Creationist Challenge: Plate Tectonics

[dad]

It knows no such thing. You cannot disprove last thursdayism, thats the whole point of it dad.

Of course we can, beyond a reasonable doubt. Unlike the slightest clue about the past and future as being physical only beyond the present. That is vastly different.

 

[Adriac]

Of course we can, beyond a reasonable doubt. Unlike the slightest clue about the past and future as being physical only beyond the present. That is vastly different.

If you can disprove last-thursdayism, why haven't you? Maybe you don't really know as much as you claim, hmm?

 

[Lord_Marx]

Of course we can, beyond a reasonable doubt.

How?

 

[dad]

no you didn't, you were just created with the false memories of before last week to create the appearance of a universe that is older than 1 week. your memories were created on thursday though, along with everything else.

So if we doubt your unproven past and future as PO claims, we were made last week. Got it.

nope, last-thursdayism claims victory, not defeat. you can't disprove it, so it must be true!

Beyond a reasonable doubt, and above all normal standards of science, yes, I can! That is all I ask. You have nothing.

 

[Nightson]

Of course we can, beyond a reasonable doubt. Unlike the slightest clue about the past and future as being physical only beyond the present. That is vastly different.

You haven't proven we wern't created last thursday.

 

[caravelair]

So if we doubt your unproven past and future as PO claims, we were made last week. Got it.

no, it's more along the lines of if your merge/split claims are reasonable/rational/useful then our last-thursdayism claims must be too. after all last thursdayism has exactly as much substance to it as your claims do.

Beyond a reasonable doubt, and above all normal standards of science, yes, I can! That is all I ask. You have nothing.

no you can't. go ahead then, prove we weren't created last thursday. i would love to see you try! you can't do it, because you know it's not true. you know that last thursday is the beginning of time!

 

[caravelair]

Of course we can, beyond a reasonable doubt. Unlike the slightest clue about the past and future as being physical only beyond the present. That is vastly different.

no it's not, it's exactly the same. you can't prove last thursdayism wrong any more than we can prove split/merge wrong.

 

[dad]

no it's not, it's exactly the same. ....

No, because I accept science, and evidence, which abounds for last week. To question it is unreasonable. On the other hand, you have no evidence to say that this universe will not pass away, and is not temporary as the bible says. Or that things will no longer decay, but last forever then, in that different state. It isn't as simple as renting an old video, say, Bruce Almighty, made long before last week. Or checking the library,, history, bible, parents, etc.

You will need to learn the difference between unreasonable unsound ideas, like we were created last week, and sound ideas that are well based.

 

[Adriac]

No, because I accept science, and evidence, which abounds for last week. To question it is unreasonable. On the other hand, you have no evidence to say that this universe will not pass away, and is not temporary as the bible says. Or that things will no longer decay, but last forever then, in that different state. It isn't as simple as renting an old video, say, Bruce Almighty, made long before last week. Or checking the library,, history, bible, parents, etc.

You will need to learn the difference between unreasonable unsound ideas, like we were created last week, and sound ideas that are well based.

That video was made last week, along with everything else. The library, history books, the Bible, everyone you know. Your own memories. All created, just the way it is, last Thursday.

Go ahead. Disprove it.

 

[dad]

That video was made last week, along with everything else. The library, history books, the Bible, everyone you know. Your own memories. All created, just the way it is, last Thursday.

Go ahead. Disprove it.

Already done, beyond a reasonable, sane doubt. Ask around.

 

[caravelair]

No, because I accept science, and evidence, which abounds for last week.

no it doesn't. you can't name a single piece of evidence that disproves last thursdayism. go ahead, i dare you, try. all you could say would be dependant on baselessly assuming that the universe was not created last thursday with apparant great age.

To question it is unreasonable.

split/merge is unreasonable.

On the other hand, you have no evidence to say that this universe will not pass away, and is not temporary as the bible says.

i have exactly as much evidence against that as you have against last-thursdayism.

It isn't as simple as renting an old video, say, Bruce Almighty, made long before last week. Or checking the library,, history, bible, parents, etc.

none of those things are evidence against last-thursdayism because they were all created last thursday to help give the false appearance of age. see, last-thursdayism explains this evidence perfectly, so this is yet more proof that it is true.

You will need to learn the difference between unreasonable unsound ideas, like we were created last week, and sound ideas that are well based.

You will need to learn the difference between unreasonable unsound ideas, like split/merge nonsense, and sound ideas that are well based.

 

[Adriac]

Already done, beyond a reasonable, sane doubt. Ask around.

