Is YEC science? Is is even really a theory?

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Its not nonsensical - dismissing or marginalizing History (recorded) is your way of ignoring the significance of it. There is nothing more important to our understanding of the past than recorded history. The study of which is called History. I think its safe to say that 99% of every detail we know about our past is because of History (recorded).
Its not just the start of recorded history - its the start of 99% (don't take my number literally - you get my point) of every detail of our past.

It is nonsensical, since you're arbitrarily trying to split history between history and History (recorded history), which is a pointless and nonsensical distinction because you want your view of YEC and your near idolatrous view of the Bible to be 100% correct, when the Bible is clearly not to be taken as a history text.

Explain the fact of the settlement of Dolní Věstonice, a Paleolithic settlement which includes art and engravings, and is dated to have be lived in between 27,000 and 20,000 BC, with your view of history.

 

[Astrid]

I don't generally don't give my opinion of what the Bible says...I simply state what the Bible says.

Cute, but it's always opinions about what
the meaning is.

 

[AV1611VET]

IF a person derived his math by reading the Bible ...

And who would do such a thing?

Unless that person is trying to discredit the Bible?

Like you are.

 

[Platte]

This is so freaking simple.
IF a person derived his math by
reading the Bible he would see that pi is 3.


Same as if he got his geology and history there,
checked no outside sources, he'd think there really
had been a flood.
Just believe what the bible says, it's right there.

That's silly

 

[Platte]

Cute, but it's always opinions about what
the meaning is.

Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." So me saying God created the earth is not opinion or giving you a meaning. Can we even agree on that? (that I'm not giving an opinion in this example)

 

[Platte]

It is nonsensical, since you're arbitrarily trying to split history between history and History (recorded history), which is a pointless and nonsensical distinction because you want your view of YEC and your near idolatrous view of the Bible to be 100% correct, when the Bible is clearly not to be taken as a history text.

Explain the fact of the settlement of Dolní Věstonice, a Paleolithic settlement which includes art and engravings, and is dated to have be lived in between 27,000 and 20,000 BC, with your view of history.

Huh? I know you know better...the distinction between history and History is EXTREME and very significant. Far from arbitrarily splitting....Academia has split the 2 even. They don't even call it history - they call it prehistory.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Huh? I know you know better...the distinction between history and History is EXTREME and very significant. Far from arbitrarily splitting....Academia has split the 2 even.

Explain the fact of the settlement of Dolní Věstonice, a Paleolithic settlement which includes art and engravings, and is dated to have be lived in between 27,000 and 20,000 BC, with your view of history.

 

[Gene2memE]

Cave art for at least 60,000 years - where do you get that?

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap7778

"...Hoffmann et al. used uranium-thorium dating of carbonate crusts to show that cave paintings from three different sites in Spain must be older than 64,000 years. These paintings are the oldest dated cave paintings in the world...."

Human created art is probably older than that:

An abstract drawing from the 73,000-year-old levels at Blombos Cave, South Africa - Nature

A silcrete flake with a 73,000-year-old cross-hatched ochre drawing, from Blombos Cave, South Africa, demonstrates that early Homo sapiens used a range of media and techniques to produce graphic representations.

www.nature.com

"....Here we report a cross-hatched pattern drawn with an ochre crayon on a ground silcrete flake recovered from approximately 73,000-year-old Middle Stone Age levels at Blombos Cave, South Africa. Our microscopic and chemical analyses of the pattern confirm that red ochre pigment was intentionally applied to the flake with an ochre crayon...."

If those don't satisfy you, there are plenty of other examples of human art in the 30,0000 to 40,000 year old range:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abd4648

."...This image from Leang Bulu’ Sipong 4 in the limestone karsts of Maros-Pangkep, South Sulawesi, was created at least 43,900 years ago (43.9 ka) based on Uranium-series dating. Here, we report the Uranium-series dating of two figurative cave paintings of Sulawesi warty pigs recently discovered in the same karst area. The oldest, with a minimum age of 45.5 ka, is from Leang Tedongnge. The second image, from Leang Balangajia 1, dates to at least 32 ka....."

