Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only thing that has been proven about the Bible is that is is a blatant ripoff of earlier culture's mythologies (and this is true of both the OT and NT). Your God is a direct hand me down from the Sumerian god EL. Before he was promoted to "one true god" he was a lowly god of war married to the goddess Asherah. If history had taken a slightly different course you would be worshipping EL, Enlil or Marduk and claiming the Epic of Gilgamesh is supported by the evidence..
Evolution on the other hand is REALITY, is supported by mountains of overwhelming evidence (more so than gravity) in everything from the fossil record to geology and biology, and is indeed a fact whether you and your backwoods kin wish to believe it or not.
Exactly, the Bible is nothing more than
1. people trying to explain their world
2. Source of entertainment, and performed like a play
3. To control the people and instill fear so the people behave a certain way and not question authority. it is just scary that it is still in practice. At some point you would think people would wise up.
So am I a free thinker. That is why I came to the conclusion that the bible is the truth, that God is real, that Jesus is the Messiah.
You actually believe that you are a free thinker when you reject what has been proven and instead parrot what is in the bible and what your pastors tell you? I've got news for you. That's not your thinking at all, let alone free thinking. You are living in a bubble, and like all bubbles, someday it will burst and you will be lost in a reality you don't understand.
The reality is that the universe is more than 13.7 billion years old, and the earth is more than 3.7 billion years old. The oldest ancient fossils (microbe like objects) are dated to be 3.5 billion years old. The first Hominid appeared more than 4 million years ago, but modern man has only been on the scene for 200,000 years. A moment in time compared to many other species, and I really doubt that we will be around all that long.
I'm sorry if they disagree with your dogma, but these are facts. They are not some conspiracy by millions of scientists.
I'll post a couple of links for confirmation, although I know you won't consider them perhaps there are some that will.
The craters on earth were caused by pieces of earth blown into space out by the great flood, and some came back?
HHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA! I almost peed myself when I read that!!
I am sorry but that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SUMMARY: Past explanations for how comets began have serious problems. After a review of some facts concerning comets, a new explanation for comet origins will be proposed and tested. It appears that the fountains of the great deep and the sustained power of an “ocean” of high-pressure, supercritical water jetting into the vacuum of space launched comets into the solar system as the flood began. Other known forces would have assembled the expelled rocks and muddy droplets into larger bodies resembling comets in size, number, density, composition, spin, texture, strength, chemistry (organic and inorganic), and orbital characteristics. After a comparison of theories with evidence, problems with the earlier explanations will become apparent.
Figure 143: Arizona’s Meteor Crater. Comets are not meteors. Comets are like giant, dirty, exceedingly fluffy “snowballs.” Meteors are rock fragments, usually dust particles, falling through the atmosphere. “Falling stars” streaking through the sky at night are usually dust particles thrown off by comets years ago. In fact, every day we walk on comet dust. House-size meteors have formed huge craters on Earth, the Moon, and elsewhere. Meteors that strike the ground are renamed “meteorites,” so the above crater, 3/4 mile wide, should be called a “meteorite” crater.
On the morning of 14 December 1807, a huge fireball flashed across the southwestern Connecticut sky. Two Yale professors quickly recovered 330 pounds of meteorites, one weighing 200 pounds. When President Thomas Jefferson heard their report, he allegedly said, “It is easier to believe that two Yankee professors would lie than that stones would fall from heaven.” Jefferson was mistaken, but his intuition was no worse than ours would have been in his time. Today, many would say, “The Moon’s craters show that it must be billions of years old” and “What goes up must come down.” Are these simply mistakes common in our time?
As you read this chapter, test such intuitive ideas and alternate explanations against evidence and physical laws. Consider the explosive and sustained power of the fountains of the great deep. You may also see why the Moon is peppered with craters, as if someone had fired large buckshot at it. Question: Are comets “out of this world”?
Comets may be the most dynamic, spectacular, variable, and mysterious bodies in the solar system. They even contain organic matter,1 which many early scientists concluded came from “decomposed organic bodies.”2 Today, a popular belief is that comets brought life to Earth. Instead, comets may have traces of life from Earth.3
Comets orbit the Sun. When closest to the Sun, some comets travel more than 350 miles per second. Others, at their farthest point from the Sun, spend years traveling less than 15 miles per hour. A few comets travel so fast they will escape the solar system. Even fast comets, because of their great distance from Earth, appear to “hang” in the night sky, almost as stationary as the stars. Comets reflect sunlight and fluoresce (glow). They are brightest near the Sun and sometimes visible in daylight.
