Will there be new giants in this era?

[Durzan]

Half-exalted beings as you describe don't exist as a concept as far as I know.

Why did Noah's father suspect his wife had had intercourse with such a being?

Wut? I don't recall reading anything that implied that in the standard works...

But to answer your question... its called superstition based on old corrupted legends.

And yet it was in an Ensign article when the Ensign carried really deep and intellectual articles.

Just because they were deep and insightful articles doesn't mean it was true. GA's can make opinions and educated guesses just the same as you or I; it doesn't make them doctrine. The Nephilim concept originated as part of erroneous christian doctrine. Naturally, some people migrated some of those beliefs over when they converted. Similar traditions have been passed down to us from those people.

Just because it says there were giants in the old times, doesn't mean that said giants were Nephilim, or that said giants were genetically altered. So while I will acknowledge that there probably were a subrace of humans that were abnormally large, I refuse to acknowledge the false and absurd notion that they were begotten of exalted beings.

[Fiannan]

Just because it says there were giants in the old times, doesn't mean that said giants were Nephilim, or that said giants were genetically altered. So while I will acknowledge that there probably were a subrace of humans that were abnormally large, I refuse to acknowledge the false and absurd notion that they were begotten of exalted beings.

So Genesis is wrong then?

[Durzan]

Just because it says there were giants in the old times, doesn't mean that said giants were Nephilim, or that said giants were genetically altered. So while I will acknowledge that there probably were a subrace of humans that were abnormally large, I refuse to acknowledge the false and absurd notion that they were begotten of exalted beings.

So Genesis is wrong then?

Nope. Satan and his minions are non-coporeal, and they are the only fallen angels that I know of. Kinda hard for Satan or his ilk to have kids with people without a body. Even if he possessed someone to do it, the child born would still be human, and wouldn't necessarily inherit some of his traits. Any other fallen angel who has a body would likely be already confined to outer darkness, or sent there on the spot if they even tried to fall. All the other exalted beings would be within one of the three degrees of glory, and I'd bet my bottom dollar that they ain't gonna come back to a mortal world unless deliberately instructed to do so by God.

Think about what the term "Son of God" can mean. It is referring to the covenant people. The righteous priesthood holders of the time. The son's of God (the righteous men and priesthood holders before the flood), and married the daughters of men (daughters of the wicked). IE they married outside the covenant.

As for the term Giant, it can be referring to literal Giants (IE humans who were born with mutations that caused them to grow to abnormally big sizes), Spiritual Giants (again, a reference to mighty righteous men and women), metaphorical giants (IE the giants of a society... the rich, the powerful, the rulers, etc), it can be referring to giant creatures (Like mammoths or dinosaurs), and so forth.

The use of the phrase "and there were giants in the land in those days" in the same paragraph as the sentence that specified that the children of god had kids with the daughters of men, doesn't mean the two phrases are actually meant to be read hand in hand (although I admit that such is a possibility, however unlikely). Rather, it is just one descriptive annotation meant to help specify some of the traits of time period in which the event occurred.

[Fiannan]

So it was spiritual giants that were trying to kill Noah?

[Durzan]

So it was spiritual giants that were trying to kill Noah?

Did you read my entire previous post? The term Giant likely referred to multiple different kinds of giants that existed in that day. It was likely actual physical giants or political giants that wanted to kill noah. However, those giants are NOT Nephilim in the sense that they would be children of fallen angels.

[capctr]

The same way we are doing it today.

Dinosaurs died out millions of years before Noah. I doubt the giants trying to assassinate him were Tyrannosaurs.

I was intrigued by this topic when I heard someone translate the term "pure" from Hebrew and it was not so much in reference to Noah's morality but to a more genetic context. Were there only a few people alive in Noah's day who were not altered? How much animal or synthetic DNA put into a developing human embryo before it ceases to be a human in "the image of God?" If the creation were polluted by such tampering then it puts the need for God to kill hundreds of millions of people as well as the animals inhabiting the region they lived in a more understandable context.

BUT some people think that Dinosaurs are not that old. The world is not that old and the Grand Canyon could have been formed during the flood. I don't know.

The earth is 4 billion yrs old and the dinosaurs are MANY millions of years old just as the scientists say. The relgious ideas that the earth is 6 days or 6K yrs old is what BRM would call “old sectarian notions”. Its good that these ideas are slowing being purged from the church.

The fact that the earth is that old in no way casts doubt on the gospel.

Wrong...The materials used to make the Earth come from different planets, that is where the confusion comes(IMO).

And how long do believe man has been walking the Earth??????

Modern scientists pay homage to the Prince of the world. Don't believe Babylonians.

I dunno, I kind of wonder if the MIGHT be somewhere in between.
If the scriptures say “nothing is new under the sun” and the “Lord’s course is one eternal round”, and IF Adam and Eve is a title rather than names, and if the statement Joseph (allegedly) made to Brigham was actually made:“if I told you everything I knew, you’d also be howling for my blood...”(taken from my imperfect memory, for what it’s worth). Then maybe it’s possible that the earth has been through the cycle of humanity before? I’m not saying this is true, but I AM saying that as we only know a fraction of the truth, then stating things (spiritual and temporal) as hard facts(outside of what the current Prophet states is so) may be slightly dangerous.

[capctr]

There was not a race of giants in the past. The use of the word giant in the OT was symbilic in nature.

There will not be a face of giants in the future.

And yet Church publications state that giants were out to kill Noah.

I’m not sure to what publications you are refereeing, but assuming they do, they are simplly replicating the use of the word used in the KJV. The term “giants” as used in the early sections of genesis are referring to rulers, warlords, big-shots...not a race of people of abnormal height.

Giant in stature, or merely name isn’t the most concerning thing(although king Og from the OT...), but what tells me that while symbolism plays a huge role in things as they were, are, and are to come, don’t forget that the scriptures AND certain G.As have made a point of mentioning giants as being physically different. Six toes and six fingers on all of them is a little too consistent to be polydactyly, don’t you think?

[DesertWonderer2]

There was not a race of giants in the past. The use of the word giant in the OT was symbilic in nature.

There will not be a face of giants in the future.

And yet Church publications state that giants were out to kill Noah.

I’m not sure to what publications you are refereeing, but assuming they do, they are simplly replicating the use of the word used in the KJV. The term “giants” as used in the early sections of genesis are referring to rulers, warlords, big-shots...not a race of people of abnormal height.

Giant in stature, or merely name isn’t the most concerning thing(although king Og from the OT...), but what tells me that while symbolism plays a huge role in things as they were, are, and are to come, don’t forget that the scriptures AND certain G.As have made a point of mentioning giants as being physically different. Six toes and six fingers on all of them is a little too consistent to be polydactyly, don’t you think?

To what statements by “certain GAs” are you referring?

[capctr]

Not entirely sure, to be honest. I only remember it because it caught me off guard when i read it.

[Fiannan]

The one thing we can be sure of is that the traditional depictions of Noah before the flood are inaccurate in almost all details.

[capctr]

I want to hear Friends Of The weigh in on this, as he is the one to make me stop and actually THINK about what the scriptures were saying past what I’ve learned in seminary, institute, etc... Just like the prophets have told us to do. I guess it took an unconventional, non traditional approach to make me understand what they meant.

[nightlight]

BUT some people think that Dinosaurs are not that old. The world is not that old and the Grand Canyon could have been formed during the flood. I don't know.

The earth is 4 billion yrs old and the dinosaurs are MANY millions of years old just as the scientists say. The relgious ideas that the earth is 6 days or 6K yrs old is what BRM would call “old sectarian notions”. Its good that these ideas are slowing being purged from the church.

The fact that the earth is that old in no way casts doubt on the gospel.

Wrong...The materials used to make the Earth come from different planets, that is where the confusion comes(IMO).

