically supergiants that have burnt away most of their hydrogen.

also, that's very interesting, it means that diamons are formed under us all the time wherever there is chunks of carbon

All radiometric dating is based on several assumptions that are very questionable. For radiometric dating to work, all of the following must be true.

1. The exact proportion of parent and daughter isotopes have to be known (how can we know when we don't even know the date?)

2. We have to know the exact decay rate and that decay rate has to be constant even under changing conditions (this is the easiest to believe, but there is still physical evidence that it isn't true).

3. The sample must not allow any of the parent or daughter isotope to come into or exit the sample (since most are water soluable, this is hard to believe).

C-14 dating uses the assumption that we currently have a particular proportionality of C-14 and C-12. This proportion is present in the CO2 in the air that plants use and therefore the plants have this same proportion in their flesh. Animals eat these plants and therefore have the same proportion. When either dies, they stop ingesting C-14 and therefore it starts decaying into C-12 over time.

There are two problems with this dating. Plants and animals in the ocean are further from the initial ingestion of C-14 and therefore they (and anyone/anything that eats them) with have a lower proportion of C-14 giving an older age when their age is calculated. Also, Earth's magnetic field halves approximately every 1400 years. The magnetic field was higher in the past. This reduced the solar radiation which converts N-14 to C-14, therefore the C14/C12 ratio was lower in the past, once again giving older dates. There is no measurable C-14 after less than 100,000 years and isn't very accurate over about 10,000 years.

Since rocks aren't ingesting carbon, these symptoms clearly don't work, so other radiometric methods are used, most of which have extremely long half-lives meaning there is not much change over millions of years. They also tend to assume the sample started with only the parent isotope (which is very unlikely). Most (if not all) cases that radiometric dating was used to test rocks of unknown ages, it gave multiple orders of magnitude higher ages. If it doesn't work on rocks of known ages, why should anyone believe the ages of rocks of unknown ages?

thinking about estimated ages of geological events and their heavy reliance on Carbon 14 suggests to me that if this historical record is accurate, and based on the prescribed 360 day year, then 2348 BC is the timing of the event that geologists are calling ~6000 years...

i think that their dating method doesn't work, and the reason is that every so often the sun blows up hard, in either massive flares, or even more full on, a micro nova, and when this happens, huge amounts of C14 are thrown at the earth and so there is no consistency to the amounts that are upon the surface, using it as a time estimate is stupid

so, it's probably accurate, give or take a bit, and not only is it probably accurate, a follow-up event like the Flood is coming, as evidenced by the rapid decline of the earth's magnetic field over the last 150 years, and especially the acceleration in the last 20 years

i saw a documentary a while back that explained how the flood event is a much better explanation for the existence of fossils, mainly because of the way that it washes away so much loose soil, and then as the waters return back to the sea, they form distinct layers, often of different types of sedimentary soil composition, and the fossils are literally a small area where these animals were drowned and quickly smothered in layers of mud and clay, that later hardens up into sedimentary rock. really, it's just hard packed fine soil that has had megatons of other soil on top of it

the thing is though, that although yes there was heavy cloud cover and rain and lightning and whatnot during the event, it was not from the sky where most of the water came from, it was because the entire earth's crust suddenly jerked to a new orientation, and the stickiness of the water and the contours of the ground and all this mud it kicks up and washes away, over the following months first there is the wash, then the "slosh back" which then covers everything up and creates a whole new set of contours over top of the bedrock and volcanic rock layers underneeth, and eventually over time and floods in between some of these caches of dead animal bodies are found, and this wrong-headed model of carbon 14 decay makes them think it's millions of years old when actually it only happened 4000 years ago... and this distortion impacts everything associated with geological and archaeological stuff

when in realityit's almost impossible to know the age of most things.

You’re not sorry it hurts my feeling you’re just talking nonsense about things you no nothing about. Stop hating on those who had no support when they obviously needed help. Until you lose a loved one (l lost my Dad) I suggest you don’t go around spreading negativity. I know first hand and trust me I’ve gone through hell and back and I would never ever consider suicide the solution. If anything my Dad doing Shay he did is the reason why I would never consider it. Because I KNOW FIRST HAND suicide is NOT the solution. So essentially because of what he did , suicide is out of the question. It’s not an option cause I know how it feels to be left behind.

Yes, we strive for perfection. However we will never reach it this side of our resurrection.