A typical comet, when far from the Sun, resembles a dirty, misshapen snowball, a few miles across. About 38% of its mass4 is frozen water—but this ice is extremely fluffy, with much empty space between ice particles. The rest is dust and various chemicals. As a comet approaches the Sun, a small fraction of the snowball (or nucleus) evaporates, forming a gas and dust cloud, called a coma, around the nucleus. The cloud and nucleus together are called the head. The head’s volume can be larger than a million Earths. Comet tails are sometimes more than an astronomical unit (AU) long (93,000,000 miles), the Earth-Sun distance. One tail was 3.4 AU long—enough to stretch around Earth 12,500 times.5 Solar wind pushes comet tails away from the Sun, so comets traveling away from the Sun move tail-first.....
Thanks for the laugh. There is no such thing as creation science...Creation is a myth. Brown's position is typical, of young-earth creationists in desiring to explain all major terrestrial features in terms of a catastrophic Biblical flood.
Of all of the possibilities listed (some of which are irrelevant anyway), most explain explain why light might move slower than light-speed. However, in order for a "young" universe to appear old when looking at distant stars, light would have to move faster. Thus the only interesting part is the last one - a 20 years old hypothesis that currently isn't supported by evidence and in fact would require major changes in physical laws to work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdbrich
One could ask why God would create an adult male, and an adult female in Adam and Eve. When they were 2 days old they likely looked to be at least teenagers.
Thing is, God had to create the humans "old" (for a given value of old). Assuming we decide that life begins at conception, the alternative would be creating a fertilized ovum - which requires a mother to develop. No such problem for starlight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdbrich
It can be inferred from that stuff. I honestly don't know the science behind the dating methods, but I would question the possibility that maybe scientists have simply made an error on it, and keep building on that error.
So you believe that, by some coincidence, multiple independent dating methods all calculated a similar age of the earth that is wrong by a factor of about 757,000. And none of the millions of qualified scientists (kept in line by the peer-review system) noticed, or found any incoherence with their research.
To put that into perspective, this is as if it was suddently discovered that the diameter of an oxygen atom is about half that of a human hair. That's the same order of magnitude and the same level of trust scientists have in the number.
Did I mention radiometric dating is a direct consequence of the Atomic Theory? Radioactive decay and half-lives in particular. Which are also used in nuclear power-plants and atom bombs, among other things. Kdbrich, if you honestly believe scientists let an error on the scale of several hundred thousands slip, you've got bigger problems than the theory of evolution to deal with. Specifically, how soon you can build a fallout shelter.
Thing is, God had to create the humans "old" (for a given value of old). Assuming we decide that life begins at conception, the alternative would be creating a fertilized ovum - which requires a mother to develop. No such problem for starlight.
If God chose the process to light things being that waves of light would hit them...why is it not possible that he'd create the waves en route? I guess to me that seems as logical as creating a man/woman that are in appearance at least teenagers.
Quote:
So you believe that, by some coincidence, multiple independent dating methods all calculated a similar age of the earth that is wrong by a factor of about 757,000. And none of the millions of qualified scientists (kept in line by the peer-review system) noticed, or found any incoherence with their research.
I've been told that there are a lot of dating methods that point to a young earth. The ones that you hear about are the carbon and radiometric dating methods.
If God chose the process to light things being that waves of light would hit them...why is it not possible that he'd create the waves en route? I guess to me that seems as logical as creating a man/woman that are in appearance at least teenagers.
I've been told that there are a lot of dating methods that point to a young earth. The ones that you hear about are the carbon and radiometric dating methods.
Since you threw that out there, what dating methods confirm a young earth? I sure haven't heard of any, but I'll do a search to see if there is any truth to what you say...
It can be inferred from that stuff. I honestly don't know the science behind the dating methods,
OK, honest enough....
Quote:
but I would question the possibility that maybe scientists have simply made an error on it, and keep building on that error.
Oh, you should have stopped there. So you really don't have any grounds to question the results? I would understand if your question was how they came to those results, not questioning the results, themselves. You honestly don't know the science behind the dating methods, yet you assume there has got to be an error. Why is that? Is this more a gut feeling, or wishful thinking. Doesn't seem to really be a reason for assuming this.
Quote:
Do we have any evidence they were flat a couple million years ago? We don't know how long it took to get to where they are now.
I used to ask those same questions. How can they tell? I know I certainly couldn't. However, that is what geologists can actually do. Many facets of the science combined yield those results. We can tell by examining the rocks - in-situ, the type of environments in which they were laid down, and subsequently how they were disturbed, and in what order. Moreover, the timing can be narrowed down quite well, depending on associated igneous anomolies that have happened during the sequence of events that brought the strata to its current orientation.
The bible does not say that God created the sun on the 4th day.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