And how long do believe man has been walking the Earth??????

Modern scientists pay homage to the Prince of the world. Don't believe Babylonians.

I dunno, I kind of wonder if the MIGHT be somewhere in between.
If the scriptures say “nothing is new under the sun” and the “Lord’s course is one eternal round”, and IF Adam and Eve is a title rather than names, and if the statement Joseph (allegedly) made to Brigham was actually made:“if I told you everything I knew, you’d also be howling for my blood...”(taken from my imperfect memory, for what it’s worth). Then maybe it’s possible that the earth has been through the cycle of humanity before? I’m not saying this is true, but I AM saying that as we only know a fraction of the truth, then stating things (spiritual and temporal) as hard facts(outside of what the current Prophet states is so) may be slightly dangerous.

You are assuming the measurements of men are hard facts.... there is nothing dangerous in my belief. Perhaps the scriptures really mean what they say????

Our Earth was made from material from different planets. When you try to measure the rocks and minerals to determine the age of our Earth you're measuring material that existed before earth was formed. You made a loaf of bread yesterday but the flour in the bread was made weeks ago, scientists are measuring the flour and saying the bread was made weeks ago when in reality the bread was made yesterday.

Radiocarbon dating doesn't work beyond a few thousand years and with people and animals there's so many different variables that is useless. What human or an animal spent its life eating can affect its radiocarbon date of its Bones by thousands of years.

So now you have radioisotope dating.... or dating the half-life of certain elements. Once again glaring hole and unaccounted variables.

We have to remember that the Earth was moved after the Adam and Eve were evicted from the garden of Eden... do we understand what that did to the carbon effect and the radioactive decay of the elements of the Earth..??? Satan is smarter than anybody who walks this Earth. He's the father of evolution he is the father of the way are scientists view/measure of the world. By their fruits you shall know them... the fruits of modern science view of the world are by-and-large apostasy. Our scientist are retarded children throwing ice cubes at the Sun.

D&C77
6 Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?
A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.
7 Q. What are we to understand by the seven seals with which it was sealed?
A. We are to understand that the first seal contains the things of the first thousand years, and the second also of the second thousand years, and so on until the seventh.

[capctr]

“Our scientists are retarded children throwing ice cubes at the sun.” Sorry, but I’m TOTALLY STEALING THAT! BWAWHAWHAWHAWHAW!!!
I agree with what you are saying, while also remembering that Joseph taught that the earth used to be considerably larger, and will one day be so again.
I’m trying to leave room for possibilities, as the Lord only gives us the knowledge we can handle, and I don’t want to be somebody who apostisizes over a future, monumental revelation to the Prophet, because it conflicts with the truth I’ve grown comfortable with.

[LDS Physician]

So for the giant question, its very possible giants came from genetic tampering in the pre-flood cultures. Some sources claim that this is one of their sins. Also genetic tampering is being done and is warned about in Isaiah.

Right now we have the enviro-pig. The enviropig is tampered genetics with mixing genes from mice, pig, and e-coli. It's all been done already. No doubt other experiments like the person above commented are being done here and in other cultures.

Isaiah 66:17 King James Bible
They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD.

How do you think they would have done genetic tampering back in Noah's day? I just watched a you tube video where he felt that they created giants and Dinosaurs in that time. I think it says somewhere that some of the animals were evil.

The same way we are doing it today.

Dinosaurs died out millions of years before Noah. I doubt the giants trying to assassinate him were Tyrannosaurs.

I was intrigued by this topic when I heard someone translate the term "pure" from Hebrew and it was not so much in reference to Noah's morality but to a more genetic context. Were there only a few people alive in Noah's day who were not altered? How much animal or synthetic DNA put into a developing human embryo before it ceases to be a human in "the image of God?" If the creation were polluted by such tampering then it puts the need for God to kill hundreds of millions of people as well as the animals inhabiting the region they lived in a more understandable context.

If you believe in aliens, Simon Parkes said the greys lost their god given image by merging with non-biological resources. Doing so trapped them in 4d which is essentially spirit prison.

It kind of makes taking the mark of the beast to a new level. Can accepting a computer implant have a biological impact that literally cuts you off from connecting your dna back to heaven and home? I imagine if our ability to hear the holy spirit is anything like a computer transmitter, then by accepting a 3d communication device into our body might mess up our wifi with God.

As far as animal-human hybrids, I can't imagine what hasn't been done in deep underground military bases. We are just too curious to know what is good for us. I hope that spirits put into such biological conditions can be redeemed and that God stops these abominations as soon as possible.

One thing we know for sure, they are messing with the dna of the food we eat. Such as genetically modified organisms that are spliced with dna from viruses! How can that be a good idea??? If the food we eat has dna sliced by viruses, won't that change our dna if we eat it?

No. When you eat GMOs, your DNA is not changed. Our digestive tracts breakdown genetic materials placed therein. Anything digested and then absorbed into the blood is not able to assimilate into our DNA.

In fact, making changes to our DNA is one of the main obstacles scientists have to solving diseases on the genetic level: they lack the ability (proper vectors, etc.) to alter the DNA causing the problem. We may know where the problem is, we just can't change it yet. This will be overcome someday, but you can go ahead and eat GMOs without fear of growing a potato spud out of your forehead. At least for now...

[nightlight]

“Our scientists are retarded children throwing ice cubes at the sun.” Sorry, but I’m TOTALLY STEALING THAT! BWAWHAWHAWHAWHAW!!!
I agree with what you are saying, while also remembering that Joseph taught that the earth used to be considerably larger, and will one day be so again.
I’m trying to leave room for possibilities, as the Lord only gives us the knowledge we can handle, and I don’t want to be somebody who apostisizes over a future, monumental revelation to the Prophet, because it conflicts with the truth I’ve grown comfortable with.

Go ahead, I heard someone use in a different context when i was young. I think it's a good description of men of try to understand the Mysteries of God without God...

Yeah, I believe he taught that whole earth will be one giant land mass accepted north pole area, which will be the only ocean.
I also recall reading somewhere that he said the city of Enoch,not only the people were taken but the actual land which made the Gulf of Mexico. Not sure if he really said that but...

[Alaris]

This will be overcome someday, but you can go ahead and eat GMOs without fear of growing a potato spud out of your forehead. At least for now...

Whew! Well, I'll be sleeping easier at night!

[Alaris]

“Our scientists are retarded children throwing ice cubes at the sun.” Sorry, but I’m TOTALLY STEALING THAT! BWAWHAWHAWHAWHAW!!!
I agree with what you are saying, while also remembering that Joseph taught that the earth used to be considerably larger, and will one day be so again.
I’m trying to leave room for possibilities, as the Lord only gives us the knowledge we can handle, and I don’t want to be somebody who apostisizes over a future, monumental revelation to the Prophet, because it conflicts with the truth I’ve grown comfortable with.

That is a great quote!

Can you provide a reference on the teaching that the earth used to be larger and will be so again? The first half of that statement matches what I suspect the purpose of the gas giants are but not the latter half.

[Alaris]

Interesting video on gmo crops

[larsenb]

. . . . . Wrong...The materials used to make the Earth come from different planets, that is where the confusion comes(IMO).

And how long do believe man has been walking the Earth??????

Modern scientists pay homage to the Prince of the world. Don't believe Babylonians.

Hard science is a largely value-free system/method that describes and monitors causal effects, and actions between different forms of matter. The implied value of this system is encompassed by the search for the truth of how these effects and actions play out and how best to describe them.

Modern scientists who employ this method correctly and aren't doing so by violating other societal norms and proscriptions are NOT paying homage to the Prince of the world. To say otherwise, is a silly assertion.

