Why do people think they need to cling to such preposterous theories to remain faithful in their Lord?
If anything, I'd say I were a pantheist. But I chalk it up to chemistry we have yet to understand.
So, what we still refer to as "alchemy" is the source of life, the possibilities are limitless, but our frame of understanding, based on impermanence, is what separates us from godly knowledge. And there is no reason to assume intelligent design is behind it.
I remember my wifes 6 year old son coming back from school one day telling me that God made the world. From her point of view, the teacher had told her, therefore; it was absolutely true. I was rather angry about that, to say the least.
You'd think a teacher would know the difference between education and indoctrination
>>1337567
They're not very bright, even by Christian standards.
Where curiosity ends, the superstitious begins.
I'm gonna post a few of the pics he used.
>>1337623
>>1337626
>>1337628
>>1337631
>>1337632
>>1337636
Here's the last one I'm gonna post.
And yes, he did use this as an argument.
>>1337636
lmao creationists actually believe that's how it's done
>>1337641
How do people actually believe something that they willingly lie to support?
>>1337596
>my wifes 6 year old son
>>1337670
Fear is a powerful thing, anon.
>>1337623
Answers in Genesis (and by extension, Ken Ham) is funded by the Institute for Religion and Democracy.
The institute is promoting neither of those things.
>>1337691
Someone that afraid to die must be ... full of candy.
>>1337691
I had one tell me that they "studied evolution", but he thought that evolution was literally one animal just turning into another.
Somehow he thought I wouldn't realize he had no clue what he was talking about.
>>1337733
It's not exactly the opposite of that. If CP biology isn't enough to make someone understand then it's hopeless for that person.
>>1337733
When ai posted a link to talk.origins, he told me,
>evolutionist article using evolutionist terminology and cladistics
>>1337740
But I don't know if fear is really the motivation.
I mean, you'll see anti-GMO and anti-vaccine people do the same shit where they will lie to support a position they hold regarding something they don't even understand the science behind.
I just don't understand why people don't try to understand something before they form an opinion about it.
>>1337751
They've been taught from birth that if you do that, you run the risk of becoming the dreaded atheist.
>>1337596
>not calling your wife's son your son as well
why can't you accept him and love him as your own?
>>1337567
The truth is the truth.
People don't cling to the truth.
People cling to lies to avoid having to deal with the truth.
>>1337567
Bro considering i'm banned could you ask Peter why he thinks /christian/ is reddit?
>>1337733
So much of creationism is based off a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution.
Evolution has no end goal, and mutations that happen in population aren't usually benevolent, which is how we get genetic disorders. Survival of the fittest just means the fittest to their environment-not necessarily the smartest. Fish are the fittest to live underwater because they can extract oxygen via their gills vs humans and whales who have to surface to breathe air. someone who is smarter isn't "more evolved" than someone who is not as smart, as there is no end goal.
>>1337665
It is.
It's funny. The answers all of you people mocking Creationists have boil down to "I don't know, but some day Science will answer everything!"
Pathetic.
>>1337733
You don't, if you don't realize that's the entire theory.
Fucking ignorance in this thread is astonishing.
>>1337743
talkorigins is a joke. It's babby tier nonsense. "Well if God made the universe, who made God? Checkmate, theists!"
Literally babby tier.
>>1339761
Because he's a loveless godless faggot, that's why.
>>1339777
Bullshit.
Creationism is based off of knowing that the bible is God's eyewitness account of how He made the universe.
I mean, theology is interesting to think about. But it's a problem when it gets in the way of science and leads to unfair treatment of individuals.
When it comes to Creationism, you can't even begin to fully account for all of it ever. Only God can do that.
What is recorded in all creation legends is only a small piece. Every early civilization had one. What we see is only a small piece.
>>1339807
Like scientific and religious ideas go together they really aren't that outrageously far off from eachother.
>>1339781
what
>>1339799
This can only be possible if you think science has jurisdiction over absolutely everything, including the unknown, the supernatural, the paranormal, the unobservable, etc., etc., etc.
>>1337751
Cognitive dissonance, I can understand their position at the very least, imagine having to face the truth that your entire being, the entire core of you ideology, is formed around a cult ideology instilled in you by your parents/friends/pastor etc. from birth
>>1339824
The circular reasoning between the geologists and the paleontologists is world renowned logical fallacies at play.
"This rock is 10,000,000 years old, because we found a 10,000,000 year old trilobite in it!"
"This trilobite is 10,000,000 years old, because we found it in a 10,000,000 year old rock strata!"
Literally how it was done.
>>1339839
You have no idea who the truth is.
You're just a number in a mob that all believes the same way, and that way can change at the drop of a hat.
>muh radiometric dating
>muh Miller-Urey experiement
>muh finch beaks
>>1337567
Because it's what the Bible says. It's not complicated. A harder question is how you claim to be faithful but disregard all the parts that are inconvenient.
>inb4 it's just a metaphor
>>1339847
>That can change at the drop of a hat
That's the point anon, it's not a negative connotation that opinions will change if prior theories are invalidated. The refusal to accept opposing opinions and selectively pick information to fit your own constructed argument is characteristic of creationists.
>>1339857
You can't selectively pick aspects of the bible (Creationism especially), and then ignore other aspects which are empirically proven to be incorrect.
