11 Jun 13
Originally posted by RJHindsI know, so don't say you interpret it in the same way. If you interpret the data differently from scientists, then you should not accept most of astronomy and most of geology. You should have your own creationist astronomy and geology beliefs, or simply be ignorant on the subjects. Its just stupid to say that you accept that galaxies are a certain size and a certain distance from earth whilst rejecting all the data that scientists used to determine this. If anything it suggests that you really know scientists are right, you are embarrassed to say they are wrong, but you have trouble reconciling their findings with your religion.
The YEC people just interpret the data in a different way than the Old Earth people.
11 Jun 13
3 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou have a tendency to distort everything I say in some way so you can find fault with it. If you don't agree with me, that is okay, but you don't need to go to the underhanded trick of distorting what I say to create a strawman to knock down.
I know, so don't say you interpret it in the same way. If you interpret the data differently from scientists, then you should not accept most of astronomy and most of geology. You should have your own creationist astronomy and geology beliefs, or simply be ignorant on the subjects. Its just stupid to say that you accept that galaxies are a certain size an ...[text shortened]... ssed to say they are wrong, but you have trouble reconciling their findings with your religion.
Not all scientist believe in an old Earth. So it is dishonest, as Dasa would say, to pretend that they do. As I said before, one can accept most of the data and assumptions and believe in a young Earth by interpreting the data from a different worldview. But obviously, some of the data and assumptions may be wrong and will have to be changed as more understanding is gained.
Earth is 6,000 Years Old
The Instructor
11 Jun 13
Originally posted by RJHindsI do not do that. It may be possible that I am misunderstanding you, but at no point do I deliberately misinterpret you. I guess it may be because you seem to have a different definition from me for all the critical words.
You have a tendency to distort everything I say in some way so you can find fault with it. If you don't agree with me, that is okay, but you don't need to go to the underhanded trick of distorting what I say to create a strawman to knock down.
Not all scientist believe in an old Earth. So it is dishonest, as Dasa would say, to pretend that they do.
I don't pretend that they do. I state that the general finding in the fields of geology, astronomy, and several others fields is that the earth is old. That there may be a few people calling themselves scientists who are also creationist is irrelevant to this.
As I said before, one can accept most of the data and assumptions and believe in a young Earth by interpreting the data from a different worldview.
No, one can't do so rationally. Most of the data is in conflict with a young earth. Something like 99% of the data. And the interpretation of most scientists is that the earth is therefore old. If you interpret the data differently then you should have different conclusions on not just the age of the earth, but also how mountains are formed, and how big galaxies are and what stars are made of. It is simply irrational to accept the findings of how big galaxies are whilst rejecting the findings about the speed of light and the age of the galaxies.
11 Jun 13
9 edits
Originally posted by RJHinds
You have a tendency to distort everything I say in some way so you can find fault with it. If you don't agree with me, that is okay, but you don't need to go to the underhanded trick of distorting what I say to create a strawman to knock down.
Not all scientist believe in an old Earth. So it is dishonest, as Dasa would say, to pretend that they do. As ...[text shortened]... d.
Earth is 6,000 Years Old
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1msS71xL00
The Instructor
Not all scientist believe in an old Earth.
in every profession you will always get at least a tiny minority of morons and not even science is an exception.
Basic science tells us that the Earth is many millions of yours old. There are a very tiny minority of people with a science degree qualification, usually religious extremists and usually creationists and I would imagine they probably represent much less than one percent of all scientists, that are stupid or crazed enough to deny the basic scientific facts along with the vast mountain of evidence to support those facts. These morons should be stripped of their science qualification because no one should be officially a 'scientists' if they don't agree with the basic principles of the science profession and such morons are in danger of giving science a bad name it ill deserves.
To say that “all scientists believe in an old Earth” would be true if it wasn't for these morons that make up these rare exceptions to that rule.
It is totally true to say that, in this modern day of science and reason, the vast majority of scientists believe in an old Earth and the very tiny minority that don't are all stupid crazed religious nuts that have absolutely no scientific credibility as a direct result.
just watch the whole of this excellent concise short video that explains just some of the totally irrefutable evidence that the Earth is very old:
well?
I think surely the hardest thing you would have to explain is the first bit of the video about the calculation about the minimal time, which would be millions of years, it would take for that vast quantity of fossil fuels to be naturally deposited and formed in the Earths crust -there is no way you can explain that one!
11 Jun 13
Originally posted by RJHindsI am sure you know by now that not many people bother following youtube links especially when posted by you.
Starlight And A Young Earth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=6xdlmykLI58
The Instructor
Can you summarize the basic argument? Do you understand it yourself? Or are you just looking for anyone whose conclusion matches yours?
12 Jun 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadOkay, I will summarize it. I'm right and you are wrong.
I am sure you know by now that not many people bother following youtube links especially when posted by you.
Can you summarize the basic argument? Do you understand it yourself? Or are you just looking for anyone whose conclusion matches yours?
The instructor
12 Jun 13
Originally posted by RJHindsThe scientists who claim the Earth is 6K years old are not really scientists they are religious politicians with an agenda to DESTROY traditional science and replace it with religious dogma nonsense. THAT is what would make these scientists happy. They are in no way interested in the truth, only in that which pushes their religious political agenda. They want political power plain and simple.
You have a tendency to distort everything I say in some way so you can find fault with it. If you don't agree with me, that is okay, but you don't need to go to the underhanded trick of distorting what I say to create a strawman to knock down.
Not all scientist believe in an old Earth. So it is dishonest, as Dasa would say, to pretend that they do. As ...[text shortened]... d.
Earth is 6,000 Years Old
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1msS71xL00
The Instructor
12 Jun 13
Originally posted by sonhouseThey want the truth to be known, so the lies of the devil can be defeated.
The scientists who claim the Earth is 6K years old are not really scientists they are religious politicians with an agenda to DESTROY traditional science and replace it with religious dogma nonsense. THAT is what would make these scientists happy. They are in no way interested in the truth, only in that which pushes their religious political agenda. They want political power plain and simple.
The Instructor
12 Jun 13
Originally posted by sonhouseYeah, that's right! Right on! Atheists don't want to believe in evolution or in an old earth/old universe, they have been forced into believing it because the real scientists say so. Atheists don't have an agenda... they don't even know what an agenda is.
The scientists who claim the Earth is 6K years old are not really scientists they are religious politicians with an agenda to DESTROY traditional science and replace it with religious dogma nonsense. THAT is what would make these scientists happy. They are in no way interested in the truth, only in that which pushes their religious political agenda. They want political power plain and simple.
Pffft
12 Jun 13
2 edits
Originally posted by lemon lime
Yeah, that's right! Right on! Atheists don't want to believe in evolution or in an old earth/old universe, they have been forced into believing it because the real scientists say so. Atheists don't have an agenda... they don't even know what an agenda is.
Pffft
they have been forced into believing it because the real scientists say so.
No. We have been forced into believing it because we know the evidence says so. Whether we "want" to believe it is irrelevant.
12 Jun 13
Originally posted by humyYou don't know the evidence says so, you only believe what you say the real scientists say. Man up and tell the truth.they have been forced into believing it because the real scientists say so.
No. We have been forced into believing it because we know the evidence says so. Whether we "want" to believe it is irrelevant.
The Instructor