The stratigraphic record itself, shows no evidence that the materials used to make the earth come from different planets, though obviously the material came from preexisting cosmic dust and 'debris'. You could make a flimsy case that 'exotic terrains' may have come from different planets, but a simpler explanation is that they were rafted into their present position by plate tectonics. This assertion is bolstered by the fact that the fossils, etc. and their successions, found in these terrains are the same as those found in terrains that are not 'exotic'.

[nightlight]

. . . . . Wrong...The materials used to make the Earth come from different planets, that is where the confusion comes(IMO).

And how long do believe man has been walking the Earth??????

Modern scientists pay homage to the Prince of the world. Don't believe Babylonians.

Hard science is a largely value-free system/method that describes and monitors causal effects, and actions between different forms of matter. The implied value of this system is encompassed by the search for the truth of how these effects and actions play out and how best to describe them.

Modern scientists who employ this method correctly and aren't doing so by violating other societal norms and proscriptions are NOT paying homage to the Prince of the world. To say otherwise, is a silly assertion.

The stratigraphic record itself, shows no evidence that the materials used to make the earth come from different planets, though obviously the material came from preexisting cosmic dust and 'debris'. You could make a flimsy case that 'exotic terrains' may have come from different planets, but a simpler explanation is that they were rafted into their present position by plate tectonics. This assertion is bolstered by the fact that the fossils, etc. and their successions, found in these terrains are the same as those found in terrains that are not 'exotic'.

[...]

Our Earth was made from material from different planets. When you try to measure the rocks and minerals to determine the age of our Earth you're measuring material that existed before earth was formed. You made a loaf of bread yesterday but the flour in the bread was made weeks ago, scientists are measuring the flour and saying the bread was made weeks ago when in reality the bread was made yesterday.

Radiocarbon dating doesn't work beyond a few thousand years and with people and animals there's so many different variables that is useless. What human or an animal spent its life eating can affect its radiocarbon date of its Bones by thousands of years.

So now you have radioisotope dating.... or dating the half-life of certain elements. Once again glaring hole and unaccounted variables.

We have to remember that the Earth was moved after the Adam and Eve were evicted from the garden of Eden... do we understand what that did to the carbon effect and the radioactive decay of the elements of the Earth..??? Satan is smarter than anybody who walks this Earth. He's the father of evolution he is the father of the way are scientists view/measure of the world. By their fruits you shall know them... the fruits of modern science view of the world are by-and-large apostasy. Our scientist are retarded children throwing ice cubes at the Sun.

D&C77
6 Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?
A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.
7 Q. What are we to understand by the seven seals with which it was sealed?
A. We are to understand that the first seal contains the things of the first thousand years, and the second also of the second thousand years, and so on until the seventh.

[larsenb]

. . . . . Wrong...The materials used to make the Earth come from different planets, that is where the confusion comes(IMO).

And how long do believe man has been walking the Earth??????

Modern scientists pay homage to the Prince of the world. Don't believe Babylonians.

Hard science is a largely value-free system/method that describes and monitors causal effects, and actions between different forms of matter. The implied value of this system is encompassed by the search for the truth of how these effects and actions play out and how best to describe them.

Modern scientists who employ this method correctly and aren't doing so by violating other societal norms and proscriptions are NOT paying homage to the Prince of the world. To say otherwise, is a silly assertion.

The stratigraphic record itself, shows no evidence that the materials used to make the earth come from different planets, though obviously the material came from preexisting cosmic dust and 'debris'. You could make a flimsy case that 'exotic terrains' may have come from different planets, but a simpler explanation is that they were rafted into their present position by plate tectonics. This assertion is bolstered by the fact that the fossils, etc. and their successions, found in these terrains are the same as those found in terrains that are not 'exotic'.

[...]

Our Earth was made from material from different planets. When you try to measure the rocks and minerals to determine the age of our Earth you're measuring material that existed before earth was formed. You made a loaf of bread yesterday but the flour in the bread was made weeks ago, scientists are measuring the flour and saying the bread was made weeks ago when in reality the bread was made yesterday.

