How old is the world according to Theologists?

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur



"I'll change the subject because I have nothing to rebut with"

Call it whatever you like, your "rebuttal" has nothing to do with any of the points I brought up though, so you're guilty of precisely what you're accusing me of.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur


"Creation scientists"

I stopped reading right there. They are wackos that only seek to push a fundamentalist view of religion as a "science" and warp our children's minds with it.

x1000 You have no idea how ironic that is.

 

[conjur]

How Creationists Misrepresent the Carbon-14 Dating Method

Evolution of a Creationist Quote

Intelligent design theory is science. (debunked)


And I'll throw this in for good measure:

Is America a Christian Nation?  (No)

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur
How Creationists Misrepresent the Carbon-14 Dating Method

Evolution of a Creationist Quote

Intelligent design theory is science. (debunked)

I like how "Dr." Holloway brought up whacko fundies in his first sentence regarding Carbon dating

2nd one: more Dr. Holloway

3rd one: yeah, that really debunked creationism there...
4th one:

once again, nothing to do with the topic at hand

that roll smiley sure is getting a workout today

 

[conjur]

Nice how you so easily dismiss those sites.

Your faith has blinded you FROM the truth.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur
Nice how you so easily dismiss those sites.

Your faith has blinded you FROM the truth.

That's even more ironic than the last one! You're pretty good at that

 

[conjur]

blah blah blah

Flyermax, you really have no idea how much a fool you make of yourself in these threads.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: HotChic

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: matt426malm


it doesn't change it is becoming more acurately measured, proposed ages throughout history

Still don't buy it. "becoming more accurate" does not describe the history of this issue. You assume it's becoming more accurate because that is the natural tendency of science, but until the final figure is arrived at how can you truly know if it's becoming more accurate? I've seen everything from 6,000 years to 20 billion.

So...the Grand Canyon was carved in 6,000 years? The glaciers that formed Yosemite Valley formed and receded in 6,000 years? Niagara Falls is in its current position because water carved that valley in 6,000 years?

Get a clue and lose the fundamentalist viewpoint. It's utterly ridiculous. Believing, word-for-word, a book that's nothing but a composition of various stories told over the centuries...LOL!

There are creation scientists that have studied all those phenomenon and come up with theories based on water and erosion that would explain those in light of a huge flood. What some scientists say is impossible can be wrong. A few years ago there was a hurricane that swept away a wealth of black sand beaches. Scientists lamented the loss, saying the beaches would take thousands of years to regenerate. A few days later they were back. Science is not infallible.

"Christian scientist" theories based on water and erosion are BS that they create to support their fanatical beliefs. There is no way the Grand Canyon was made in 6000 years, no matter how may hurricanes blew over it. I don't see how you can compare erosion and deposition of a beach with large scale terrain building.

 

[Entity]

Flyermax,

Do you have any evidence to offer in support of the 6000 number, as opposed to blind dismissal of the 4.55billion? Links to rational explanations of the existence of the Grand Canyon, etc., would be appreciated; I'm not very well versed on how creation scientists can believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old, but I'm open to the possibility.

Rob

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Entity
Flyermax,

Do you have any evidence to offer in support of the 6000 number, as opposed to blind dismissal of the 4.55billion?

Rob

Geez, Rob, of *course* he does! The Bible! Didn't you know that it's completely infallible?!?!?

 

[matt426malm]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: conjur
Nice how you so easily dismiss those sites.

Your faith has blinded you FROM the truth.

That's even more ironic than the last one! You're pretty good at that

The point is that while science is certainly not perfect or infailiable it is the best we can do at the time. Sorry flyer all opinons are not equal. Some opinons have reproducable support and therefore we accept those theories if there is suitable evidence. I for one do not read everything I read in a textbook and take it to be literal fact. I find that it is not supported or if the evidence isn't clear well then it will remain in my mind just another interesting theory. A possible explanation, something to keep on the back burner until more evidence arises. Or if it doesn't eventually throw the idea out.

Being a future scientist myself, undergrad in the science of the atmosphere I know that I am not perfect myself. So no science is not perfect. It is not this awsome infinite truth but it is best we have.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur
blah blah blah

Flyermax, you really have no idea how much a fool you make of yourself in these threads.

What a well-thought-out argument! You've convinced me to change my ways! No more will I believe in "magical beings in the sky", from this day forward I shall worship science which is perfect by definition!
I really hope I don't need to point out that the above was sarcasm but just in case... there you have it

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Entity
Flyermax,

Do you have any evidence to offer in support of the 6000 number, as opposed to blind dismissal of the 4.55billion? Links to rational explanations of the existence of the Grand Canyon, etc., would be appreciated; I'm not very well versed on how creation scientists can believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old, but I'm open to the possibility.

Rob

What's the point in responding to your question? Literally anything I answer with will be leapt upon by the pagans like a pack of wild dogs. My answer resides in the Bible. You can find your own answer.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Entity
Flyermax,

Do you have any evidence to offer in support of the 6000 number, as opposed to blind dismissal of the 4.55billion? Links to rational explanations of the existence of the Grand Canyon, etc., would be appreciated; I'm not very well versed on how creation scientists can believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old, but I'm open to the possibility.