>>1337751
The problem with anti-vaccination people and anti-GMO people is that I can find some sense behind that stuff.
More rational anti-GMO people raise actually decent reasons. Like companies(I'll give you a hint of one - they sprayed toxin over Vietnam and said it wasn't carcinogenic, it was, now they also make GMO) can modify the plants to die without fertilisers made by them or to release what-would-be toxin for any plant that isn't modified by the company that made them into the soil(as in bounds the farmer to use let's say GM wheat from only one company).
You're also reducing bio-diversity of the species you use which disadvantages aren't as visible with plants although they are still relevant - but when you look at animals, you can easily see it. There are some breeds of let's say - sheep - that are more resistant to some parasites and various viruses/bacteria they've carried but are less resistant to others which may mean that if you'll replace all sheep by breed Y because for instance in its own environment it grows bigger than other sheep's breeds, they may grow weaker than previous breeds in different environments. Same can apply to some plants.
There are also other reasons for it and not all are "if you eat them your DNA will be modified" tier.
For vaccines it's mostly financial stuff - like there's no point in using vaccines against ordinary flu because it mutates fast enough to make them worthless waste of money yet people keep using them for no reason.
Now the problem with creationists is that they at times point out some analysis done wrong here and such but they don't have any argument reaching 10% of coherency and sense the ones above reach.
>>1339877
>Now the problem with creationists is that they at times point out some analysis done wrong here and such but they don't have any argument reaching 10% of coherency and sense the ones above reach.
This is the core of the problem, any inconsistency within an empirically backed study from the 1930s or the 1940s is latched onto as an attempt to discredit quite literally every aspect of the scientific body.
There is not attempt to create valid criticisms of the scientific method, but rather to simply find attempted illogical scenarios and say "haha i knew you were wrong I showed you there!!!"
>>1339834
>Implying these things exist
>Implying that anything else has any jurisdiction over them instead
Aside from the unobservable of course since actual scientific hypotheses can make properly falsifiable predictions for things as of yet unobserved.
Both creationism "science" and explaination of life especially human with evolution trough natural selection and the history of development of matter trough big bang and all conjunctures.
People need to separate scientific fact from conjuncture.
Science just analyzes in purely objective way.
There's a huge difference between scientific laws and a meme made by some guys that became a story to be told in college classrooms.
It's better and simple to admit - we don't know how human came to be - we have not gathered enough information and discovered enough laws to start making correct assumptions.
You can still use scientific laws we have discovered and the scientific facts in various fields - to help and achieve tangible goods - but wasting your time inventing stories then trying to back them up with random information you think it's compatible - it's both time consuming and useless.
As Christians we know trough faith that God created the universe and earth - not trough scientific method we know that.
>>1339867
Yes, it is.
The truth never changes.
Science is always wrong.
If you can't see the obvious choice among the above, you're hopeless.
What possible reason would anyone have to invent these elaborate schemes to attack biology and geology?
It stems from childish clinging to a literal text from some arbitrary story book.
I feel sorry for anyone who is compelled under a religious obligation to stubbornly refuse to learn.
I wish I could put it in a less emotional personal attack, but that's what I feel about the issue.
Thankfully I don't deal with Christians in my day to day, the real victims are their own children who they are indoctrinating into helpless stupidity.
>>1339867
>and then ignore other aspects which are empirically proven to be incorrect.
Nothing needs to be ignored in the bible, because nothing in the bible has ever been "empirically proven to be incorrect."
I get that you idiots don't know you're dealing with something holy.
Better learn quick.
>>1339877
It's not the the vaccines are a problem.
It's that the population has become unthinking in receiving vaccines, which can vector literally anything into an entire population within a week.
>>1339886
The scientific method requires observation.
How do you do that when you're talking about the creation of the world, again?
Oh, yeah, that's right. You ask God, Who was there.
>>1339891
Then science cannot opine on the creation of the universe.
All it has is models.
Zero observation.
You will find to your horror that you are not an evolved amoeba on a random rock spinning in a self-made universe quickly enough.
>>1339939
Correct. You don't know.
God does.
>>1339942
Science is a tool - scientific laws can't be true or wrong, but trough scientific means - the laws can be tested again and again in many places of the universe and have same or simmiar results.
This for ordinary people means that trough scientific methods and defined science the material world can be controlled to some extent benefiting others - if the results are different the scientific tools are mostly capable of telling what interfered.
>>1339945
Science always proves science is wrong. Sometimes it takes a generation or two, but it always happens.
Because science is always wrong.
Man what's up with insane christians in this site
>>1339969
Everything about science is wrong.
The sooner you learn that, the better.
>>1339974
Are you by chance a protestant?
>>1339971
I know, right? Christians who believe the bible is true? Who ever heard of anything that bizarre!
>>1339977
I'm a born again Christian. I have never met a "protestant" in my life. I suspect neither have you.
>>1339877
Monsanto's Roundup is objectively a cancer in the farming industry, but the real reason why is the legal system. If Monsanto soybeans are found in a non-Monsanto soybean field, they can sue you for theft, which is fucked up. Oh, and farmers can't save seeds. That is why it's so shitty.