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1219957

"...Pike et al. .... have now obtained U-series dates on the calcite crusts that formed over the art from 11 caves in northwestern Spain. The ages from three caves are older than 35,000 years ago, and one dates to nearly 41,000 years ago. The earliest art used primarily red and was relatively formless; animal depictions appeared later...."

Some Evidence of a Date of First Humans to Arrive in Brazil

A calcite formation was found on a rockwall painting at Toca da Bastiana rockshelter at Serra da Capivara National Park, Piaui, Brazil. Thermoluminesc…

www.sciencedirect.com

A calcite formation was found on a rockwall painting at Toca da Bastiana rockshelter at Serra da Capivara National Park, Piaui, Brazil. Thermoluminescence and EPR dating of this calcite gave an age of 35 to 43 ka, indicating that humans lived there prior to 35 ka ago...."

 

[Astrid]

Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." So me saying God created the earth is not opinion or giving you a meaning. Can we even agree on that? (that I'm not giving an opinion in this example)

No opinion as to whether it is
an accurate account or pure fantasy?

That's silly

What is? Trying to get meaningful info
from the Bible? Believing the flood story?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

In what way(s) do you find it "significant"?

From our pov here in the land of the
celestials, it could hardly have less
significance.

The way(s) in which I find it "significant"? That's only something we each decide for ourselves, and we do so only if we have interests in Philosophy, World History (as opposed to the sole study of rock and things---which is great and all and interesting to me, geologically speaking) and Spiritual Interests relevant to surviving physical death.

If we have none of these combined interests, then the Bible probably won't have any meaning for us, and we'll probably ignore any historical value it can have as well.

You might be surprised, for from the pov of many folks in the land of the RED, WHITE and BLUE, it has little real or lasting significance either.

...................................................... For me, though, JESUS ROCKS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

In what way(s) do you find it "significant"?

From our pov here in the land of the
celestials, it could hardly have less
significance.

... and while I'm at it, I'm always open to chatting about the Tao Te Ching if the Bible doesn't float your boat.

It's awesome too, just in a different way.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Cute, but it's always opinions about what
the meaning is.

Yeah, but that's where the Study of Hermeneutics comes in; it makes the difference for a lot of things, like the difference between Menshiviks, the Bolsheviks, and the Social Revolutionaries. Of course, I think they were all wrong, but who knows who had the most "faithful" reading of their source material?

And then there's Hermeneutics in archaeology. That's a hoot, too!

 

[Astrid]

Yeah, but that's where the Study of Hermeneutics comes in; it makes the difference for a lot of things, like the difference between Menshiviks, the Bolsheviks, and the Social Revolutionaries. Of course, I think they were all wrong, but who knows who had the most "faithful" reading of their source material?

And then there's Hermeneutics in archaeology. That's a hoot, too!

You find many things to be groovy that
are dull as ditchwater to me.
But I've a touch o need myself so I get it.

 

[Astrid]

... and while I'm at it, I'm always open to chatting about the Tao Te Ching if the Bible doesn't float your boat.

It's awesome too, just in a different way.

I just don't do mystical- mystical

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You find many things to be groovy that
are dull as ditchwater to me.
But I've a touch o need myself so I get it.

I used to think it was all ditchwater too. That was before I became a Christian. But go figure.

 

[sjastro]

It's possible the original Australians were using watercraft at least 120,000 years ago!!!

Further to the possible presence of human occupation of Australia 120,000 years ago, scientists must consider seagulls as human imposters amongst other points in this interesting TEDx talk.

​

 

[Shemjaza]

Sure. That is referring to a time post flood. The Bible makes no mention as to language variety pre flood - which certainly could have and likely did exists

Ignoring that ancient written languages are related to other languages, rather then completely unintelligible miraculous ones as described after Genesis 11.

But it does create problems is that archaeological evidence should be impossible because it was destroyed by a world wide flood.

 

[AV1611VET]

But it does create problems is that archaeological evidence should be impossible because it was destroyed by a world wide flood.

Maybe it is, and they just don't know it?

 

[Frank Robert]

What you call "bias" we call "accuracy."

See:

Belief Bias: When People Rely on Beliefs Rather Than Logic​

 

[2PhiloVoid]

See:

Belief Bias: When People Rely on Beliefs Rather Than Logic​

Logic doesn't guarantee much of anything, especially where the past and the act of writing history about it is concerned.