It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Simple, yet Damning Proof Young Creationism is False!-?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 12:08 AM
link   
This is the logical vs. illogical
God=Magic

You can't beat magic with logic. Whatever logic you throw out is easily trumped by magic. You can't beat the Bible because whatever it says is backed by the ultimate magic of God. It claims to be the truth "or No.1" so whatever anything else states is No.2.

I just don't understand why a book is more logical to some people than analyzing the world they are a part of and live in. Didn't God make the universe(s)...so why don't you listen to what God has put right in front of your eyes day after day for the truth, instead of a book that was "streamlined" by the Romans? You eat part of this world, it gives you breath to live...yet you'd rather ignore the intelligence that starts your car every day and explains why you must eat and breathe?

I don't know how you can ever defeat a creationist theory if behind every door of truth, lies another door with God running the puppet show? Someone could then just say "well behind God is the rules of science which God is a puppet to". It's like reflecting a mirror back into a mirror of infinite answers. Whichever mirror "reflection" you want to say "stop" at, can be your answer...it never ends.

[edit on 14/11/06 by Atomic]




posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   
True.

But doesn't this at least debunk a young earth theory? In terms of science, not religious purposes.

What is the official stance of creationism or "intelligent design" that is taught in our public schools in reference to a young earth. Do they not mention young earth at all?



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
True.

But doesn't this at least debunk a young earth theory? In terms of science, not religious purposes.

Perhaps as far as 'mainstream' science is concerned. But in the minds of people like Gentry and Morris Jr. The idea of a YE is distinctly not debunked.


What is the official stance of creationism or "intelligent design" that is taught in our public schools in reference to a young earth. Do they not mention young earth at all?

Perhaps you're familiar with the concept of separation of church and state? This clause currently ensures freedom from religion in our public schools (US), hence, there is no teaching of ID or Creationism in the public schools.

The ID movement takes no official position with respect to the age of the Earth.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I am very aware of the seperation of Church and state, but I DO remember reading my 9th garde integration science text book in which it included Intelligent design as one of the "theories."



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
I am very aware of the seperation of Church and state, but I DO remember reading my 9th garde integration science text book in which it included Intelligent design as one of the "theories."


Where, and perhaps more importantly, when were you in 9th grade.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
But doesn't this at least debunk a young earth theory? In terms of science, not religious purposes.


I think that you'd have to address the 'new chronology' that gentry brings up. He isn't saying 'the problems are explained by miracles', he is provinding an alternate interpretation of the evidence that would permit there to be a young earth.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   
i think kent hovind best addresses this question when he says "einstein was wrong, time is the constant, and light is the variable."

actually, that doesn't mean anything
because he just says that out of ignorance (which is what most id/creationist thought is vioiced out of)



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by kallikak

Originally posted by k4rupt
I am very aware of the seperation of Church and state, but I DO remember reading my 9th garde integration science text book in which it included Intelligent design as one of the "theories."


Where, and perhaps more importantly, when were you in 9th grade.


San Francisco... 3 years ago.

Yes, yes, I know... I'm still a high schooler.

[edit on 15-11-2006 by k4rupt]



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
San Francisco... 3 years ago.

Hmmm... very interesting. Were you in public school? Seems weird... especially given location... I can't see Frisco as being as bastion of ID proponents, but what do I know.

I would imagine that it's less likely to happen nowadays though given the recent decisions, and the negativity that the ID movement has brought upon themselves.


Yes, yes, I know... I'm still a high schooler.

Good for you. Believe it or not, it probably is the best time of your life.... or close to it... college was a lot of fun too, even if you don't realize it now.

You wouldn't happen to remember the book that was used? Wait, did you say it was in the book, or the teacher just mentioned it?



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Here is more damning evidence you can tell how old things are through carbon dating so if people think the Earth 10,000 years their beliefs are flawed since they have found human tools dating back 14,000 years and more.

[edit on 15-11-2006 by spinstopshere]



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 08:16 PM
link   
Yes it is a public high school and it was the only textbook that we used in that class. I don't, however, remmeber the name of the book.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 10:06 PM
link   
That's an extremely interesting theory. A valid point to bring up in the argument in my opinion. However, things like just don't matter do those who believe God created the universe. If they can't argue with your point, they usually just answer "God works in mysterious ways." I think it's interesting to point out that the Mormon church believes than one day in "God's" time is equal to a thousand years our time. Not that I believe what the Mormons believe, but if the being who created the earth and stuff was maybe...from a nother dimension, perhaps time runs slower/faster there??? I like your theory better though.



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by an3rkist
... I think it's interesting to point out that the Mormon church believes than one day in "God's" time is equal to a thousand years our time. Not that I believe what the Mormons believe, but if the being who created the earth and stuff was maybe...from a nother dimension, perhaps time runs slower/faster there??? I like your theory better though.


Perhaps it does. It's not something we can prove. But let me ask how the Mormons found out that God's time is 1000yrs/1day. Are they saying that because 'God' has done nothing in the past 2 thousand years? Does that also mean they are saying God sleeps? Maybe he slept in, or it was a Friday and doesn't have to be back into work until Monday morning?

What relevance does his day being a thousand years do? No offense to anyone here, but Mormons are crazy. Well, I actually believe that all religions are crazy, but that's just my opinion.

The original poster's theory is a good one. But, like other people in this thread have said, you cannot refute anything in the bible because of the fact that the people who follow it will deny any falsity to it, regardless how how much proof or how much sense you make.

""Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence." - Richard Dawkins

I thought that quote to be very fitting to this and the many topics in this forum.