Genetic modification in other areas of agriculture is usually just shortcutting the decades it would take to breed those crops to produce desired strains.
GMO opposition is usually just ignorant and have no idea how broad the "o" in GMO reaches. I've met a diabetic who was staunchly opposed to GMO's until she realized where her insulin comes from.
There is literally nothing wrong with gene editing.
>>1339942
Yes and Science is simply an attempt to accurately define the truth. Considering the fact that there is quite literally no consensus among Christian demagogues on interpretations of various aspects of scripture, it's fairly hypocritical to claim that constant redefinition of theory is a negative aspect of science. Science is quite literally a constant process of elimination
>>1339981
You are a christian not a Christian - you just have a title and no spiritual appurtenance to Church of God.
You can only be a Christian if you're baptized in Orthodox Church and have an active life in Church.
>>1339980
It's actually pretty bizarre to me, how people get extremely defensive over this stuff
>>1339989
No, it is not. Science is not a tool to determine truth.
It is a tool to hypothesize ideas that may or may not be proven false.
Huge difference.
>>1339985
For copyright infringement. Sorry. Edited that a little.
>>1339990
Sorry you believe that. You'll find out how asinine that is one day.
>>1339991
Next thing you know Buddhists will be swearing that Buddha existed!
>>1339949
>I get that you idiots don't know you're dealing with something holy.
Arbitrarily claiming holiness doesn't place your rhetorical position any higher my friend. If you genuinely mean to tell me that stories such as Noah's ark stand up under empirical scrutiny, you're seriously misguided.
>>1339971
They are ridiculous Time Cube tier cranks, apparently.
>>1340000
Equally weird and apparently your god blessed you with quads. Must be a sign
>>1339957
Except the "creation" of the world aka the formation of Earth is already a scientifically accepted hypothesis. If you're talking about the formation of the universe, it ends in conjecture and hypothesis, but we fully understand how the Earth was formed.
>>1339999
Jesus is lucky that it took only around 2000 years for your cult to show up and be finally right.
>>1339964
It's understandable that you're terrified of the concept of our own inevitability and irrelevance but that's simply a concept every adult has to understand at a certain point in life.
>>1339965
And why do you believe that God knows that?
>>1339797
>God's eyewitness account
As far as we can understand through the fog of countless editing and mistranslations
>>1339996
Except within the realm of positivism the true end goal is to define the universe's physics, which is a pretty abstract concept. I personally see that as an attempt to derive the truth, but at the same time other people may disagree with that.
>>1340022
God made sure that every translation, the exact memes and engrams were transcoded directly into the magical letters to ensure 100% data fidelity.
>>1339797
Are you referring to King James's bible? Or to the multiple prior edits which were universally accepted within Europe and Russia.
>>1339981
So are you Catholic or Orthodox?
>>1340029
Then that must mean that the scripture was incorrect from the beginning?
>>1339842
I bet you know next to nothing about either subject
>>1339842
you're reflecting talking points shoved down your throat by demagogues.
>>1340029
Well, they can't all be right can they?
>>1339842
Proofs?
>>1340054
No they are all WRONG except for mine!
Only I am rightous and Holy, no one else, NO NOT ONE, Thus sayeth the Lord and me.
>>1339847
>who the truth is
A predicate is not a person.
>>1340054
Where is eastern orthodox represented in this? As simply orthodox? I was under the assumption that Byzantine orthodox was separate from Russian orthodox.
>>1340001
It's not arbitrary at all. The bible tells the story of the earth from beginning to end, and is about 30% prophecy. That prophecy comes true 100% of the time.
Only God does that.
>>1340068
Don't avoid the question. Which denomination is right.
>>1340009
That you think the collective wisdom of mankind is a match for the God Who spoke the universe into existence should demonstrate to you just how idiotic you actually are, and how desperate you are for man's approval.
>>1340070
>That prophecy comes true 100% of the time.
Please give me examples of these prophecies, represented within the bible, which have come true.
>>1340012
I date back to 32 AD.
When did your cult church splinter off of the Roman cult church again?
>>1340017
As an adult, with children who are adults, with children of their own, your assumptions about me are as correct as your assumptions about God.
>>1340020
Are you suggesting there is something God does not know?
>>1340022
You can get it directly from Him, if you have the balls for it. He likes showing off His work. And He likes people with balls.
>>1337596
>My wife's son
L e l
>>1340069
Idk. This is just a small part of the evolutionary tree of Christianity.
>>1340025
I don't care what the goals of your useless philosophy are.
You were born dead, are dead, and if you don't get resurrected, you're going to suffer the second death.
>>1340030
You can go straight off the Hebrew if you'd like. Which is why people used to teach Greek and Hebrew in schools.
>>1340092
Meaningless fearmongering
>>1340032
I'm a born again Christian.
I don't belong to either of those cults.
>>1340070
>That prophecy comes true 100% of the time.
You know what else does that? Anybody who has an IQ over 120 who can put 2 and 2 together. Market analysts, people who predict trends, think tanks.
>>1340036
I bet the two hypothetical scientists in my example don't know anything about their own subjects.
>>1340048
I'm saying the truth.
>>1340067
All you need now is a small band of dedicated followers and some arms and you're good to go.
>>1340063
Is it a math problem?
No?
Then why are you asking for "proofs" like a waterheaded babby?
>>1340092
>be tortured for eternity
>feel immense physical pain
>somehow you are "dead"
>>1339761
>getting memed on
Wait, unless this is a Countermeme Gambit... He's good...
>>1340068
I am The Way, The Truth, and The Life; no man comes to the Father but by Me."
--Jesus of Nazareth
The truth is a person.
>>1340104
>I've read false information on Christian propaganda sites, so I therefore am more knowledgeable than professionals who've spent years being educated.
Please stop baiting me
>>1340076
There's about 350 of them about the Messiah that Jesus fulfilled.
Go to Google, and instead of searching for loli furry porn, type in messianic prophecies that Jesus fulfilled.
>>1340106
But... you're not... that's the issue here.
>>1340096
Yes, you were wrong, you are still wrong, and moreover, you are proud of being wrong.
>>1340098
Simple truth.
>>1340081
Nice try, I doubt you belong to any of the Syriac churches who today still speak a dialect of the same language Jesus spoke. More likely you're an American Evangelical and therefore one of Luther's ilk
>>1340124
Simple truth, founded in arbitrary prophecy and mythology. Epic.
>>1340099
So you're a Protestant then
>>1340100
Daniel predicted to the day the messiah's grand entrance onto the world's stage, and then at the end of that week, His execution.
To the day.
483 years later.
600 years before the fact; the trigger that started the countdown was done by Artaxerxes Longimus 150 years after Daniel was taken captive..
>>1340111
Yes.
The definition of dead is "separated from God".
You are separated from God now, so you are dead.
You will suffer the second death, and be separated from God forever.
Unless of course you change your mind and decide not to spend eternity in the dark, alone, and on fire.
>>1340104
>hypothetical scientists
I would agree. Seeing as they are YOUR imaginary scientists
>>1340117
Your inability to at least concede that the geological column was used in exactly that manner for dating fossils proves that you're disingenuous, at best.
>>1340134
Even the Jews don't believe that and they wrote the damn thing
>>1340081
Jesus is so lucky - that immediately after He was physically gone from the planet - His teachings were lost for 2000 years until you and your cult showed up just with the power of rational thinking to restore it back to pristine origins.
Not only you are scientifically illiterate but it proves you're also historically illiterate - what are you doing on humanities and history board?
>>1340139
>in the dark
>on fire
How can this happen simultaneously?
>>1340120
I'm telling you what God says. That's the truth.
God is not wrong, God is not mistaken, God is not a liar, God is not hiding things from you.
>>1340127
I date back to Abraham, really. That's about 4000 years. I am his child, as he is the father of faith, and in His Seed am I saved.
>>1340130
Quite specific, actually.
For instance, there are two Bethlehems in Israel; Micah prophesied that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem Ephratha, and that's where Jesus was born. 400 years later.
>>1340147
You do realize that every justification for your belief that god is unwavering and knows all is confirmation bias, correct? All of your mythology is founded upon itself.
>>1340133
I am a born again Christian.
I do not use words papists invent to consider themselves important.
>>1340089
>And He likes people with balls
Gaylord. Get it?
>>1340140
Yup.
And the caricature of them was absolutely based on reality about 70 years ago.
The geological column is a fraud. It does not depict millions of years of the earth's crust in layers.
It's sideways mudslides.
>>1340143
They don't believe it so much that they forbid people from talking about it, and moved Daniel out of the books of the prophets.
>>1340035
It was. That's why Catholics and Orthodox don't base their belief on scripture and scripture only.
For example one of the oldest known Latin version of NT is in Vulgata however we have several manuscripts which for whatever reasons(I assume that it's by comparisons with some older, Greek versions) contain phrasing of several verses that can be dated earlier than that and they are little bit different.
At some point those little tiny differences may change the meaning of several things in the scripture, but that's not all.
The oldest known bible on the other hand contains several books that aren't part of any canon but some oriental orthodox ones.
And then when we get to translations we're getting holy fucking shit where do I start? King James Version which many protestants use is riddled with errors that actually change the meaning of scripture, Jehova Witnesses "adapted" it and turned it into bizarroo-land as did several other denominations, what catholics use nowadays has some verses fucked up as well(for instance because modern English can't really express the slight differences between slave and servant and slave/servant allegories are everywhere in the bible) although it's much, much more accurate.
Then there is printing and boy, this caused tons of damage as well. The best "secular" example of it are old prints of Nostradamus stuff compared to newer re-prints that are based off manuscripts. Hilarity ensures. The reason why Islamic world opposed printing for centuries was because the integrity of their own holy book - Quaran - is one of the most important things there were(hence why classical arabic is still a thing), and printers had notoriously bad reputation for making errors, intentionally or not. The Catholics also opposed printing for long time until they've started printing bibles under very strict observation so there wouldn't be any errors.
>>1340144
His teachings? His teachings were 90% on the Law.
Is that what you do? You follow the Law? You're in the Old Covenant?
Do you even know when the New Covenant became effective, or what it is, or the terms of it, or the conditions to enter into it?
Anything?
>>1340146
Black fire.
Invisible fire.
Pick one.
God is light, and there's nothing of God in hell.
>>1340153
I know people like you believe that to be the case, yes.
And I know people like you are in for a very rude awakening.
I try to hasten that awakening.
The supernatural has a way of bypassing your ridiculous notions of confirmation bias.
>>1340170
Dude you're retarded
>>1340159
>>1340173
>Ridiculous notions of confirmation bias
You're dismissing the fact that your entire belief system is confirmation bias without the willingness to look at your own mythology.
>>1340174
He is, but invisible fire is real.
>>1340166
Cult.
Why do baby boomer morality cultists choose to come to an anime child pornography website to rail against academia?
>>1340146
Well because of cellular respiration you're basically constantly on fire while that's going on by some definitions of the word.
And that doesn't create visible light that you can see.
>>1340179
And you're attempting to deny me the miracles that I have observed and participated in.
>>1340185
So I'm right, he's wrong, and I'm the retarded one?
kek
>>1340196
Wrong motive.
Better question is why do people come to 4chan to seed the gospel of Jesus Christ onto a field of lava tilled by no man.
Answer is because a flower that grows in a field of lava is worth growing.
>>1340196
They think with the arrival of Trump to popular neo-nats, they can finally shove more unreasonable bullocks down everyone's throat, like the Earth being 6,000 years old.
>>1337567
Because evolution punches a massive hole in Christianity and religion in general. It doesn't completely disprove it but an explanation (backed by mountains of evidence) of how we (and other animals) came into existence from tiny simple creatures zaps a lot of claims "God did it".
That's why American Protestants cling to bible literalism and in countries where Christianity has accepted the truth of evolution Christianity is dying.
>>1340230
>>1340234
The perfect way to marry both ideas.
>>1340212
Have you seen anything on earth older than 6000 years old?
Written human history goes back 4500 years, and no more?
Oldest tree ringed tree is 4600 years old, right after the Flood would have receded?
No, you just keep thinking the herd is right, and God is wrong. See how that works out for ya.
>>1340211
I doubt you've converted even one person to your retarded cult with your months of ranting. On the contrary you've proven to be the laughingstock of this entire board even by your fellow brothers. Enjoy dying soon knowing you've accomplished nothing.
>>1340227
Evolution is garbage, junk science. No macroevolution has ever been observed, and everything that has been observed falls right in with what the bible says.
Kind begets kind, always.
>>1340239
Close to a dozen.
A dozen people snatched from the fiery grip of satan himself, to live and love and create in heaven forever.
It's worth a million of you to make one of them.
>>1340241
>"junk science"
>"macroevolution"
>"kind"
It's like you are reading straight off the pamphlet.
Roman Catholics have no problem with evolution. It's the Bible thumpers who do.
>>1340238
>Have you seen anything on earth older than 6000 years old?
Many things. Tectonic plates, the continents themselves. Antarctica, ice cores, fossils (but they were placed there by the devil I forgot), cave paintings, hand axes, primitive art.
But most of all other planets, and if you look outside, the Sun itself.
>>1340109
>i do t know how carbon-14 dating works
>i dont know that most fossils are practically rocks
>but i will pretend you are the retard
>>1340246
Whatever pamphlet you're referring to, keep reading it.
>>1340257
Exactly! Thank you!
Roman Catholics have nothing to do with God, Jesus, the bible or Christianity. Just world domination.
>>1340235
What's with Cain and Seth's super sexy wives?
>>1340261
Plates are not only not that old, but not dated; the continents are not that old and not dated; the poles froze over about 4600 years ago; ice cores show each storm, not each year that passes; fossils are mostly from the flood about 4600 years ago; cave paintings showing men and dinosaurs living together are about 4500 years old, for the most part, hand axes again not dated, again about 4600 years old, max, art, not dated, about 4600 years old, max.
Planets aren't that old. Sun's not that old.
Prove it to yourself. Find out how much mass the sun burns off every year, back that up 5 billion years, and show how any life could exist in this solar system.
Ever.
>>1340264
Yes, you're a fucking retard if you think C14 dating is done on anything over 50,000 years old, which is the limit of detectibility, and not an accurate age at all, and used only on organic samples, and not mineralized fossils, at all.
A fucking retard.
Because Americans are retarded. Literally no one thought the world was 6000 years old until modern American Evangelicals decided it was a thing.
![sexy-cavewoman-costume-3[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/U6rTOE5.jpg "sexy-cavewoman-costume-3[1].jpg")
>>1340271
They went Native.
>>1340291
To be fair pretty sure some monks in the middle ages were the ones who tried to do the backdating thing first.
>>1340276
>Plates are not only not that old, but not dated
Seeing as how they're part of the Earth, it's safe to say they are that old. Planets don't form in six days, if they did, if the physics and machinery were there for that to happen, our universe would be a much more volatile and hostile place.
>the continents are not that old and not dated
Yes they are. I know, you liked to stick your fingers in your ears during class, but this is fascinating. Did you know, around 200+ million years ago, quite a long time; the continents were joined together at one point into one super-continent called Pangea? The crust that made up Pangea still is under us today, albeit moved to the world we know today! Isn't that cool!
>fossils are mostly from the flood about 4600 years ago
Right. The Flood.
>cave paintings showing men and dinosaurs living together are about 4500 years old
No cave paintings show "men and dinosaurs" living together.
I gotta say, you're great with bait.
>hand axes again not dated, again about 4600 years old, max, art, not dated, about 4600 years old, max.
Do you have some sources you can cite for these extraordinary claims?
>Sun's not that old.
If entire suns can be formed within a day, like planets, it the physics were there to let that happen, the universe would be much more hostile. There is just no way in the universe gas can turn into a sun boiling with energy and fusion within the span of a day; likewise there would have to be volatility in suns to make them collapse in on themselves within the span of a day if that were true.
Stars take quite a long time to form, if it was even six days God took to make a sun and have the physical capacity to do so, the sun would implode and cease to exist. There is no reason God would leave evidence of the processes that fuel the Sun being far older, if the process to make the sun was in a single day.
>>1340276
>>1340291
>Literally no one thought the world was 6000 years old
Ussher was Irish.
>>1340311
Ape or man? Where do you draw the line?
Is the argument supposed to be that:
>A. God created the primal organism from which all multicellular life emerged and just sort of let things run their course
>B. God has guided the evolution of all multicellular life since the start
>C. God created all life as they are today, none of that evolution stuff
Because I'm only really seeing problems with the last. Whether or not God exists, or whether or not he just gets a kick out of cancer and Treacher Collins is another matter from the discussion of evolution vs creation.
>>1340241
Kek.
Keep telling yourself that.
>>1340279
Listen up buddy I did say c14 but lets not pretend that radiometric dating is limited to one element, alright?
Geologists use radiometric dating to determine the age of rock layers, and fossils are in turn dated by where they are in the rocks.
>>1340323
depends entirely on which kind of creationism you're talking about
the latter does exist and its the most damaging one because it requires deliberate disinformation to function
I wonder if at this point /his/ has actual creationists on it.
At the start it was only trolls and they are still the majority, no doubt, but we might be undergoing a /pol/ like transformation where the actual nutjobs are mistaking trolls for kindred spirits
>>1340376
I doubt it, at least not yet at least. How many creationists would come to a laotian card game board, let alone to a history and humanities board?
panspermia is the one true theory
come at me
>>1340367
Just look at how they view other forms of creationism. Even their textbooks on the subject say that they can't work. Notice how YECs act much more matter-of-factly than their Old-earth counterparts.
I honestly believe that creationism was created by Jews to make Christianity look bad.
I genuinely believe this.
>>1340621
Christianity was created by Jews to crash the Roman Empire and it worked.
>>1340119
>the bible proves that the bible is true
Well fuck me anon, that's convenient.
>>1340695
>Christianity was created by Jews to crash the Roman Empire
Might be the best ten word summary of the geopolitical context of Christianity, but we shouldn't ignore the parallel power crises in the final centuries of the Parthian empire either!
>>1340119
>Implying Christians haven't been Furries since the beginning
>>1340134
What about that prophechy where Daniel claimed Alexanders heirs would move down and attack Alexandria?
>>1340898
Jerusalem*
>>1340300
Assume something else is old, relate it to the earth, then both are old? Is that how you think? Wow. Hey, how about this for a theory. God did it.
Pangea existed as few as 4200 years ago; the rapid movement shows on the bottom of the ocean floors of the world.
Yes, the Flood that left sediment, sedimentary rock, layers of dried mud, all over the globe.
Many do, actually. Google cave paintings and dinosaurs. Add Peru for pottery.
I've seen your claims. Your claim that the wood handle of a million year old stone axe that did not mineralize just managed to last for a million years. It's absurd.
And every single organic sample sent through a carbon dating test shows C14. Every single one. Coal beds. Diamonds. All of them.
The universe is far more hostile than you think, obviously, as this is the only rock you can live on.
There is a way when the sun is created in a day; when God creates a sun in a day. Again, backtrack all of the trillions of tons of mass the sun ejects every year, and go back billions of years to see how big the sun is. How unlikely the planets would remain. How scorched the earth would be.
Stars do not take a long time to form.
They take God to form them. And name them. Each individually, each of different glory, and each in its own place.
Then He stretched forth the heavens with His hands, and what you see is that movement.
Those stars you think are hundreds or thousands or millions or billions of light years away?
THEY'RE GONE.
>>1340302
People don't use that example because the amount of dust falling on the moon is unknown.
>>1340305
Even the Irish sober up from time to time.
>>1340311
Oh, hell no, you have to have faith that an "artist's rendition" is your ancestor. There's no evidence linking the one to the other. They just put them in a row, and you're dumb enough to assume evolution moves left to right.
>>1340317
Handcrafted by God, or spoken into existence.
>>1340323
1. No. That's theistic evolution, and it fails hard.
2. No. Kind begets kind, always.
3. Almost. Kind begets kind, always, but robust DNA is robust.
And the limits of DNA absolutely prevent one animal from turning into a different kind of animal.
>>1340349
I tell myself the truth as much as I can. Helps to keep the brain sharp, unlike that blob of gray matter in your brain housing group that's only keeping your eyes from sinking further into your head.
>>1340361
There's no such "age test". "Age" is not a quality of matter.
So no, dipshit, you're wrong again. Nobody tests "age" because such a thing is IMPOSSIBLE.
>>1340376
Maybe you're too fucking retarded to tell the difference.
