Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation (2)

[Kylie]

The technical term is "embedded."

You can make up whatever words you want, that doesn't explain the inherent contradictions that are required to accept it.

Not if God makes it.

Then you can't eliminate Last Thursdayism.

Thanks for the compliment.

Technically, it was two "compliments."

And they would be existentially wrong, but physically right, wouldn't they?

Or maybe my claim that I made it brand new was just a load of bull.

Funny how all your challenges about this start with you doing the very thing you are trying to prove.

Yup -- so get it sold before it falls apart tomorrow.

Just let them know it's old though.

But it's not old. Making it look old is a lie.

That's neat.

Got anything in mind?

You're the one claiming it's real, you tell me.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

But it's not old. Making it look old is a lie.

You're the one claiming it's real, you tell me.

It's a ridiculous scam - use flim-flam to impress some people that don't know anything about cars, sell them an old jalopy as new, and when people that do know about cars start asking questions, the unembarrassed(?) buyers defend the scammer by saying the ageing was obviously deliberate - the faded, scratched paintwork, the rusty wheel arches, the black oil, the worn bearings, the leaky gaskets, broken shocks, the brittle plastic, the 4 billion miles on the odometer - all put there on purpose - because... reasons.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's a ridiculous scam - use flim-flam to impress some people that don't know anything about cars, sell them an old jalopy as new, and when people that do know about cars start asking questions, the unembarrassed(?) buyers defend the scammer by saying the ageing was obviously deliberate - the faded, scratched paintwork, the rusty wheel arches, the black oil, the worn bearings, the leaky gaskets, broken shocks, the brittle plastic, the 4 billion miles on the odometer - all put there on purpose - because... reasons.

Do you know the difference between EMBEDDED AGE CREATION and OMPHALOS CREATION?

Are you implying that on the day Adam & Eve were created, Adam had "faded, scratched paintwork, rusty wheel arches, black oil, worn bearings, leaky gaskets, broken shocks, brittle plastic, 4 billion miles on the odometer - all put there on purpose"?

 

[Kylie]

Do you know the difference between EMBEDDED AGE CREATION and OMPHALOS CREATION?

Are you implying that on the day Adam & Eve were created, Adam had "faded, scratched paintwork, rusty wheel arches, black oil, worn bearings, leaky gaskets, broken shocks, brittle plastic, 4 billion miles on the odometer - all put there on purpose?

You've oft stated that Adam and Eve didn't have such things - why, you even claim that they didn't have belly buttons.

But the world certainly had this stuff.

 

[AV1611VET]

You've oft stated that Adam and Eve didn't have such things - why, you even claim that they didn't have belly buttons.

It's nice to see you finally say this.

But the world certainly had this stuff.

What the world sees is what came AFTER the Fall, with most of what they see having come after the Flood.

 

[Kylie]

It's nice to see you finally say this.

Which is a weird mix of embedded age and not-embedded age, isn't it? You claim they have all the signs of a history since they have bodies that would appear to have gone through puberty, yet you claim that they lack one of the things that would count as a sign of that history.

What the world sees is what came AFTER the Fall, with most of what they see having come after the Flood.

If you can explain everything with "Flooddidit," then I guess your embedded age idea can take a hike.

 

[AV1611VET]

Which is a weird mix of embedded age and not-embedded age, isn't it? You claim they have all the signs of a history since they have bodies that would appear to have gone through puberty, yet you claim that they lack one of the things that would count as a sign of that history.

Wow ... just wow.

And here I thought you were just starting to understand.

Have you seen my thread where I ask about a man named "Adam" who is thirty years old, but has no tooth decay -- not even any pit or fissure cavities?

And why would I claim they "have all the signs of a history," when I define EAC as: MATURITY WITHOUT HISTORY?

Mamma mia.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you can explain everything with "Flooddidit," then I guess your embedded age idea can take a hike.

But I don't explain everything with "Flooddidit," do I?

In fact, I've stated many times that, under no circumstances whatsoever, should a person discussing the Creation Week stray outside of Genesis 1 & 2, or the conversation is over; since it will get buried in a list of questions about the Fall, the Flood, and anything and everything BUT what happened in those two chapters.

 

[Kylie]

Wow ... just wow.

And here I thought you were just starting to understand.

Have you seen my thread where I ask about a man named "Adam" who is thirty years old, but has no tooth decay -- not even any pit or fissure cavities?

And why would I claim they "have all the signs of a history," when I define EAC as: MATURITY WITHOUT HISTORY?

Mamma mia.

If embedded age creation is maturity WITHOUT history, why does the Earth have geological features that speak of a history of millions of years?

 

[Kylie]

But I don't explain everything with "Flooddidit," do I?

In fact, I've stated many times that, under no circumstances whatsoever, should a person discussing the Creation Week stray outside of Genesis 1 & 2, or the conversation is over; since it will get buried in a list of questions about the Fall, the Flood, and anything and everything BUT what happened in those two chapters.

You explain everything we see in the present with it.

 

[AV1611VET]

If embedded age creation is maturity WITHOUT history, why does the Earth have geological features that speak of a history of millions of years?

I've already explained that many times, using a sheet of paper folded accordion style.

I should just start QVing you to my previous posts, instead of repeating myself ad nauseum.

I suspect at times you're trying to catch me contradicting myself.

 

[Astrophile]

It's nice to see you finally say this.

What the world sees is what came AFTER the Fall, with most of what they see having come after the Flood.

