Has young earth creationism become an obstacle to the Great Commission?

[TLK Valentine]

Pretty fishbowl in box thinking it seems to me.

many things "seem to you" a certain way -- it's all part of your entertainment value.

Time if different in the far away universe need not "go" in a way we know time to go here.

Indeed, it must go in a completely different manner, lest your blathering be exposed as such.

Alas, time does not obey your commands, so it need not do anything different from what it does.

An earth unit of time would not represent a far space unit. Since you cannot so much as even define what time is, how can you hope to get your head around deep space mysteries?

You've illustrated an important point here, dad -- Young Earth Creationism is but one of many obstacles to the Great Commission.

 

[pebbleanrock]

Of course, yes. Science is always behind Scripture. In Job 1500 BC [ish] 'circle [sphere] of the earth' ...Chinese caught on in 1100 AD and Europeans in 1400 AD. 'Earth hangs on nothing' .....800 BC, after which Copernicus and Galileo caught on in 1500 AD. "tablet of your heart" 800 BC ...1990 AD heart transplant scientists find memory stored on heart nerves. For a great collaboration between science and Scripture on Creation, see <pebbleanrock.org>. It has all the particle physics, all from Scripture. Comment? Can you see the monk and scientist in a past time? "Its round. Its flat. Its round. Its flat." Only when our science catches up does Scripture open up. Our current particle/energy knowledge is now great enough for us to understand this new subject in your Bible.

 

[AV1611VET]

Knowledge of the theory of evolution is necessary to find oil.

Read it and weep, chief.

Is it really true that we have to understand Earth&#8217;s history to find oil?

Sometimes people reach the right conclusion for the wrong reason. Let&#8217;s use a silly example. We all know that leprechauns store their gold at the end of a rainbow. Fewer people know that leprechauns store their oil underground near Bakersfield, California. There certainly is oil under the ground around Bakersfield, but that doesn&#8217;t prove that leprechauns put it there.

You may know where oil is without knowing how it got there. Oil is often trapped in porous rock under non-porous rock. So, if you can determine what kinds of rock are below you, you may be able to find oil even if you don&#8217;t know how those rocks were formed.

Furthermore, we should point out that one might argue with the assertion, &#8220;Oil exploration geologists are generally pretty successful&#8221;. They aren&#8217;t as &#8220;lucky&#8221; as you might expect. Forty years ago it was written,

Eight of every nine wells drilled in an area that has never before produced oil are dry.

That was an 11% success rate. Now we have more sensitive instruments, and computers with better algorithms for analyzing the data from those instruments. But, as of five years ago,

80 percent or more of the wildcats, exploratory wells drilled in untried or unproven regions, result in dry holes (wells that fail to strike oil or gas).

So, the modern success rate is still less than 20%. You could bet against the geologists, laying 4 to 1 odds, and make a profit in the long run.
The geologists who believe in creation are no more or less successful than the geologists who believe in evolution. They all use the same instruments, looking for the same kind of rock formations. It doesn&#8217;t matter if they believe those rock formations were formed rapidly by the flood, or formed slowly over millions of years, or were carved by leprechauns. They can be dead wrong about the way rocks form, and why oil is found where it is, and still find the oil. The child who thinks the Easter bunny hid the eggs is no less likely to find them than the child who knows Mom and Dad hid them.

SOURCE

 

[dad]

Sorry, that is one fact that you cannot dispute. Long story short only certain ages produced oil.

So???

We can tell if we are in that age by the fossils we find.

If no fossils?

Knowing what fossils to look for and why is intimately tied to the theory of evolution.

Not in the way you thought though. Give an example of a fossil in a formation and how it helps find oil and why. I think we will find that the fossil could easily be laid down 4300 years ago as any imaginary age you claim.

There are no "Creationist" petroleum geologists.

Not a clever lot then?

 

[Adaephon]

Read it and weep, chief.

SOURCE

That was intensely stupid and had a lot of errors. Why did you post it?

 

[AV1611VET]

That was intensely stupid and had a lot of errors. Why did you post it?

So I could get your opinion of it.

 

[CabVet]

Ha you misunderstand the concept completely. How about if time were not equal to time on earth? What if how time existed in the fabric of the universe far away were simply not the same as to earth time? A year for us might equate to something far different. Therefore when we see light here moving at so many miles in so much time it would not mean light (even if it were the same there) moved at the equal number of miles to time there! Same idea with decay. ...or anything that involves time.