>>1340913
>They just put them in a row, and you're dumb enough to assume evolution moves left to right.
Well, if you thought that's how evolution worked and believed it, you'd be wrong.
Luckily, it doesn't work that way.
>>1340604
All three of those are garbage.
God's eyewitness account was given to Moses; Moses wrote it down; the Jews kept supernaturally good records; you can read it in your native language.
As always, you stand before God without excuse, condemned already by your lack of belief and cowardice.
>>1340376
>I wonder if at this point /his/ has actual creationists on it.
It's pretty much just this one old guy.
>>1340621
As with everything else in your life, your beliefs don't matter and facts don't care about your feelings.
>>1340880
Yes, it does, by telling the future with 100% accuracy and by being 100% accurate and precise on everything it touches.
>>1340915
Which ones are which?
>>1339842
Holy fucking shit, man. http://www.cotf.edu/ete/modules/msese/earthsysflr/ages.html
At least google.
>>1340898
Not heirs; Alexander had no heirs. The prophecy was for Alexander's successors.
Yes, that is an amazing prophecy.
Daniel 11
Verse 28
There now follow some of the most despicable acts in history: Firstly, in returning to Syria, Antiochus decides to attack Jerusalem. In 169 BC he plunders the temple, setting up a garrison there and he massacres up to 80,000 Jews and sends up to another 40,000 into captivity (slavery). More can be learned of this terrible period in Jerusalem's history by consulting 1 Maccabees 1:20-28.
Verses 29-30
But Antiochus is not yet finished with his evil and despicable behaviour, he returns to the south for a second campaign two years later but now there are major differences because Rome – not Syria – is now the truly dominant power. The Roman historian Polybius tells us much more about this period. Even a fleet of ships from Cyprus is able to give Antiochus serious problems, though these were almost certainly under Roman control. He feels really 'cut down to size' and takes out his fury by once again attacking Jerusalem! But he shows favor to those who 'forsake the holy covenant.' (NIV) – referring to apostate Jews.
Verse 31
What was 'The abomination which causes desolation'? The altar to the pagan god Zeus was set up by Antiochus Epiphanes in the very temple of God at Jerusalem in 168 BC. Interestingly, this event prefigured other 'desolations' which Jesus later prophesied in Matthew 24:15.
>>1340931
Moses wrote them down as the Hebrews told him what Yahweh had told them generations ago, then it was copied multiple times.
>>1340930
It's how they convinced you it worked.
Different size and shaped skulls in a row, left to right, and you fell for it.
They're just different sized and shaped skulls.
Like Andre the Giant's skull next to Peter Dinklich's skull would prove what, exactly? That men were shrinking?
>>1340942
The earth is 6000 years old; your chart is just one lie after the other. Which lie is which?
I honestly could not care less.
Human beings were handcrafted by God in His image, and brought to life by blowing the Holy Spirit, the Breath of Life, into Adam.
The beasts of the field were spoken into existence the same day.
>>1340958
Moses and God met face to face on Mt. Sinai for over a month.
>>1340961
If found among modern humans in the same strata, one could infer that they were anomalies of some sort, like the elephant man.
This shit is pure /x/, goddamn.
>>1340951
"How can you tell the age of a rock or to which geologic time period it belongs? One way is to look at any fossils the rock may contain. If any of the fossils are unique to one of the geologic time periods, then the rock was formed during that particular time period. Another way is to use the "What's on top?" rule. When you find layers of rocks in a cliff or hillside, younger rocks are on top of older rocks."
(Except that in many places on earth, including the Grand Canyon, the older rocks are on top.)
This is exactly what I stated above.
The rock is old because the fossil is old.
The fossil is old because the rock is old.
CIRCULAR REASONING.
>>1340905
Shouldn't the light from every star be extremely weak if all light it produces during less than a day would be stretched out on millions of light years?
Also, if all those stars are dead, why do we stars being born out there? Shouldn't space just be empty of new creations if what you say is true?
And the sun loses 1.353e20g per year.
That's about 6.80241327e-14% of its mass.
>>1340972
How about this?
How about you have no fuck what you're talking about?
>>1340961
I've never been taught that "looking at pictures of skulls" is associated with anything other than Nazism.
I understand evolution holistically, with human evolution only a very small piece of that phenomenon.
I'm much more interested in understanding life's origins in deep geological history than in attempting to define which creatures living millions of years ago count as "humans." None of them were apes, none of them were modern humans.
>>1340977
Why would it be weak? It started relatively close to us, as such things would be measured, and then stretched away from us at God speed, in all directions?
Gee, that accounts for everything. Including CBR. Including the absence of the birth of any stars. Including special relativity; how a star could be 13 billion years old at the same time the earth at the bottom of the gravity well is 6000 years old.
Gee, all of this evolutionist shit is wrong.
>>1340979
>>1340979
You are so wrong. You anger God with your blasphemies. God created the universe at 7 AM, Pacific Time, this morning. God created you in your bed with a beautiful brain full of ideas and memories, and it is beautiful because God created it.
Why can't you see the truth? Arguing about fossils and skulls is just an imaginary distraction from your true life which begins today! Don't waste it arguing over the dream of a time that never existed.
>>1340989
I am honestly not sure if you are in the creatonist camp or making fun of creatonists.
