My New Apple Challenge

[Subduction Zone]

I'm sure any creation model would is 'total garbage' to some, don't you?

We are equal opportunity scoffers. Any superstitious account of the beginning of the world is laughed at if no evidence is provide to support it. So that would include that of the Hindu, Ancient Greeks, Norse and thousands of others. Some of them make interesting bedtime reading, but that is about it.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm sure any creation model would is 'total garbage' to some, don't you?

Without evidence, all you have is a cute little story.

Hmmm ... one says 'total garbage,' one says 'cute.'

I guess that old saying is true: One man's junk is another man's treasure, eh?

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm sure any creation model would is 'total garbage' to some, don't you?

Any superstitious account of the beginning of the world is laughed at if no evidence is provide to support it.

The sanitary engineers must get a charge out of passing your house then, eh?

Just to hear the laughter.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Hmmm ... one says 'total garbage,' one says 'cute.'

I guess that old saying is true: One man's junk is another man's treasure, eh?

Depends if the treasure is fool's gold or not.

 

[Elendur]

Hmmm ... one says 'total garbage,' one says 'cute.'

I guess that old saying is true: One man's junk is another man's treasure, eh?

You've set up for this yourself:

Why certainly, have you heard of the bible?

Edit: Just remembered, maybe that was redundant since part of the bible was included in the previous part. But meh, I'll leave it.
(Was referring to the entire bible)

Edit again: I need to sleep

 

[Subduction Zone]

The sanitary engineers must get a charge out of passing your house then, eh?

Just to hear the laughter.

This is supposed to mean something? You reject over 99% of the same nonsense that I do. I don't think a 1% difference in the amount of garbage rejected would affect the "sanitation engineers" very much.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

My New Apple Challenge

I create two apples ex nihilo. I create one with two months of embedded age and the other with none. They are both fully mature and ripe. They are both unblemished and perfect looking... and identical. They both feel, smell and taste the same. Now.... can you tell me which one has the embedded age and which does not? You cannot use any instruments to determine age... just your senses.

What happened to the Old Apple Challenge or was there one?


.

 

[AV1611VET]

My New Apple Challenge

What happened to the Old Apple Challenge or was there one?


.

Here's the old one: 1

Here's My Apple Challenge II: 1

Here's My Apple Challenge III: 1

And here's My Apple Challenge IV: 1

 

[Split Rock]

Here's the old one: 1

Here's My Apple Challenge II: 1

Here's My Apple Challenge III: 1

And here's My Apple Challenge IV: 1

And we still don't know what good it does to "embed" age into anything.

 

[AV1611VET]

And we still don't know what good it does to "embed" age into anything.

First of all, you're talking as if it is still going on -- and it isn't.

Second of all, embedded age is "maturity without history." Are you seriously telling me you don't know what good it does to give something maturity?

When asked to define "maturity," I defined it as "possessing the qualities needed to perform what was expected."

Had Thalidomide been "mature" before it hit the shelves, history would be different now.

 

[PsychoSarah]

First of all, you're talking as if it is still going on -- and it isn't.

Second of all, embedded age is "maturity without history." Are you seriously telling me you don't know what good it does to give something maturity?

When asked to define "maturity," I defined it as "possessing the qualities needed to perform what was expected."

Had Thalidomide been "mature" before it hit the shelves, history would be different now.

There are pros and cons to starting off with things as "older". A pro is that you can immediately have something which will be the easiest and most efficient to use, the con is that it will wear away and become useless faster. However, while embedded age might make sense for something like the sun, it has no benefit for the earth itself.

 

[AV1611VET]

However, while embedded age might make sense for something like the sun, it has no benefit for the earth itself.

From Adam Clarke's commentary:

It appears that God created every thing, not only perfect as it respects its nature, but also in a state of maturity, so that every vegetable production appeared at once in full growth; and this was necessary that man, when he came into being, might find every thing ready for his use.

 

[PsychoSarah]

That doesn't require embedded age, the world wouldn't have to appear billions of years old for humans to live on it, at most only a few million years.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That doesn't require embedded age, the world wouldn't have to appear billions of years old for humans to live on it, at most only a few million years.

Would make for a good thread

http://www.christianforums.com/t7347875-44/
"Embedded Age" and Why it's Wrong

*snipped for brevity"

"Embedded age" is a theological belief in how God created the earth. Just as God created all of the plants, animals and humans in a state of maturity, he created the earth with "embedded age." This allows them to believe the earth is only around 6,000 years old yet shows signs that it is 4.5 billion.

Embedded age theology is indistinguishable from Omphalos:.............................


If followed to the logical conclusion, any fossils found in rock older than 6,000 years belonged to animals that never existed!

This is why "embedded age" is a crock. It is impossible to have an "embedded age" for a planet without the appearance of a history... and that would make God a liar.

.

 

[AV1611VET]

That doesn't require embedded age, the world wouldn't have to appear billions of years old for humans to live on it, at most only a few million years.

Then are you agreeing with juvenissun here:

I am very sick of this misconception. So, this thread serves as a vent for my anger of people's ignorance. Yes, it includes YOU!

If the earth is not 6000 years old, nor 10,000 years old, nor 50,000 years old, could the earth still be a young earth?

If the earth is 2 million years old, is it a young earth?

If the earth is 60 million years old, is it still a young earth?

If you think the earth must be 4500 m.y. old, then why do you use the 6000 years number as the argument to against the young earth? Why not use 45 m.y. years in your argument?

If you can not make a good argument, then, please DON'T.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I don't agree really with him, seeing as the world dates as being billions of years old, meaning that if age were embedded, it is pointlessly so.

 

[AV1611VET]

I don't agree really with him, seeing as the world dates as being billions of years old, meaning that if age were embedded, it is pointlessly so.

I'm sure God has a reason for creating things as old as they are.

Luke 5:37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I'm sure God has a reason for creating things as old as they are.

Luke 5:37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.

Don't think god would do things just on a whim?

 

[AV1611VET]

Don't think god would do things just on a whim?

God ≠ Loki

 

[PsychoSarah]

God ≠ Loki

Loki = evil destroyer trickster. Doesn't mean that the Christian ideal of god can't do stuff on a whim.