This is worse than I thought. And how can this possibly apply to decay as well? We are measuring decay on rocks in our backyards, they have never been outside of the earth. So, now you have not only a different state past, but also a different state location, is that it?

You measure everything OUT FROM earth USING earth time. It would not matter what was so many earth space time years away at all.

Wrong. You don't have to measure anything. In fact, you don't even have to use time at all. Let me put it this way. There are hundreds of stars around 6,000 light years away from the earth (that is when this supposed "state change" happened, right?). Suppose the laws of physics (gravity, speed of light, etc) were different until the fall, and then those laws became as they are today. If that was the case, we would have a different sky every night. Stars that are around 6,000 light years away (of which there are hundreds) would change position every second because the "different" laws of physics from the past would put their relative positions in different places. We would literally have a sky with blinking stars. Yet, this (or anything remotely similar) was ever detected. But by all means, go ahead and explain it away.

 

[dgiharris]

Ha you misunderstand the concept completely. How about if time were not equal to time on earth? What if how time existed in the fabric of the universe far away were simply not the same as to earth time? A year for us might equate to something far different. Therefore when we see light here moving at so many miles in so much time it would not mean light (even if it were the same there) moved at the equal number of miles to time there! Same idea with decay. ...or anything that involves time.




You measure everything OUT FROM earth USING earth time. It would not matter what was so many earth space time years away at all.

You are butchering Einstein's theory of relativity...

The speed of light is the constant and does not vary or change like you are saying. There is no region of the universe in which light behaves differently than here. Its not like the speed of light here is 3.0 x 10^8 m/s but in the Andromeda galaxy the speed of light is 4.5 x 10^9 m/s

The reason we know this is because if this were the case, then there would be a gigantic ripple effect impacting every single physical law in the region.

The speed of light is directly and indirectly tied to so many physical laws that if it did change in various regions like you are claiming then it would be easily noticeable. Galaxies would be moving away or towards each other in ways that do not match the physics we've determined to be accurate on Earth.

I think this is a point your mind is unable to grasp. If our physics and mathematics were incorrect then they would not match our observations. The fact that they match our observations and more importantly, allow us to PREDICT things we previously did not observe goes a tremendous way towards validating the "truth" of our physics and math.

Skimming through your posts, its apparent that you know "just enough" of a scientific concept to complete butcher it and get it absolutely wrong.

 

[CabVet]

Not a clever lot then?

Yeah, they are so stupid that there is a shortage of gas in the world right now. Oh, wait, there isn't.

 

[CabVet]

You are butchering Einstein's theory of relativity...

The speed of light is the constant and does not vary or change like you are saying. There is no region of the universe in which light behaves differently than here. Its not like the speed of light here is 3.0 x 10^8 m/s but in the Andromeda galaxy the speed of light is 4.5 x 10^9 m/s

The reason we know this is because if this were the case, then there would be a gigantic ripple effect impacting every single physical law in the region.

The speed of light is directly and indirectly tied to so many physical laws that if it did change in various regions like you are claiming then it would be easily noticeable. Galaxies would be moving away or towards each other in ways that do not match the physics we've determined to be accurate on Earth.

I think this is a point your mind is unable to grasp. If our physics and mathematics were incorrect then they would not match our observations. The fact that they match our observations and more importantly, allow us to PREDICT things we previously did not observe goes a tremendous way towards validity the "truth" of our physics and math.

Skimming through your posts, its apparent that you know "just enough" of a scientific concept to complete butcher it and get it absolutely wrong.

But those are facts, and dad has made abundantly clear that he is not interested in facts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

AVET, your source was worthless. What they forgot is that creationist drillers would have a success rate roughly of 0%. They would have no clue of where to drill or why, unless they copied successful geologists, but then they are not using creationism geology, they are feeding off of real geology.

Once again, there are no creationist petroleum geologists.

 

[TLK Valentine]

That was intensely stupid and had a lot of errors. Why did you post it?

Question and answer in the same post?

 

[dad]

You've illustrated an important point here, dad -- Young Earth Creationism is but one of many obstacles to the Great Commission.

The commission was to preach the gospel. Having every goat accept it was not part of that.