Radiocarbon dating doesn't work beyond a few thousand years and with people and animals there's so many different variables that is useless. What human or an animal spent its life eating can affect its radiocarbon date of its Bones by thousands of years.

So now you have radioisotope dating.... or dating the half-life of certain elements. Once again glaring hole and unaccounted variables.

We have to remember that the Earth was moved after the Adam and Eve were evicted from the garden of Eden... do we understand what that did to the carbon effect and the radioactive decay of the elements of the Earth..??? Satan is smarter than anybody who walks this Earth. He's the father of evolution he is the father of the way are scientists view/measure of the world. By their fruits you shall know them... the fruits of modern science view of the world are by-and-large apostasy. Our scientist are retarded children throwing ice cubes at the Sun. . . . .

B.S., eh?

For any reasonable discussion, you will need to cite evidence for your assertion that the earth was made from material from different planets. What is that evidence?

For longer-term (non-RC) radiometric dating, the parent radionuclide will be incorporated into a particular mineral when the original melt cools below what is called the ‘closure temperature’. I.e., as the ‘melt’ cools, certain minerals will form. The mineral will NOT, at this time, incorporate any daughter product that could be produced by the decay of the original nuclide, though the majority of the element that forms a particular crystal will be the stable form of the element.

At the ‘closure temperature’, the mineral crystal will not suffer any of its elemental constituents, including radionuclide decay products, to diffuse to the outside of the crystal. I.e., it becomes a closed system.

What this means is that if you isolate particular crystals and then measure a daughter product produced by a given radionuclide in the crystal, and can also measure the remaining amount of the original radionuclide, you can determine the amount of time that has passed since the ‘closure temperature’ for that mineral crystal . . . . provided you know the half-life of the original radionuclide.

RC dating has something similar, in that a living organism will incorporate C14 from the atmosphere. When the organism dies, no more C14 enters the system. Death, then, is equivalent to the ‘closure temperature’ for longer term radionuclides. But it differs in that just the amount of remaining C14 determines the date of death. You aren’t measuring ‘daughter products’.

Both methods are quite reliable and with the longer-term radioisotopes, you can use different ones on the same material, and get what is called good ‘concordance’.

Granted, you have problems w/assuring the mineral crystals being measured are closed systems, but error can be reduced in increasing the number of samples analyzed. In the case of RC dating, the closer the age is to 60 K years, the less accurate. 35K years is about the outer limit of giving reasonable accuracy and precision. You also need to adjust the assumption of the original amount of C14 present through time. This can be done using tree ring analysis or using ‘hard’ historical dates, etc.

These methods give surprisingly reliable, consistent and concordant age estimates . . . that can normally be coroborated by other methods. In the case of the longer-term radiometric methods, the results most often fit the stratigraphic succession template very well.

[nightlight]

. . . . . Wrong...The materials used to make the Earth come from different planets, that is where the confusion comes(IMO).

And how long do believe man has been walking the Earth??????

Modern scientists pay homage to the Prince of the world. Don't believe Babylonians.

Hard science is a largely value-free system/method that describes and monitors causal effects, and actions between different forms of matter. The implied value of this system is encompassed by the search for the truth of how these effects and actions play out and how best to describe them.

Modern scientists who employ this method correctly and aren't doing so by violating other societal norms and proscriptions are NOT paying homage to the Prince of the world. To say otherwise, is a silly assertion.

The stratigraphic record itself, shows no evidence that the materials used to make the earth come from different planets, though obviously the material came from preexisting cosmic dust and 'debris'. You could make a flimsy case that 'exotic terrains' may have come from different planets, but a simpler explanation is that they were rafted into their present position by plate tectonics. This assertion is bolstered by the fact that the fossils, etc. and their successions, found in these terrains are the same as those found in terrains that are not 'exotic'.

[...]

Our Earth was made from material from different planets. When you try to measure the rocks and minerals to determine the age of our Earth you're measuring material that existed before earth was formed. You made a loaf of bread yesterday but the flour in the bread was made weeks ago, scientists are measuring the flour and saying the bread was made weeks ago when in reality the bread was made yesterday.

Radiocarbon dating doesn't work beyond a few thousand years and with people and animals there's so many different variables that is useless. What human or an animal spent its life eating can affect its radiocarbon date of its Bones by thousands of years.

So now you have radioisotope dating.... or dating the half-life of certain elements. Once again glaring hole and unaccounted variables.

We have to remember that the Earth was moved after the Adam and Eve were evicted from the garden of Eden... do we understand what that did to the carbon effect and the radioactive decay of the elements of the Earth..??? Satan is smarter than anybody who walks this Earth. He's the father of evolution he is the father of the way are scientists view/measure of the world. By their fruits you shall know them... the fruits of modern science view of the world are by-and-large apostasy. Our scientist are retarded children throwing ice cubes at the Sun. . . . .

B.S., eh?

For any reasonable discussion, you will need to cite evidence for your assertion that the earth was made from material from different planets. What is that evidence?

For longer-term (non-RC) radiometric dating, the parent radionuclide will be incorporated into a particular mineral when the original melt cools below what is called the ‘closure temperature’. I.e., as the ‘melt’ cools, certain minerals will form. The mineral will NOT, at this time, incorporate any daughter product that could be produced by the decay of the original nuclide, though the majority of the element that forms a particular crystal will be the stable form of the element.

At the ‘closure temperature’, the mineral crystal will not suffer any of its elemental constituents, including radionuclide decay products, to diffuse to the outside of the crystal. I.e., it becomes a closed system.

What this means is that if you isolate particular crystals and then measure a daughter product produced by a given radionuclide in the crystal, and can also measure the remaining amount of the original radionuclide, you can determine the amount of time that has passed since the ‘closure temperature’ for that mineral crystal . . . . provided you know the half-life of the original radionuclide.

RC dating has something similar, in that a living organism will incorporate C14 from the atmosphere. When the organism dies, no more C14 enters the system. Death, then, is equivalent to the ‘closure temperature’ for longer term radionuclides. But it differs in that just the amount of remaining C14 determines the date of death. You aren’t measuring ‘daughter products’.

Both methods are quite reliable and with the longer-term radioisotopes, you can use different ones on the same material, and get what is called good ‘concordance’.

Granted, you have problems w/assuring the mineral crystals being measured are closed systems, but error can be reduced in increasing the number of samples analyzed. In the case of RC dating, the closer the age is to 60 K years, the less accurate. 35K years is about the outer limit of giving reasonable accuracy and precision. You also need to adjust the assumption of the original amount of C14 present through time. This can be done using tree ring analysis or using ‘hard’ historical dates, etc.

These methods give surprisingly reliable, consistent and concordant age estimates . . . that can normally be coroborated by other methods. In the case of the longer-term radiometric methods, the results most often fit the stratigraphic succession template very well.

Nothing's corroborated in any of these methods of measuring. You cannot prove a single thing, these are all just theories of measurement. And regardless, even if semiaccurate you're not measuring when the earth was formed.Here's my source from Joseph Smith

Section Six 1843-44, p.350

You ask the learned doctors why they say the world was made out of nothing; and they will answer, "Doesn't the Bible say He created the world?" And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the baurau which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship.5 Hence, we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos--chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end.6

[larsenb]

These three assertions (first 2 sentences) are simply not correct. These dating methods are used all the time to corroborate historical and pre-historical events and to establish reasonable ages for them. Many, many examples of this . . . too many to really elaborate on.

Because this is the case, it means they are good, practical, logical and scientific methods, not just theory.

But of course, my saying this or even presenting a few of the successful uses of these methods won’t convince you of anything.
Your quote from Joseph Smith is irrelevant to the ‘discussion’ . . . but still a very interesting quote from more than one angle. I have no problem with it.

[nightlight]

These three assertions (first 2 sentences) are simply not correct. These dating methods are used all the time to corroborate historical and pre-historical events and to establish reasonable ages for them. Many, many examples of this . . . too many to really elaborate on.