Rob

What's the point in responding to your question? Literally anything I answer with will be leapt upon by the pagans like a pack of wild dogs. My answer resides in the Bible. You can find your own answer.

IOW, "No, I have no proof. I believe firmly in a book written by various cultures over many centuries and that's full of symbolism."

:rol;

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: conjur

Intelligent design theory is science. (debunked)

That DEBUNKS intelligent design?? LOL

Intelligent design implies results that are contrary to common sense. Spider webs apparently meet the standards of specified complexity, which implies that spiders are intelligent.

By no means does it imply that. It implies that spider has the knowledge to build a web which it needs to survive, like any other animal has the knowledge to do what it needs to survive, much like a bird building a nest or bees building a hive. It's more instinct than intelligence.

If the claim is made that the spider itself was intelligently designed, one might just as well claim that the spider's designer was not intelligent, but was intelligently designed, or maybe it was the spider's designer's designer which was intelligent.

Yes, of course someone can claim that, which is why it's called belief not knowledge. As someone pointed out before, whatever you believe in requires a leap of faith.

Thus, either spiders are intelligent, or intelligent design theory reduces to a weak Deism, or terms like "specified complexity" have no useful definition.

Yeah, ok.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur


IOW, "No, I have no proof. I believe firmly in a book written by various cultures over many centuries and that's full of symbolism."

:rol;

IOW: "I have nothing useful to add to this thread, I'm simply here to attack Flyermax's beliefs because he's a stupid Christian."

Two can play this game.

 

[Stojakapimp]

can someone please quote the bible passage that says how old the Earth is?

 

[Ameesh]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Entity
Flyermax,

Do you have any evidence to offer in support of the 6000 number, as opposed to blind dismissal of the 4.55billion? Links to rational explanations of the existence of the Grand Canyon, etc., would be appreciated; I'm not very well versed on how creation scientists can believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old, but I'm open to the possibility.

Rob

What's the point in responding to your question? Literally anything I answer with will be leapt upon by the pagans like a pack of wild dogs. My answer resides in the Bible. You can find your own answer.

the bible also says the value of pi is 3 do you believe that too? or are mathematicians wrong about that too?

 

[Entity]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Entity
Flyermax,

Do you have any evidence to offer in support of the 6000 number, as opposed to blind dismissal of the 4.55billion? Links to rational explanations of the existence of the Grand Canyon, etc., would be appreciated; I'm not very well versed on how creation scientists can believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old, but I'm open to the possibility.

Rob

What's the point in responding to your question? Literally anything I answer with will be leapt upon by the pagans like a pack of wild dogs. My answer resides in the Bible. You can find your own answer.

The point is allowing us to continue (or begin, as it were) a dialogue in an intelligent and productive way. I'm not arguing with your or your opinions; I'm instead merely interested in learning more about them. I am not familiar with the sections in the bible you allude to, and am even less familiar with discussions about how artifacts such as the Grand Canyon exist within the creation-scientific mindset.

I'm interested, but not in blind arguing. I'd like to see what (beyond the bible) has helped you to form your opinion, as I know many biblical scholars who believe in the 4.55billion estimate, but none who believe in the 6000 year estimate. Hence I would need someone familiar with that mindset to help me understand it.

Rob

 

[matt426malm]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Entity
Flyermax,

Do you have any evidence to offer in support of the 6000 number, as opposed to blind dismissal of the 4.55billion? Links to rational explanations of the existence of the Grand Canyon, etc., would be appreciated; I'm not very well versed on how creation scientists can believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old, but I'm open to the possibility.

Rob

What's the point in responding to your question? Literally anything I answer with will be leapt upon by the pagans like a pack of wild dogs. My answer resides in the Bible. You can find your own answer.

It has to do with tracing through the line of who had sex with who and there offspring; ages, dates, ect. Until it reaches adam and eve who were supposudly created right after the genesis of the universe.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: conjur


IOW, "No, I have no proof. I believe firmly in a book written by various cultures over many centuries and that's full of symbolism."

:rol;

IOW: "I have nothing useful to add to this thread, I'm simply here to attack Flyermax's beliefs because he's a stupid Christian."

Two can play this game.

Yep, that's exactly what I think.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur


Yep, that's exactly what I think.

Whether or not you acknowledge it, your words speak for themselves. I don't need to put words in your mouth to demonstrate your hatred for me, you do that quite well on your own.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Stojakapimp
can someone please quote the bible passage that says how old the Earth is?

I can't recall any specific passages, it's more of a calculation arrived at by tracing the lineage of modern man back to Adam. I do recall some passages in the apocalyptic books referring to the earth ending in the 7th (current) millenium, however.

 

[Stojakapimp]

Originally posted by: Stojakapimp
can someone please quote the bible passage that says how old the Earth is?

oh really? that's pretty interesting!!!

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Ameesh


the bible also says the value of pi is 3 do you believe that too? or are mathematicians wrong about that too?

I hope this is sarcasm...