Another thing I don't understand about the creationist position...

[dlamberth]

And it’s a lie.

And than there's Yellowstone. The Yellowstone hot spot can be traced back to the Oregon/Nevada border some 17 million years ago. It's taken that long for the continent to move over the hot spot as it burned it's way through the earth to it's present location. That movement is one of the ways that the North American Plate has been tracked over time.

More lies?

Just how long has the Yellowstone Hotspot been around? | U.S. Geological Survey

 

[Astrid]

I don’t have an argument that needs to be won. I have a truth that needs to be proclaimed.

You choose to believe you do.
Claiming belief as fact is inherently
dishonest.
And it's preaching, not discussion or
debate, it has standing in the
markeplace of ideas.

It's a conversation killer, a thought
killer.
Maybe you are in the wrong place.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Not to mention Andromeda, which can be seen by the naked eye, is 2.5 million light years away.

 

[Hammster]

Geochemistry is a lie? do tell.

[edit to fix punctuation for clarity]

It obviously produces false data.

 

[Hammster]

And than there's Yellowstone. The Yellowstone hot spot can be traced back to the Oregon/Nevada border some 17 million years ago. It's taken that long for the continent to move over the hot spot as it burned it's way through the earth to it's present location. That movement is one of the ways that the North American Plate has been tracked over time.

More lies?

Just how long has the Yellowstone Hotspot been around? | U.S. Geological Survey

It wasn’t 17 million years ago.

 

[Hammster]

You choose to believe you do.
Claiming belief as fact is inherently
dishonest.
And it's preaching, not discussion or
debate, it has standing in the
markeplace of ideas.

It's a conversation killer, a thought
killer.
Maybe you are in the wrong place.

And yet, here you are conversing.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It obviously produces false data.

And you base this evaluation of 'obviousness" based on what data set?

 

[Hammster]

And you base this evaluation of 'obviousness" based on what data set?

Genesis 1:1 and following.

 

[Astrid]

And yet, here you are conversing.

I won't make that mistake again,
but you will persist in yours.

 

[Hammster]

I won't make that mistake again,
but you will persist in yours.

I’m not making a mistake.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Genesis 1:1 and following.

That is not scientific data. Bible verses are not used to date rocks.

 

[Hammster]

That is not scientific data. Bible verses are not used to date rocks.

They really don’t need dating.

 

[dlamberth]

It wasn’t 17 million years ago.

Than when?
How do you explain the movement of the Hot Spot from Oregon to where it lies now?

 

[dlamberth]

They really don’t need dating.

I don't understand the fear of what the Earth itself can show us about itself.

 

[Astrid]

I don't understand the fear of what the Earth itself can show us about itself.

Could shatter someone's myth of
their personal infallibility.

 

[kiwimac]

It’s not millions of years old.

Yes, yes it is.

 

[kiwimac]

And it’s a lie.

Prove it!

 

[kiwimac]

Genesis 1:1 and following.

The first two chapters are not about how but why. The universe is a loving act of creation by a caring God who is interested in each person. The Bible is not a science text.

 

[Hammster]

Prove it!

Genesis 1:1 and following.

 

[Hammster]

The first two chapters are not about how but why. The universe is a loving act of creation by a caring God who is interested in each person. The Bible is not a science text.

What about Exodus 20?