Because this is the case, it means they are good, practical, logical and scientific methods, not just theory.

But of course, my saying this or even presenting a few of the successful uses of these methods won’t convince you of anything.
Your quote from Joseph Smith is irrelevant to the ‘discussion’ . . . but still a very interesting quote from more than one angle. I have no problem with it.

You said:

"For any reasonable discussion, you will need to cite evidence for your assertion that the earth was made from material from different planets. What is that evidence?"

I give you the quote/evidence from JS on my "assertion" and you say it's not relevant to our discussion???? Lol why's that?

BTW you can't prove not corroborate longer-term radiometric dating. It is a theory........but that is not the point of our discussion.

So we have this...

D&C77
6 Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?
A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.
7 Q. What are we to understand by the seven seals with which it was sealed?
A. We are to understand that the first seal contains the things of the first thousand years, and the second also of the second thousand years, and so on until the seventh.

And this...
Section Six 1843-44, p.350

You ask the learned doctors why they say the world was made out of nothing; and they will answer, "Doesn't the Bible say He created the world?" And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the baurau which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship.5 Hence, we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos--chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end.6

AND YOU STILL DOUBT???

6k years ago Adam labored on a world that just began its temporal existence.

[Durzan]

These three assertions (first 2 sentences) are simply not correct. These dating methods are used all the time to corroborate historical and pre-historical events and to establish reasonable ages for them. Many, many examples of this . . . too many to really elaborate on.

Because this is the case, it means they are good, practical, logical and scientific methods, not just theory.

But of course, my saying this or even presenting a few of the successful uses of these methods won’t convince you of anything.
Your quote from Joseph Smith is irrelevant to the ‘discussion’ . . . but still a very interesting quote from more than one angle. I have no problem with it.

You said:

"For any reasonable discussion, you will need to cite evidence for your assertion that the earth was made from material from different planets. What is that evidence?"

I give you the quote/evidence from JS on my "assertion" and you say it's not relevant to our discussion???? Lol why's that?

BTW you can't prove not corroborate longer-term radiometric dating. It is a theory........

So we have this...

D&C77
6 Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?
A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.
7 Q. What are we to understand by the seven seals with which it was sealed?
A. We are to understand that the first seal contains the things of the first thousand years, and the second also of the second thousand years, and so on until the seventh.

And this...
Section Six 1843-44, p.350

You ask the learned doctors why they say the world was made out of nothing; and they will answer, "Doesn't the Bible say He created the world?" And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the baurau which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship.5 Hence, we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos--chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end.6

AND YOU STILL DOUBT???

6k years ago Adam labored on a world that just began its temporal existence.

That could literally mean a couple things besides an overly literal interpretation of the earth being 7000 years old, without having radio carbon dating be false.

First, one possibility is that the Earth was created "as an adult" by the Lord, the same way we assume Adam and Eve were formed as adults. Either that, or the Lord simply used something akin Time Dilation to age the earth up.

Second, another possibility is that the earth is actually ~7000 years old according to God's time, and that humanity as we know it (with human souls) has only been around for about 6 God days. If 1 day of the Lord's Time is literally equal to 1000 earth years, and we assume that God has a Year comparable in length to that of Earth (So 1 God Year has 365 God Days in it), then that means: 1000 earth years (y) * 365 = 365,000 y in a single God Year. If that is the case, then 365000 years *7000 God Years is equal to 2.555 Billion Earth years, which is slightly more than half of the estimated scientific age of Earth. Not exactly within a standard deviation of error, but its within the same ballpark at least. If we factor in that the creation account in Genesis doesn't actually state a specific period of time (The Hebrew words for day, has an alternative meaning in that context that can indicate an indefinite period of time; IE an epoch), then we can safely account for the disparity.

Also worth noting that the oldest bacterial life on earth was thought to have sprung up anywhere from 2 to 3 billion years ago.