• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

6000 years?

dhiannian

Active Member
Jan 10, 2005
252
9
✟447.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Douglaangu v2.0 said:
I'm not the one making the claim there cheif.
YOU claimed that text books claim there is no god.
Why can't you show me a text book that explicity states what you say they do? Surely it should be easy to.
Why should I have to prove you wrong before you've provided any evidence for your case?




Handwaving and rhetoric?
Unless of course you can show me a scientific paper that you've had published in a respected journal that reveals a fraud.

We don't need the words saying the evolutionists say there is no God, they are fervently working to prove there isnt one,
Why don't they flaunt the proof they find against evolution? (dino and human prints together, human scull at same level as supposed "caveman", etc)
Why because it would totaly deflate this theory that they have built "evidence" on that says there is no God or at least we were not created by one.
They built their theory already assuming the earth is billions of yrs old, we build ours on the scriptures which says it's not, and guess what, we have "theories" on why things are as they are too.
It depends on the foundation you start on.
 
Upvote 0

Data

Veteran
Sep 15, 2003
1,439
63
38
Auckland
✟24,359.00
Faith
Atheist
dhiannian said:
Why don't they flaunt the proof they find against evolution?
What evidence?..

dino and human prints together
Which has never happened before. Ever.

human scull at same level as supposed "caveman", etc.
I have a feeling this claim will be misleading. Give us a link.
 
Upvote 0

Douglaangu v2.0

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2004
809
40
✟1,169.00
Faith
Atheist
dhiannian said:
We don't need the words saying the evolutionists say there is no God, they are fervently working to prove there isnt one,
If you claim that they are there, YES YOU DO.
Why don't they flaunt the proof they find against evolution? (dino and human prints together, human scull at same level as supposed "caveman", etc)
Because they've all been exposed as fraudulent MANY MANY times.
Post a thread on any one of them. I BET you that it will be refuted.
Why because it would totaly deflate this theory that they have built "evidence" on that says there is no God or at least we were not created by one.
Wrong. If a scientist was to falsify ToE they would win a nobel prize.

They built their theory already assuming the earth is billions of yrs old, we build ours on the scriptures which says it's not,
You dont have a 'theory' at least in the scientific sense.
I'm willing to bet you don't even know what it means in that context.

and guess what, we have "theories" on why things are as they are too.
It depends on the foundation you start on.

You're right to put " marks around theories, because creationism is not a theory in the scientific sense.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I've made it quite clear what I want. An explicit example of a biology text book STATING that there is no god, we are gods, and that we 'sailed out of a singularity'.
Tough
That is what is being taught. Were do you think the big bang started? Where do you think men are taught to have decended from? I can see why you'd rather beat around the bush.
 
Upvote 0

Douglaangu v2.0

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2004
809
40
✟1,169.00
Faith
Atheist
dad said:
Tough
That is what is being taught. Were do you think the big bang started? Where do you think men are taught to have decended from? I can see why you'd rather beat around the bush.

How is it being taught? You claimed it was, and yet you can't give any examples of it being so.
"Because nothing is attributed to god" is NOT proof of it.
Medical text books don't give all the credit to god, but I don't see you harping on about them.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
How is it being taught?
How is Jesus being taught? How did the world come to be, and men? How did the sun get there? And the stars? How long ago were we made? Where did the universe come from? Why do animals have an extra sense, like how they mostly ran to safety from the tsnuami? etc? Dis Jesus really live, and rise from the dead? Is there a heaven? Why do we die? Is there life after death?
We all know whay biology, cosmology, geology, and all that baloneyoglogy says!
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You're right to put " marks around theories, because creationism is not a theory in the scientific sense.
Of course not! That's the name of the game there. Cosmic snowballs creating our water, speck vreating the universe, fine. All life from a random fluke to the billionth power? Fine. Anything that wreaks of God, hey, we hate it, nonsense, fairy tales, etc. Selective belief in the miraculous, where only God's miracles are outlawed!
 
Upvote 0

Krysia

I just don't know.
Jan 25, 2004
1,974
125
46
Virginia
✟17,744.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
You know, I was at the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History, this past Saturday, with my fiance. We stopped by the "Insect Zoo" (always loved that section as a kid :) ). One of the exhibits I viewed showed a butterly trapped in amber that they dated at 30 million years old. Interesting.
 
Upvote 0

Krysia

I just don't know.
Jan 25, 2004
1,974
125
46
Virginia
✟17,744.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
dad said:
[/font][/color][/size]
Very interesting how they base the age calculations! I agree. Very amazing!