No. It's impossible. All of the evidence was created last thursday.

There is nothing you can do to disprove that.

 

[dad]

No. It's impossible. All of the evidence was created last thursday.

There is nothing you can do to disprove that.

You guys prove a good point. Your old ageism and last week creation beliefs are similar. Intelectual dishonesty. Jesus rose from the dead thousands of years ago. Ask a christian.

 

[Adriac]

Why would a Christian's opinions matter? He's just using his week-old beliefs about a week-old book to draw an a priori conclusion that contradicts the known truth: that the universe was created last Thursday.

 

[Gracchus]

You guys prove a good point. Your old ageism and last week creation beliefs are similar. Intelectual dishonesty.

Real intellectuals use spell-checkers.

Jesus rose from the dead thousands of years ago.

Got video?

Ask a christian.

How would they know? Their holy book gives four conflicting accounts.

 

[caravelair]

You guys prove a good point. Your old ageism and last week creation beliefs are similar.

no, it's your merge/split nonsense that is similar to last-thursdayism.

Intelectual dishonesty.

where?

Jesus rose from the dead thousands of years ago. Ask a christian.

it's all a part of the appearance of age that was created last thursday, and you'll never prove otherwise.

 

[dad]

where?


.

In not admitting we have great proofs that are more than adequate to demonstrate we have been here for many years. I don't find it funny, or honest.

 

[dad]

Real intellectuals use spell-checkers.

How would you know?

Got video?

Some won't accept video evidence we were here beyond last week! We have witnesses. I am one of them. He is alive and well.

How would they know? Their holy book gives four conflicting accounts.

No, it gives a harmonious account that is designed to be hidden from your understanding unless you get saved. Look how well it works! Amazing. If only you knew.

 

[alonesoldier]

I am not a YEC, but I have read some YEC arguments and am fairly familiar with them, though I don't mock any sincerely held belief especially one held by Christians I don't accept this as science. However, and it comes back to being unable to prove it even if true because of the Supernatural element of their argument, but YEC's would claim in regards to plate tectonics, that God created the earth with age. A full grown man, a full grown woman, trees not seeds, complete oceans and continents. That a person would be able to date something as very old in this belief structure is consistent with what they believe the Bible teaches. Adam for argument sake was in his early thirties, but thirty years had not actually elapsed.

As a Christian I too had to look at science and Genesis 3. But my conclusions were slightly different from that of creationist. Assuming that everything we know about Science is currently correct, (big assumption) how would this have been explained in ancient Hebrew to a stone age culture that lacked both the words and the concepts to understand them even if the words existed? There are cultures in Africa presently that we are unable to communicate the very concept of outer space to as we are lacking both the words and the conceptualization on their part. Unless in my view God wanted to wait thousands of years for his creatures to grow up before he entered into a relational experience with them, he would have had to explain what happened in language they could understand (perhaps he would still be waiting, with 96% of the Universe currently be written off as dark energy it maybe a stretch to say we could ever understand what God has to say in regards to creation?). Namely that he is the author of life, the creator of heaven and earth. Genesis 3 answers who did it and why, it does not answer the how even from the creationist perspective and Genesis 1 is even better because it has been argued that the correct order of creation is given in regards to what we believe currently. So these are not insurmountable obstacles to faith. If an intelligent person whom for other reasons like the historical evidence for Christ becomes convinced that God had his hands on the authorship of the Bible the fact that said God did not try to explain to people still using flint tools the unified theory of everything that general relativity and quantum physics are currently engaged in is not an obstacle to faith.

 

[Atlantians]

Assume the world is 30, 000 years old. On average tectonic plates move 4 inches per year. This means that since the beginning of time the plates have shifted around 10, 000 feet, a little less then two miles. Obviously, this poses a problem for the idea of a Pangea.

Challenge: Explain

1. Coal deposits in Antarctica showing fossils of tropical plants. Tectonics explains this since that land was at one point nearer to the equator at a latitude that allowed for such growth. Growth of these plants at the latitude of Antarctica is nearly impossible.

2. Continental ice sheets- glacial striations on rocks show that glaciers moved from south America towards the Atlantic ocean and from the Atlantic ocean towards Africa. Since it is highly unlikely that glaciers swim, how is this gap explainable if the continents were not joined at some point?

3. Identical fossil species along the South American and African shores, both on the Atlantic side. Fossils from these species are not found in north America, Asia, or the western side of Africa.

How bought:
The Earth is not 30,000 years old it is 4.6ish Billion just as science states and the days reffered to in Genesis are alegorical in nature.