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 04:25 AM
link   
Sorry, as I am late to the thread, I am digging up a few days back. I'm usually only a lurker.


All quotes originally posted by jakeolsen2219
I happen to consider myself christian. I however, do not base my beliefs on tradition, but on what the bible says.


By basing your beliefs on the bible, you are basing yourself on tradition. Am I wrong?



Yes, in Genesis it does say that God created the earth in 7 days, but I do not take this as a literal passage. God's time is unmeasurable. His one day could be, and hour, a second, or a million years, we can never know.There are many places in the bible, especially in Moses' writings, where figurative language is used. I believe this to be true with the Great Flood as well. There are even thoughts that some old testament stories are simply parables.


Why is it that you can take some parts of the bible literally, and others not? What criteria do you follow that shows what is to be taken literal and what is symbolic? Why should you look to the bible as factual history? Ridiculous. If the book The Silmarillion was written a thousand years ago, you could easily do the same thing the Bible has done today. But you know it's not true.


None of this changes the fact that God is real.


What fact? Besides the bible, which you've already stated isn't really factual, shows proof that God exists? I think you meant "None of this changes my opinion that God is real." Sounds right.


You also have to understand that in Moses' time (The author of Creation), he was creating a new country based on this religion. Religion was, at the time, the center of everything, and calendars were established based on religion. It would be easily conceivable that the idea of seven days was in order to establish the judaic week(which it did).


Could it be that religion was the center of everything because of not knowing how to scientifically prove anything, so they just went on campfire stories past on through the generations?


To me, it is harder to believe that matter orchestrated itself into intelligent life. than to believe that there was a guiding hand. Why is this such a far stretch for people who believe in aliens and the spirit world?


I find it completely the opposite. Sure, it's easier to just go ahead and say "yeah, God did this." and be done with it. But then you have the question, How did God come into being? But, of course you and many like-minded individuals will just say Because he's God. Regardless of either question, they are both very hard to contemplate and neither one can be proved at this moment. But at least scientists are trying to prove their theories. You are relying on an old copy of Readers Digest to present your facts.

edit: Also, I don't believe in the aliens or ghosts that the people in this forum talk about.

[edit on 16-11-2006 by Larfox]



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Larfox
But let me ask how the Mormons found out that God's time is 1000yrs/1day. Are they saying that because 'God' has done nothing in the past 2 thousand years?


I'm sure they had a "revelation" from God. It's just another convenient cop-out to explain inconsistencies in their doctrine. I brought it up not because I believe it, but just as alternate point of view. Time is mysterious thing, more mysterious than "god" in my opinion.



""Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence." - Richard Dawkins


Great quote!



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ViewFromTheStars
All interesting indeed and I'm sure alot of you will figure out pretty quickly how I feel about evolution. I steadfastly believe in intelligent design and the basis that I shoot evolution down with is this:

Where did the DNA in the first cells come from in the first place?

Didn't think you could answer that.

The chances of 'life' just falling into place are astronomical, almost infinite if I'm not mistaken.

The "instructions" needed had to have came from somewhere and you can rest assured they didn't just 'evolve' into existence.



[edit on 13-11-2006 by ViewFromTheStars]


for a short moment i will assume you know what your talking about. Your whole idea will also discount god in that he would have come from nothing, with not only knowledge but ALL the knowledge. On the basis on simple reasoning, your past statement would make my previous statement true, and the only defense you can put up is that god is an all knowing, all powerful being that cannot be detected, and if this is your arguement, im going to stop wasting time with you and go argue with my wall.



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 05:59 PM
link   
It is im possible to prove or disprove scientifically ridiculous theories ie. (Young Earth), that are backed up by ridiculous statement. but just because some cannot be disproven DOES NOT make it true.


en.wikipedia.org...


EVERYONE SHOULD READ THAT!!!, has little to nothing to do with the food



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 10:34 PM
link   


That link above just made my day. Thanks. Stop Global Warming...more Pirates! Arrggh



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Here's some facts that might interest someone:
All elements/atoms up to and including Iron in the periodic table are created in stars. The heavier elements are created when stars go supernova and hypernova.

So would someone like to tell me how god managed to make the earth and all thats on it when there were no stars to create the atoms to make it. Also stars take a long time to die therefore making the age of the universe and consequently the age of the earth a damn site older than YEC's claim or do they dispute these facts???



G



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masisoar
My dissociation with the bible began at age 5 when I asked my priest at my church about the beginning of the universe.. and how dinosaurs fit into it.. he simply couldn't give an honest answer. I found it kind of him to not know and let me know that rather than filling my mind with irrational occuring events of the past as described in the bible.


You aren't going to get many accurate answers from priests....they don't even us the Bible.


And to this day, I hold that as a key defining factor against any argument of creationalism. The LARGE time lapse between the era of Dinosaur and Humans just defies it. I've to this day, haven't seen "sound" arguments to refute this claim by me, I mean you can claim that dinosaurs and humans co-existed.. but wheres the proof. I remember the footprints in Texas claimed to be "human footprints" next to "dinosaur footprints" but that fell apart.


Okay, here's your proof. There is your dinosaur spoken of in the Bible.


15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. 16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. 17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. 18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. 19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. 20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. 21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. 22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. 23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. 24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.



Personally I feel for Christians to deny the accuracy and competence of science in the matter of refuting creationism.. by ANY theory is to deny one's own way of life and its conventionalities.


For me I feel sorry for those that have trouble facing facts. I don't have enough blind faith to believe that hydrogen will turn into people if you wait long enough.
I'm more interested in facts. The Bible still stands dispite attempts to disprove it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join