I'm glad you agree. I do think it's amazing that a few Christians will continually argue for a YEC view, basing their entire argument on one book written by men, rather than the overwhelming evidence for the contrary. :)

Blessings,
Krysia
 
Upvote 0

Numenor

Veteran
Dec 26, 2004
1,517
42
115
The United Kingdom
Visit site
✟1,894.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Private
Politics
UK-Conservative
dad said:
Well, evolutionists are well known for forgeries and fraud. But theres no need on the whole, to create bones, we have lots of them everywhere. I don't see anything wrong woth fossils or bones, if you know what they really tell you.

If you want to be taken seriously dad, stop telling lies.
 
Upvote 0

dhiannian

Active Member
Jan 10, 2005
252
9
✟447.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Battie

Veteran
Dec 6, 2004
1,531
158
40
Northern Virginia
Visit site
✟24,989.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
dhiannian said:
I wouldn't doubt theistic evolutionists would disagree, when they too are trying to falsify God's word by saying God didn't mean what he said. I don't think it's possible to be a christian theistic evolutionist, because you are denying that God created everything when it says in the bible that he did, and that without him was not anything made that was made.
That would make them decievers/wolves in sheeps clothing trying to fool people into believing another of satan's lies.
And no we wouln't be God's because we would not be saying we created ourselves, in essence:)

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! o_O

That's an awfully conceited thing to say about your fellow Christians. TEs do not say that God din't mean what He said. They merely have a different interpretation of Genesis than you do. They do believe that God created everything, but that He did it through evolution. And, most importantly, all of us know Christ as our savior. That's the part that really counts. You have no right to make such a claim about the validity someone's faith.

With statements like these you are doing far more damage to Christianity then evolution could ever do.
 
Upvote 0

dhiannian

Active Member
Jan 10, 2005
252
9
✟447.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Everything is not cut and dried and scientifically explainable and comprehensible, despite what the scientists would have us to believe. Their lack of answers prove this. It's not God that is improbable, it's not Life after death that is impossible, it's not a creator that is incomprehensible, it's their own deity. What is impossible is that there is 'not' a God! Think seriously about outer space and it's boundaries and implications, then tell yourself again what is impossible! You will find that the unthinkable, is very much thinkable. And what is impossible is that all this expanse just happened by mere chance. Can we rationally believe that it all came from nothing, and evolved into living, thinking, intricate flesh bound spirits like ourselves, able to reason and have conscious existence? And if we came from something, where did the something we came from, come from? It's the never ending questions that have never been rationally answered by evolutionists. If matter always existed, eternally, then that in itself is incomprehensible. i.e., by faith, they believe the incomprehensible, all the time.
http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/apologetics/evolve1.html
 
Upvote 0

Juvenal

Radical strawberry
Feb 8, 2005
385
145
Georgia
✟47,022.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Greetings, CFers ...

I'm new here, as you'll undoubtedly note from a quick glance at my post count.

While I've no interest in interfering in this lively discussion, a few points of interest might serve to refocus this thread along the lines of the OP. This was the first thread in the latest listing, and so it seemed a good place to meet CFers who were actively posting and thus able to receive my hello.

As I've stumbled into a creation/evolution dispute, I won't allow the inevitable heated comments to influence my impressions of the usual demeanor of posters on this board. There's only one other topic that seems as guaranteed to raise blood pressures on theistic fora.

Some of the original posts, no doubt inadvertently, conflated creationism with young earth creationism, so many of the comments about various polls suffered from the misperception.

While I am, obviously, not christian, I've spent many a pleasant hour discussing christian apologetics with my brother, a lutheran pastor of the missouri synod persuasion, and quite conservative, though not fundamentalist.

In particular, modern apologetics tend to discount the unusual ages cited for biblical patriarchs due to a change in numbering systems during the course of the bible's original compilation. This explanation makes unnecessary any speculation as to how humans might have lived for centuries on end before marrying, raising families and dying.

I note a logical disconnect between the ideas of a world view without gods and a world view with man as god. I can assure you that the world view of man as god is as alien to an atheist as it is to any theist, more so perhaps as it would require the existence of a god, something theists readily aver.

Fear not, by the rules of this forum which I have very recently studied, and by my own preference, I do not proselytize my lack of faith. I am here to hear about yours, and how it affects your relationships with your fellow men.

I would urge anyone seriously interested in how the expansion of Bishop Ussher's timeline came to pass to study the history of geology. A fast google search will turn up articles such as "Diluvial Theory: A Synopsis from the Historical Geologic Account Relative to Biblical Teachings" which give a good view of the changing perspectives of the earth's age.

I regret not being able to post a link, but I haven't yet accumulated the necessary 15 posts.

But I note that most of the discussion has been in relationship with a universe age of millions or billions of years. This is rather stronger than necessary to address the OP. A telescope taking sightings using the baseline of our relative positions about the sun six months apart is capable of resolving stars tens of thousands of light-years away using simple trigonometry.

As we see the light now, in order to justify a universe age of less than ten thousand years, we'd have to assume the light was generated before the star was born. This strikes me as inherently unlikely.

In peace, Jesse
 
Upvote 0

leccy

Active Member
Dec 9, 2004
286
36
67
✟23,088.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
dhiannian said:
Why don't they flaunt the proof they find against evolution? (dino and human prints together, human scull at same level as supposed "caveman", etc)

My first thought was that this was bogus and that the evidence of a human scull at the same level as supposed "caveman" was false. On searching a bit I was horrified to find that the camera cannot lie. There really was a human scull at the same level as cavemen as indicated by this picture.


http://www.cavemanlibrarian.com/images/boat.jpg


That's possibly a single scull that little caveman is sitting in- amazing stuff!

Those evolutionists must be real numbsculls, sorry numbskulls, not to recognise this as evidence that boat and human evolution are simultaneous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Praxiteles
Upvote 0

dhiannian

Active Member
Jan 10, 2005
252
9
✟447.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
My mistake it wasnt dino bones but Java man, :)
http://www.reynoldsforcongress.net/evolution.htm
* There are no intermediate forms of evolutionary evidence found in fossils!

*

Nebraska Man: In the early part of the 20th century, this was hailed as a missing link by some scientists, although other scientists opposed its inclusion as a missing link.* Nebraska Man had a brief history, as it was shortly determined that it was actually the tooth of a pig. Despite many scientists rejecting Nebraska Man, that some accepted it as evidence (one tooth) of a transitional creature, shows how gullible some evolutionists are. In fairness of evolutionists, we are all easily tricked about some things.
*

Java Man: Dr. Dubois concealed for over 30 years that he had found human skullsnear his Java man at the same level.
*

Piltdown Man: In the first half of the 20th century many books, dissertations, master theses, and high school papers were written hailing Piltdown Man as the missing link.* Scientist Henry Fairfield Osborn used the publicity surrounding the famous Scopes Monkey Trial to adorn the New York Times with his defense of evolution. The brilliant paleontologist cited Piltodown man as one of the evidences of evolution (New York Times, July 12, 1925, section 8, page 1).* In 1953 it was found to be a fraud.* It was the jaw bone of a modern orangutan, but its teeth had been filed down, and its bones had been artificially colored to deceive the public.
*

Horse Series: This is another example of the imaginative bone-arranging of evolutionists. Since 1926 this has been used by to illustrate a general increase in size reduction and the loss of toes.* Perhaps you recall seeing this in your high school biology book.* Once again, fraud is employed, as the fossils are not found in the proper order in the fossils, and there is no sequence in the fossils from small, many-toed ancestors to large, one-toed man.* The first horse on the list is actually the “Echippus,” a contemporary fox-like animal called the “Daman” that darts in the African brush.
*

Dinosaurs: Evolutionists argue that the extinction of dinosaurs allowed man to evolve.* However, The Bible mentions dinosaur-like creatures.* Job 41 mentions a Leviathan who breathes fire, and Job 40 discusses the Behemoth that could not be caught because its tail was like a cedar.* Roman Historian Pliny (2nd A.D.)* in his Natural History prescribed medicine that could be used from Dragons, such as crushed bones of its spine could cure gallstones.
 
Upvote 0

dhiannian

Active Member
Jan 10, 2005
252
9
✟447.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Archaeopteryx (ancient wing) is called a reptilelike bird.* However, some scientists say it is fully a bird.* Regardless, the evolutionists are wrong when they argue that the claws on the bird prove its place as proof for evolution.* If they would check, they would discover that some modern birds also have claws--the ostrich has three claws, the hoatzin in South America, and the Touracoin in Africa.

*

Radio Carbon Fraud: This is used for dates fewer than 50,000 years ago.* Evolutionists claim that the ratio of Carbon 14 (radioactive carbon) was in a steady state in time and space.* However,* the Earth’s magnetic field is decaying, meaning the magnetic field was stronger earlier.* This means there would be less radio carbon as cosmic radiation would have been deflected.* This would greatly shorten radiocarbon chronology.* Contamination and selective absorption can also distort radio carbon readings.
*

Uranium.* Lead, etc. are used for items more than 50,000 years old.* Atmospheric upheavals, such as supernovas can distort results
http://www.reynoldsforcongress.net/evolution.htm
 
Upvote 0