>>1340977
Now put that 2.46 x 10^24 tons of burning fuel back into the sun and tell me how hot the earth is.
>>1340974
>The age of a rock in years is called its absolute age. Geologists find absolute ages by measuring the amount of certain radioactive elements in the rock. When rocks are formed, small amounts of radioactive elements usually get included. As time passes, the "parent" radioactive elements change at a regular rate into non-radioactive "daughter" elements. Thus, the older a rock is, the larger the number of daughter elements and the smaller the number of parent elements are found in the rock.
Read the hole page.
>>1337596
>wife's won
I love this memen
My God, what a shitshow this thread is.
I'm ok with religion being discussed on /his/, but American Protestcuck crap like creationism and Jack Chick needs to get the hell out of here.
>>1340981
No, you don't. You have swallowed hook line and sinker the worst scientific hypothesis ever generated by mankind.
There was nothing living millions of years ago.
How is that not completely and utterly obvious?
Take a mating pair of ANYTHING, mate it at ANY known rate, and back that up a million years.
Hell, if humans have been here for 50,000 years there would be an INFINITE number of humans on earth.
Go find a population calculator. Use it.
>>1340923
>what is a half life
Its like you don't know what you're talking about or something.
>>1340990
Atheists have absolutely no understanding of the God they say does not exist. Your point is absurd and self-refuting.
>>1337596
KEK
U
C
K
>>1340997
You're saying God's a liar.
Good luck with that.
>>1341000
Probably because you're an idiot. Maybe you're still mostly monkey.
>>1341016
Perhaps this will be more to your liking.
>>1341004
The page is absurd; it's methods are absurd; its definitions are absurd.
The assumptions behind radiometric dating are fatal, and radiometric dating literally cannot age rocks of known age.
For instance, igneous rocks formed at the eruption of Mt. St. Helen's in 1984 were dated to be 3 MILLION YEARS OLD. You can be dumb enough to believe that magma has argon in it; I'm not.
>>1341015
Holy shit. You probably should have defined it because you just used it as a sign that it shows age.
And not rate of decay.
>>1341009
i know this is bait but any simple observation of bacteria can demonstrate the limits of exponential replication
>>1341009
I understand that every single surface of the Earth is covered in the remnants of living organisms. Do you know that the dirt you are standing above would not exist if it weren't for the billions of generations of things that have lived and died on the Earth?
Life has changed the entire geological history of the Earth. The historical existence of life on Earth is what makes it look so different from all the other explored planets today.
>>1341024
No clue how you cannot see that the middle demeans all the others.
>>1341030
Doubt it. You're talking about something being contained, not something organically reproducing in the wild.
>>1341019
God has never once lied to me. Lies are by definition the work of the devil.
>>1341031
What a stupid fucking thing to say. Seriously.
>>1341038
And yet, you just posited that God lied to Moses about how and when He created the earth.
And you're a fucking loony tune.
>>1341027
You did not, in any way, refute my argument. You just called me dumb, but did not provide any source nor any argument. By this way I can say "hurr, man, really? Did you say this? How can be you so stupid? Hahahahah, man" yet, you claimed things but not an argument.
>>1341033
Then you can't see the true beauty of His glorious creation. Praise be to Yahweh and His Son, our Messiah, Yeshua!
>>1341039
Do you know anything about biology? What he said was true.
>>1341040
Moses quite obviously didn't exist. God created life, humanity, the Earth, the Universe, and everything else at 7 AM Pacific Time this morning.
That book you are reading is the one lying to you.
>>1341029
Amount of decay over time = age
you mental gymnast
>>1341046
You didn't make an argument. You pointed me to what looks like a 5th grade online special ed site for geology.
It literally said this rock is x old due to this fossil, and this fossil is x old due to this rock.
Your argument was refuted before you entered the thread; such circular reasoning is absurd.
And saying that 6 million years of radioactive decay takes literally 6 million years is also absurd. Just as absurd as saying light from a star 10,000,000 light years away took 10,000,000 years to reach earth.
It's all fucking absurdities.
>>1341048
Anyone ashamed of the bible, or even of Ken Ham, barring his novel tax procedures, is no friend of mine.
The gospel rests upon the authority of the bible; start dropping books out of the bible to appease the world, and you make an enemy of God.
>>1341037
"the wild" is far more dangerous and competitive than some agar plate
it's not some garden of eden shit where you can just fuck and eat fruit all day
>>1341050
That life turns into dust?
In a conversation about where life started?
Fucking off topic and retarded.
>>1341051
He quite obviously did.
You'll see him, one day. Preaching in Jerusalem.
Mark your calendar.
>>1341067
The Protestants did so centuries ago. Why is this any different?
>>1341062
>Just as absurd as saying light from a star 10,000,000 light years away took 10,000,000 years to reach earth.
Hi, I used to be an astrophysicist. I know how long it took the light from a given star to reach the Earth because I can measure, essentially, the amount of space the light traveled through, and because I know how fast light travels through space.
There is no systematic uncertainty or keystone assumption in this physical observation.
>>1341061
No, that's just a fucking assumption.
Stop making idiotic fucking assumptions; you're retarding scientific progress.
>>1341068
Ever seen Nigeria?
They have a billion people there.
