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.
I was not talking about the age of the earth. I was speaking about the age of the dinosaurs. Please get on the same page. I don't need to educate myself. You just need to pay attention to the topic at hand.
Stop lying.
This is what you wrote: Evolution teaches us the earth is very old. The Bible does not.
I am lost, why would finding a living dinosaur prove somebody's religious belief to be true?
That is not Campbell's mission, at least not directly...He believes that finding a live dino would disprove evolution in some way I can't imagine, and that in turn would prove creation.....Not logical, but that is the way he thinks.
That is not Campbell's mission, at least not directly...He believes that finding a live dino would disprove evolution in some way I can't imagine, and that in turn would prove creation.....Not logical, but that is the way he thinks.
Don't chase him away, he may be the only one here more senile than I am.
I am lost, why would finding a living dinosaur prove somebody's religious belief to be true?
It's a long story and as Sans said, its linked with discrediting evolution -since dinosaurs are still around and American Indians rode on Pterodactyls in Peru back in pre Conquest times, they cannot be really ancient. Therefore the few thousand years time - period of Genesis could be true. As you say, if they are still around (and this is still not in any way adequately supported) that no more disproves deep Time than having turtles, sharks, crocodiles ammonites and Coelacanth disproves it. It would really make no difference even if true.
And even if it did, that would prove nothing. The Ark would still not work whether one supposes dinosaurs were on it or not. The whole thing seems to be the fallacy of the One Shot win - if you can discredit any tenet of the (supposed) Atheist doctrine, then the whole atheist faith - system collapses. Similarly, if you can prove any part of the Bible - literalist string of claims (by fiddling and misrepresentation, if necessary - quite legitimate since it's All True anyway) then all the rest must be true, too.
This is what you wrote: Evolution teaches us the earth is very old. The Bible does not.
Last man out, clean bowled. And even this: "Evolution teaches us the earth is very old" is not really correct. Evolution teaches us about the development of organic life through natural selection. Geology teaches us that it must have happened over billions of years since the fossils appear in old rocks.
The Bible does not. It teaches us that life appeared in a manner contradicted by the evidence. Thus the evidence teaches us that the Bible is not reliable. Thus Bible - literalist believers have to discredit the evidence, or at least, the interpretation of it. And that really is what the Evolution/Religion debate is all about.
Last man out, clean bowled. And even this: "Evolution teaches us the earth is very old" is not really correct. Evolution teaches us about the development of organic life through natural selection. Geology teaches us that it must have happened over billions of years since the fossils appear in old rocks.
The Bible does not. It teaches us that life appeared in a manner contradicted by the evidence. Thus the evidence teaches us that the Bible is not reliable. Thus Bible - literalist believers have to discredit the evidence, or at least, the interpretation of it. And that really is what the Evolution/Religion debate is all about.
which backs up the claim of my faith that the bible is in error, either through mistranslation, lost parts, or deliberate fraud.
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.
It's a long story and as Sans said, its linked with discrediting evolution -since dinosaurs are still around and American Indians rode on Pterodactyls in Peru back in pre Conquest times, they cannot be really ancient. Therefore the few thousand years time - period of Genesis could be true. As you say, if they are still around (and this is still not in any way adequately supported) that no more disproves deep Time than having turtles, sharks, crocodiles ammonites and Coelacanth disproves it. It would really make no difference even if true.