Did the impact craters on the Moon, Mars and Mercury come after the Fall, or after the Flood? Did planetary nebulae and white dwarf stars come after the Fall? Did star clusters with red giant stars and RR Lyrae stars come after the Fall? Did Population II stars with less than a thousandth of the Sun's abundance of heavy elements come after the Fall?

 

[AV1611VET]

Did the impact craters on the Moon, Mars and Mercury come after the Fall, or after the Flood? Did planetary nebulae and white dwarf stars come after the Fall? Did star clusters with red giant stars and RR Lyrae stars come after the Fall? Did Population II stars with less than a thousandth of the Sun's abundance of heavy elements come after the Fall?

Does it matter?

What's the key word here in "after the Fall" and "after the Flood"?

I say the key word is "after".

What say you?

 

[Kylie]

I've already explained that many times, using a sheet of paper folded accordion style.

I should just start QVing you to my previous posts, instead of repeating myself ad nauseum.

I suspect at times you're trying to catch me contradicting myself.

I don't remember ever seeing such a post...

 

[AV1611VET]

I don't remember ever seeing such a post...

Logic: if apes connected to humans, humans can "reconnect" to humans - what is the good of that?

In regard to the theory of evolution .... the major pillar of it is TIME. Time according to Einstein and others is an illusion ... and it is. Without planet earth how is time calculated? Does it even exist? UNKNOWN What did Albert Einstein say about time? In the Special Theory of...

www.christianforums.com

Creationist thoughts on dinosaurs?

No. Stop it. Stop. Youll at least have to spray me with the water bottle to dissuade me.

www.christianforums.com

Geological Layers do not represent fewer years than we conclude

Before I accidentally derailed the thread "Creationist thoughts on dinosaurs?" a concept was brought up about the age and time represented by geological layers. I made a statement of facts about dinosaurs: Dinosaurs were structured differently to modern animals. Dinosaurs came in sizes from...

www.christianforums.com

Proving that Links Exist

I am not suggesting you find a link between dinosaurs and man. As I am sure you will state we are descended from mammals not a direct descendent of Dinasours. What I am stating is you need to give me the evidence. I am yet to see it. If you are so sure you can beat me you had better get your...

www.christianforums.com

 

[Kylie]

Logic: if apes connected to humans, humans can "reconnect" to humans - what is the good of that?

In regard to the theory of evolution .... the major pillar of it is TIME. Time according to Einstein and others is an illusion ... and it is. Without planet earth how is time calculated? Does it even exist? UNKNOWN What did Albert Einstein say about time? In the Special Theory of...

www.christianforums.com

Creationist thoughts on dinosaurs?

No. Stop it. Stop. Youll at least have to spray me with the water bottle to dissuade me.

www.christianforums.com

Geological Layers do not represent fewer years than we conclude

Before I accidentally derailed the thread "Creationist thoughts on dinosaurs?" a concept was brought up about the age and time represented by geological layers. I made a statement of facts about dinosaurs: Dinosaurs were structured differently to modern animals. Dinosaurs came in sizes from...

www.christianforums.com

Proving that Links Exist

I am not suggesting you find a link between dinosaurs and man. As I am sure you will state we are descended from mammals not a direct descendent of Dinasours. What I am stating is you need to give me the evidence. I am yet to see it. If you are so sure you can beat me you had better get your...

www.christianforums.com

Ah, so you just assume that scientists are making stuff up.

Of course, they aren't. They have plenty of evidence for their claims. Radiometric dating, for example. But that tells you something you disagree with, so it can take a hike, am I right?

 

[AV1611VET]

Ah, so you just assume that scientists are making stuff up.

Of course, they aren't. They have plenty of evidence for their claims. Radiometric dating, for example. But that tells you something you disagree with, so it can take a hike, am I right?

Here's a point I made to Estrid last month.

Do you mind commenting on it?

"That's because science stretches the timeline from 6000 to 13,700,000,000, then claims things didn't exist together.
It would be like stretching your street from 1 mile to 2.3 million miles, then claiming you don't have any neighbors."

 

[Kylie]

Here's a point I made to Estrid last month.

Do you mind commenting on it?

"That's because science stretches the timeline from 6000 to 13,700,000,000, then claims things didn't exist together.
It would be like stretching your street from 1 mile to 2.3 million miles, then claiming you don't have any neighbors."

Your analogy is flawed. A neighbour is simply the closest house to you, regardless of how far away it is. But you started off by saying that it's analogous to two species that existed AT THE SAMEA TIME.

So perhaps a better analogy would be to say it would be like having someone standing a short distance away from you and putting their hand on your shoulder, and then stretching that short distance to 2.3 million miles and claiming no one has their hand on your shoulder.

And again, as usual, you completely ignore all the evidence the scientists have for making the claim.

Despite what you constantly imply, scientists do not just make up whatever they feel like in an effort to disprove the Bible.

 

[AV1611VET]

Your analogy is flawed. A neighbour is simply the closest house to you, regardless of how far away it is. But you started off by saying that it's analogous to two species that existed AT THE SAMEA TIME.

So perhaps a better analogy would be to say it would be like having someone standing a short distance away from you and putting their hand on your shoulder, and then stretching that short distance to 2.3 million miles and claiming no one has their hand on your shoulder.

And again, as usual, you completely ignore all the evidence the scientists have for making the claim.

Despite what you constantly imply, scientists do not just make up whatever they feel like in an effort to disprove the Bible.

Thank you for commenting.

 

[Kylie]

Thank you for commenting.

You have no rebuttal?