Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation (2)

[AV1611VET]

This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created.
The old thread automatically closed is here: "Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation"

 

[Hammster]

There are man's standards, and there are standard's men say are god's.

That's quite a distinction you failed to mention.

For sake of argument, I'll concede the point. But there are still at least two standards.

 

[HitchSlap]

For sake of argument, I'll concede the point. But there are still at least two standards.

Allegedly.

 

[Hammster]

Allegedly.

One of our allegedly's is correct.

 

[RickG]

But there are still at least two standards.

As there are with turkeys. Domesticated turkeys do not fly, but wild turkeys can and do fly, as any turkey hunter can tell you.

 

[Hammster]

As there are with turkeys. Domesticated turkeys do not fly, but wild turkeys can and do fly, as any turkey hunter can tell you.

That was lost on Mr. Carlson, though.

 

[RickG]

Only when it contradicts scripture. Other than that, no.

Like in Genesis 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Which was before the sun. Surely you can see a problem with that.

 

[AV1611VET]

Like in Genesis 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Which was before the sun. Surely you can see a problem with that.

It's only a problem for evolutionists. For those who believe in miracles, there's no problem at all.

QV please: Creation as a Miracle.

 

[Hammster]

Like in Genesis 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Which was before the sun. Surely you can see a problem with that.

No, for two reasons. One, there was light. Two, even if there wasn't light, it was only for a day.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, for two reasons. One, there was light. Two, even if there wasn't light, it was only for a day.

God can maintain life, where nature would take it; such as in the burning bush, or Daniel's three friends in the furnace.

 

[RickG]

It's only a problem for evolutionists. For those who believe in miracles, there's no problem at all.

QV please: Creation as a Miracle.

AV, this has nothing to do with evolution. Plants cannot survive without the sun. Without the sun Earth's temperature would be -18 C.

 

[AV1611VET]

Without the sun Earth's temperature would be -18 C.

It's -18C in the hollow of God's hand, is it?

Isaiah 40:12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance?

 

[gaara4158]

AV, this has nothing to do with evolution. Plants cannot survive without the sun. Without the sun Earth's temperature would be -18 C.

Plants can do whatever they please with the help of God's magick.

 

[RickG]

It's -18C in the hollow of God's hand, is it?

Isaiah 40:12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance?

Stefan-Boltzmann law (Black Body Temperature). It is one of the first concepts taught in Climatology and an important integral in Earth's Energy Budget. I think meteorologist get a taste of it as well. If not they should. I know Michael Oard hasn't a clue what it is, he must have cut class that day.

 

[Hammster]

Stefan-Boltzmann law (Black Body Temperature). It is one of the first concepts taught in Climatology and an important integral in Earth's Energy Budget. I think meteorologist get a taste of it as well. If not they should. I know Michael Oard hasn't a clue what it is, he must have cut class that day.

Since you didn't address my response, we'll just move on.

What's the relevance of this?

 

[RickG]

Since you didn't address my response, we'll just move on.

What's the relevance of this?

So if you don't agree with my response you view it as not responding at all, cute.

Since this is a science forum in the CF, why don't you do something unique and actually discuss science.

 

[Hammster]

So if you don't agree with my response you view it as not responding at all, cute.

Since this is a science forum in the CF, why don't you do something unique and actually discuss science.

I guess it's possible I missed it, but you asked a question, I responded, and them you started interacting with AV. Where did you respond to my answer?

 

[RickG]

No, for two reasons. One, there was light. Two, even if there wasn't light, it was only for a day.

If this the the post you say I did not respond, you are correct. I missed it and I apologize.

So, on with the response.

Yes, according to Gen: 1:1 there was light on the first day. So, there resides another contradiction. Light without a source, not even star light. Genesis 1 and science do not agree, that is a fact. We do know when the Earth, Sun, and Moon were formed approximately, that is a fact based on physical evidence whether you are willing to accept it or not. If you have another scientific explanation, please render it with citations. In other words, demonstrate with scientific evidence that the earth is not 4.54 billion years old.

 

[Hammster]

If this the the post you say I did not respond, you are correct. I missed it and I apologize.

So, on with the response.

Yes, according to Gen: 1:1 there was light on the first day. So, there resides another contradiction. Light without a source, not even star light. Genesis 1 and science do not agree, that is a fact. We do know when the Earth, Sun, and Moon were formed approximately, that is a fact based on physical evidence whether you are willing to accept it or not. If you have another scientific explanation, please render it with citations. In other words, demonstrate with scientific evidence that the earth is not 4.54 billion years old.

I assume by your icon that you really are a Christian.

Do you at least believe the bible whee it says this?:

Night will no longer exist, and people will not need lamplight or sunlight, because the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign forever and ever. (Revelation 22:5 HCSB)

 

[CabVet]

I assume by your icon that you really are a Christian.

Do you at least believe the bible whee it says this?:

Night will no longer exist, and people will not need lamplight or sunlight, because the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign forever and ever. (Revelation 22:5 HCSB)

Wouldn't it be nice if you answered his question before asking another?