From the shortened comments below I have one question.  Who's
watch/clock/calendar are we using here?

I tend to agree with the 4004 BC (give or take a few days/weeks/months...).
But in terms of the 'creation of this world' a 'day' doesn't necessarily
mean 24 hours; again who's timetable are we using.  Carbon dating uses a
time piece, for lack of a better definition, so the elements that make up
the earth could be billions of years old.
The Aztecs (I believe it was the Aztec race)  had a better calendar than we
use today so should we use their method of time measurement?

Ooopssss, that's more than 1 question, sorry.



-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 4:21 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Global Warming Called 'Fairy Tale'

As for taking Bishop Ussher's work seriously, I wrote, in a discussion about
the anticipated end of the world based on Ussher's dating of creation:

In all fairness to the Archbishop, his work on chronology based on the
genealogies is still highly respected, as are other of his works, both
sacred and secular, and those who accept the historicity of the
genealogies tend to accept his work. I actually beg to differ, based on
evidence of the occasional minor character being omitted from the
genealogies (If you REALLY want to know, email me), but, since I accept
the historicity of the text, I believe 4004 BC is closer than 4.5
billion years.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *