• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

A challenge to DURANG0

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by Arikay, Feb 16, 2004.

  1. Arikay

    Arikay HI

    In another thread DURANG0 said:
    "You forgot to mention science as a reason as to why creationist are against science."

    Also in another thread DURANG0 posted a list of 70 or so of these reasons.

    My challenge to DURANG0 is for him to pick 5 reasons from this list that he feels are valid and that are either his favorite ones or the ones he feels are the strongest. And present them for review on the forum.
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Pete Harcoff

    Pete Harcoff PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

    Other Religion
    Just an aside, but I found it quite ironic that he "spams" such a list, but the accuses others of the same thing in the thread on transitionals. IMHO, he should practice what he preaches.
  3. Hydra009

    Hydra009 bel esprit

    While we're doing asides, I need to learn CFspeak. What does IMHO, OP, and all the other slang you guys use mean?
  4. LibertyChic

    LibertyChic Finally Free To Be Me

    IMHO = In My Honest Opinion
    OP = Original Post or Original Poster

    What others do you need to know? :)
  5. Deamiter

    Deamiter I just follow Christ.

    In My Humble Opinion (AKA IMO)
    Origional Post.

    Stuff like OP is not so universal, but you should google "Internet acronyms" and you'll get all SORTS of lists of things you'd never expect. Generally people try to stay away from acronyms like this because they get annoying to read, and honestly, it takes very little effort to actually type out the words. If you type slowly enough that you cannot take the time to write out your phrases, you NEED the practice which will make you faster in the long run!
  6. revolutio

    revolutio Apatheist Extraordinaire

    I had thought IMHO was "In my humble opinion."
  7. ObbiQuiet

    ObbiQuiet Eating Heart

    IMHO = lmao, I just thought of a great one but it'd break the forum rules.
  8. Pete Harcoff

    Pete Harcoff PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

    Other Religion
    It can mean both.
  9. ab1385

    ab1385 Respect my authoritah!

    Still no reply? There seems a pattern here of avoiding direct questioning by creationsts on here...
  10. DURANG0

    DURANG0 Member

    All are valid.

    Study arikay, study.
  11. ObbiQuiet

    ObbiQuiet Eating Heart

    Stop dancing - that wasn't what he was asking. He was asking for the most valid.

    If they're all valid, then great. However, he wanted the ones you felt were the best.
  12. ab1385

    ab1385 Respect my authoritah!

    I believe he asked for the 5 you felt were the strongest/most valid. Not a copout reply like "all are valid". Avoiding the question? Surely not..
  13. DURANG0

    DURANG0 Member

    Sorry, I'm not playing your game.
  14. ab1385

    ab1385 Respect my authoritah!

  15. Arikay

    Arikay HI

    Really? Then pick 5 of them.

    The only reason I want you to pick 5 is so that you dont claim that I picked the 5 worst ones of the bunch. The reason for 5 is because I want to discuss them in depth. I dont think a forum post is long enough to address all 70, but 5 will do.

    So please, pick 5. If they are all valid, that should be no problem, if you are afraid they will be torn apart, then I understand why you wouldn't want to. :)

  16. DURANG0

    DURANG0 Member

    Call it what you want.

    As I said, I'm not playing your game.
  17. ab1385

    ab1385 Respect my authoritah!

    But seriously DURANGO, this isnt about trying to humiliate you. This is about trying to engender open-mindedness. About asking people to look at the evidence before dismissing it. About not slagging off people for not being creationists and saying they arent really christian. If you can show me any evidence of creationism, then I will look at it happily. Would you do the same about evolution?
  18. DURANG0

    DURANG0 Member

    Actually the earth is quite young.
    As you well know, the evidence of the actual fiat of creation was destroyed in the flood. The evidence the YEC present is chiefly flood evidence.
    Although, Polonium Halo's can be considered as evidence of a rapid fromation of the Basalts.
    Not to mention that C-14 hasn't met equilibrium as of yet...which it should have if the earth is as old as some claim.
    Many say the continents should have eroded by now, that is if the continents are as old as some claim.
    Judging from the erosion rate of Niagra falls as it retreats from lake Ontario, the falls are much much younger than the old earthers claim.
    The observation of the earth population and population growth also support a recent creation.
    We also must not forget the decay of the magnetic field of the earth which STRONGLY indicate a young earth and recent creation along with the recession rate of the moon that would have put it too close to earth a few billion years ago.The low amount of helium in the earth atmosphere and the low level of salt in the ocean also say young earth. Not to mention that the sediments in the ocean would be higher is another example of a young earth. Polystrata trees are also a good example and proof that strata forms quickly and not over millions upon millions of years. The soft sediment deformation of rock strata is a very good indicator of a rapid folding of the pre-hardened rocks and not millions upon millions of years as the continents drifted slowly. The rapid formation of the Grand Canyon when the Hopi and Grand lakes broke through their damns show how it could have been formed in a very short period of time and not millions of years. The Mt St. Helen Volcano and after results PROVED the possibility of quick canyon formation.

    Here is a list of other reasons as to why the earth CAN’T possible be 4.5 BY old.
    Personally I haven't investigated each item as I cut and pasted them from somewhere a little while ago. I also don't claim to understand each topic presented in the list. But the point is there is a lot of scientific objection to a 4.5BY old earth or a 16 BY old universe.

    1. The amount of dust on the moon's surface - I understand this argument is generally no longer used due to more up to date rates of processes and info. being utilized (i.e. Snelling's article in TEN Tech J)
    2. Lack of meteorites in the geologic column
    3. The Poynting-Robertson Effect on Cosmic Dust Sphericals
    4. The Abundance of Short-period comets v.s. its average life-span
    5. Io being geologically active
    6. The Moon, i.e. Lunar Material with high levels of radioactivity
    7. Types of Radiation that shouldn't be in existence on the Moon
    8. Turbulance & instability of Saturn's Rings
    9. Existence of 3 Giant Dust Rings that circle the solar system
    10. Rock-Flow of Lunar Material v.s. craters of the Moon
    11. Lack of emitted Neutrinos from the sun
    12. The chemical composition of stars being roughly the same
    13. Star clusters gravitationally bound yet containing stars with vastly different thurmonuclear-burn
    14. Paradox between the expected nuclear-fusion temperature history of the sun and the temperature
    history of the Earth
    15. Controversy over our Shrinking Sun
    16. The White Dwarf Star Sirius B Mystery
    17. The Missing Mass Problem
    18. Velocity of Light Deccaying with Time idea
    19. Lack of Helium in Earth's Atmosphere
    20. Problems with Radioactive Clocks
    21. Age of Diatoms v.s. fossil skeleton of a Baleen Whale on End
    22. Lack of erosional lines separating depositional formations
    23. Polystrate Fossils in Sedimentary Rocks
    24. Tilt of the Earth Axis based on Astronomical Evidence via. Eudoxus, Stonehenge & Solar Temple of
    25. Geocentric Pleochroic Polonium Halos in Precambrian Granite & Coalified Wood
    26. The Second Law of Thermodynamics
    27. Oil & Natural Gas - their existence
    28. Carbon-14 Disintegration v.s. production
    29. Decay of the Earth's Magnetic Moment
    30. Dinosaur Tracks & Man Tracks at Paluxy - Generally no longer used by most creationists
    31. Large Stars - Mass problems
    32. Delta Filling - Rate of growth of delta
    33. Ocean Chemical Concentrations - Much less than what they should be
    34. Erosion of the Continents - Problems with supposed time involved
    35. History - Record of man's existence
    36. Dendrochonology - Age of trees much less than what they could be
    37. Sea Ooze - Lack of sea ooze on ocean floors
    38. Rotation of the Earth - Rotation much to fast by evolutionary standards
    39. Ocean Sediment - Rate of sediment added to the oceans precludes an old ocean
    40. Volcanic Water & Rocks - Time problem based on present rate of rock accretion
    41. Mutation load - Lack of it indicates biological world couln't have vast antiquity
    42. Population Statistics
    43. Earth Heat - Earth young based on considerations of existing temperature gradient in the earth and its
    rate of cooling
    44. The existence of Lunar Inert Gases
    45. Stalagmites & Stalactites
    46. The existence & depth of topsoil
    47. Certain Geological features a) unconsolidated rock b) various fossils & minerals & their current rate of
    formation c) the lack of uniformitarian horizontal layers of sedimentary rocks blending & d) meandering
    serpentine course of many rivers and canyons
    48. Niagra Falls and the rate of its edge wearing away
    49. The existence of Hydrogen still in the universe
    50. The existence of Atmospheric Oxygen
    51. Grand Canyon Dating
    52. Dating of the Cardenas Basalts
    53. Basalts on the Rim of the Grand Canyon
    54. Age of Meteorites/Earth & Allende
    55. Recent Dating of Civilization
    56. Plate Tectonics and the age of the Earth
    57. Salt in the Ocean
    58. Rocks on the Earth's Surface
    59. Various Surface Features of the Earth (such as ripple marks, raindrop impressions, animal tracks)
    60. Bioturbation - Deficiency of evidence of living communities within a layer of rock
    61. Lack of soil layers anywhere in the geologic column
    62. Undisturbed Bedding Planes
    63. Soft-Sediment Deformation
    64. Clastic Dikes
    65. Limited extent of unconformities
    66. Lack of evidence of in situ petrified tree stumps
    67. Escape of methane from Titan
    68. The Recession of the Moon
    69. The presence of star clusters
    70. The sudden appearance of Advanced Life forms
    71. The permanence of prototypes
    72. Absence of Transitional Forms
    73. The Nature of Fossilization & the Fossils themselves
    74. Preservation of Soft Parts
    75. Sirius B White Dwarf & observation
  19. ThePhoenix

    ThePhoenix Well-Known Member

    What game is he playing? He is letting you choose the terms, select the turf, draw the boundries. He can't say "Oh this point is B.S." he has to refute the points you choose for him to refute. That's your list you're using too. So you get to choose the 5 strongest points from your list, and let him have a go at them. What's the game in that?
  20. DURANG0

    DURANG0 Member

    I never said anyone wasn't really a christian if the accept the false theology of evolutionism.

    I expect an apology from you for claiming I said that.