 

[AV1611VET]

AVET, your source was worthless. What they forgot is that creationist drillers would have a success rate roughly of 0%. They would have no clue of where to drill or why, unless they copied successful geologists, but then they are not using creationism geology, they are feeding off of real geology.

Abandoning your own words now, are you?

Knowledge of the theory of evolution is necessary to find oil.

Now who's in denial?

Once again, there are no creationist petroleum geologists.

But there are petroleum geologists who are creationists, aren't there?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Abandoning your own words now, are you?

No.

Now who's in denial?

That would still be you and dad.

But there are petroleum geologists who are creationists, aren't there?

Umm, no. Find one.

 

[dad]

This is worse than I thought. And how can this possibly apply to decay as well? We are measuring decay on rocks in our backyards, they have never been outside of the earth.

You measure on earth in this state. Period.

So, now you have not only a different state past, but also a different state location, is that it?

Yes. Possibly, but more importantly science doesn't know.

Wrong. You don't have to measure anything. In fact, you don't even have to use time at all. Let me put it this way. There are hundreds of stars around 6,000 light years away from the earth (that is when this supposed "state change" happened, right?).

Show us how the 6000 light YEARS are calculated without time! Do you use parallax?

Suppose the laws of physics (gravity, speed of light, etc) were different until the fall, and then those laws became as they are today. If that was the case, we would have a different sky every night. Stars that are around 6,000 light years away (of which there are hundreds) would change position every second because the "different" laws of physics from the past would put their relative positions in different places.

Whoa. That is pretty flat lined thinking. First of all the universe would have changed not just 6000 light years as the present state earth crow flies! Now if all that was changed was the earth and area, then, again, the far universe need not obey our laws...either way!

 

[AV1611VET]

Umm, no. Find one.

QV please:

On a muggy afternoon in July, a group of geologists from around the country put on some bug spray and fanned out along one of Ohio’s richest fossil beds. The rock walls were slippery and steep at points, and some people came in their dress shoes straight from the conference that brought them together. But no one seemed daunted; when let loose on the rocks they behaved like children with a piñata, filling their pockets with local specimens and cooing over their treasure. “Ahh, that’s a beautiful brachiopod!” or “A fine trilobite! Let me see that.”

A brightly painted sign in the state park explained that 450 million years ago these ancient creatures lived at the bottom of a warm, shallow sea during the Ordovician period. But none of these geologists believed it. As young-earth creationists, they think the earth is about 8,000 years old, give or take a few thousand years. That’s about the amount of time conventional geology says it can take to form one inch of limestone.

Creationist ideas about geology tend to appeal to overly zealous amateurs, but this was a gathering of elites, with an impressive wall of diplomas among them (Harvard, U.C.L.A., the Universities of Virginia, Washington and Rhode Island). They had spent years studying the geologic timetable, but they remained nevertheless deeply committed to a different version of history. John Whitmore, a geologist from nearby Cedarville University who organized the field trip, stood in the middle of the fossil bed and summarized it for his son.

SOURCE

 

[pebbleanrock]

We know the Bible does not specifically age the universe, but how about this? 7 days x 2 parts [a morning and an evening]. If each part is a billion years...7 x 2 =14 billion years. Jesus returns soon for a 1000 years. Scripture says one year is as a day and each month has 30 days, so Jesus'1000 yrs could be 360,000 years. 14 billion -360,000= 13.64 billion years. Scientists currently say we are between 13.7 and 13.5 billion years old.

 

[AV1611VET]

We know the Bible does not specifically age the universe, but how about this? 7 days x 2 parts [a morning and an evening]. If each part is a billion years...7 x 2 =14 billion years. Jesus returns soon for a 1000 years. Scripture says one year is as a day and each month has 30 days, so Jesus'1000 yrs could be 360,000 years. 14 billion -360,000= 13.64 billion years. Scientists currently say we are between 13.7 and 13.5 billion years old.

There's a major flaw in that.

Angiosperms were created on the third day, then the sun was created on the fourth.

That means 2 billion years passed (evening & morning) without sunlight.

 

[Subduction Zone]

QV please:


SOURCE

So you admit that you have nothing.

Picking up a rock hammer and putting on a pair of hiking boots does not make you a geologist.

It is all too easy to show any honest person that the sedimentary layers could not have come from the flood.