How can YEC's ignore ALL the data of old Earth?

Originally posted by joya1999
The "scientific data", while seemingly logical, is based on a number of assumptions. For example, if you believe the Bible is correct, then the method for carbon dating is invalid based on what scientist think the world was like when it was created ... before the flood

And believing in the bible has no assumptions?

Originally posted by C Hess
A few pages back you quoted her to support your position, and you called her a real scientist. Indeed she was a real scientist, one of the very best. Presumably, when you quoted her, because she said what you wanted to hear, you didn't think of her as a fool then, as you shouldn't. Fool.

I did not say Lynn Margulis was a fool. I was only referring to the statement you claimed she made as being foolish. Obviosuly, if she makes statements that agree with the Holy Bible, then her statements are like a wise person.

Originally posted by sonhouse
And believing in the bible has no assumptions?

God does not make assumptions, He knows.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I did not say Lynn Margulis was a fool. I was only referring to the statement you claimed she made as being foolish. Obviosuly, if she makes statements that agree with the Holy Bible, then her statements are like a wise person.

Like he said, when YOU quoted her you liked what she said because it fell in line with your self lobotomized brain.

Originally posted by DeepThought
If the visible universe were 6000 light years across then it would have a volume of 2.4 * 10^37 cubic metres. There are of the order of 100 billion stars in each galaxy and of the order of 100 billion galaxies. The volume occupied by the sun is 10^28 cubic metres. So the total volume of space occupied by stars is around 10^50 cubic metres. This would ...[text shortened]... the universe is more than 6,000 years old or the universe was created to look older than it is.

God created the heavens and the earth and stretched out the heavens. If God made the earth in a couple of days and man within a day. Why would the earth or man look older than that to God? You are talking nonsense.

Originally posted by joya1999
The "scientific data", while seemingly logical, is based on a number of assumptions. For example, if you believe the Bible is correct, then the method for carbon dating is invalid based on what scientist think the world was like when it was created ... before the flood

Hello, welcome to the site. That point has been attempted before. I think it was in this thread I used zircon dating as an example. I know it's 18 pages long, but if you read back through it I think you'll find that the "assumptions" of "apparently logical" science aren't actually assumptions and are logical. The only caveat is that they are based on inference, but inference has served us so well we can infer it is sound. They are based on observation and the rather simple assumption that we are not being deceived.

If we are being deceived by God then there is a far bigger theological problem than parts of the Bible not being literally true. For the record I am an agnostic, I do not think it is possible to prove, either way, whether God exists or not. So I neither believe there is a God, nor do I believe the converse. However I think it is possible to determine how old the universe is. It is a lot older than 6,000 years. For one thing if our "assumptions" were wrong we couldn't have this conversation as the technologies we need to communicate with one another wouldn't work.

Originally posted by RJHinds
God created the heavens and the earth and stretched out the heavens. If God made the earth in a couple of days and man within a day. Why would the earth or man look older than that to God? You are talking nonsense.

You are the poster boy for talking nonsense, you have been talking nonsense for decades.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Like he said, when YOU quoted her you liked what she said because it fell in line with your self lobotomized brain.

I do not have to agree with everything a person says to quote them when they say something wise. If that was a requirement, then I would be violating your admonition to think for myself. Certainly you would not want that, would you?

Originally posted by RJHinds
God created the heavens and the earth and stretched out the heavens. If God made the earth in a couple of days and man within a day. Why would the earth or man look older than that to God? You are talking nonsense.

This is the best argument from a scientific standpoint that YECers have is the stretching out of the heavens .....we do see objects in every direction redshifted meaning moving away and I've heard or read that this redshifting appears to be in rings or stages ( don't know if that is true ) however the implications of a 6000 year old universe ....would mean that the objects moving out or away would be traveling faster than the speed of light and I believe this defies what we know about physics ( not to say God could not do it that way but ) there should be some overwhelming evidence of this event if it happened that way

Manny

Originally posted by menace71
This is the best argument from a scientific standpoint that YECers have is the stretching out of the heavens .....we do see objects in every direction redshifted meaning moving away and I've heard or read that this redshifting appears to be in rings or stages ( don't know if that is true ) however the implications of a 6000 year old universe ....would mean ...[text shortened]... but ) there should be some overwhelming evidence of this event if it happened that way

Manny

I believe the overwhelming evidence is that it is written in holy scripture.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I believe the overwhelming evidence is that it is written in holy scripture.

And I believe you are totally duped and don't even know it.

Originally posted by sonhouse
And I believe you are totally duped and don't even know it.

Your belief does not promise you eternal life does it? Your belief promises you only death. I'll take a chance on being duped. I can't do any worse than you, even if I am duped.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Your belief does not promise you eternal life does it? Your belief promises you only death. I'll take a chance on being duped. I can't do any worse than you, even if I am duped.

That line of argument might work if you were only arguing for faith, but you are arguing for a young universe - which the rest of the religion doesn't depend on.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I did not say Lynn Margulis was a fool. I was only referring to the statement you claimed she made as being foolish.

Well, it wasn't. We are indeed walking, talking communities of bacteria. It's a well known, established fact that the cells of the human microbiome outnumber human cells ten to one. It's also a well supported fact that the eukaryote cell (human cell) looks just the way you'd expect, if it began as different forms of bacteria entering into symbiosis. I've already provided links explaining as much.

You can close your eyes and cover your ears, but that won't change the facts. Lynn, while controversial, didn't make foolish statements; statements completely unsupported by the facts. You seem to throw them around without so much as a blink though, with your: "if it appears to contradict the bible it can't be true"-mentality.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I do not have to agree with everything a person says to quote them when they say something wise. If that was a requirement, then I would be violating your admonition to think for myself. Certainly you would not want that, would you?

Hm, in your case... 😛

Seriously, you're not thinking for yourself. This much is blatantly obvious. I'm gonna guess that you used those quotes because you've seen some creationist video or read some creationist website that used them. You didn't even realise who Margulis is. You betrayed yourself when you wrote: "This Lynn Margulis makes statements like a fool.", even though you had, just a few pages before quoted her. You probably forgot the name of the scientist you quoted, and thought I was quoting someone else.

Now, if you were indeed to sit down and think for yourself, that'd be great.