You are the one with embedded age. You are the one who says God created everything 6,000 years ago but made the earth to physically much older. If God really did that, he is deliberately deceiving us.
Upvote
0
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.
You must have me mixed up with someone else.
Which is an absurd, if not blasphemous clutch phrase.
Yup! Which is something we rarely see from anyone citing the creationist literature.Finally, an honest admission.
I didn't say anything about the creation of life. But since you give me the opportunity, YES. There is no reason it could not happen by natural means.So you don't believe God created life except by naturalistic means.
No, what I stated was up to date main stream science. It doesn't have anything to do with Darwin.Classic Darwinian logic, there is nothing scientific or Biblical about it.
The fossil record is very important but there is more than enough evidence to establish evolution as the best theory to explain the diversity of life without even needing to look at fossils.Lines of evidence: The science of evolution
At the heart of evolutionary theory is the basic idea that life has existed for billions of years and has changed over time.
Overwhelming evidence supports this fact. Scientists continue to argue about details of evolution, but the question of whether life has a long history or not was answered in the affirmative at least two centuries ago.
The history of living things is documented through multiple lines of evidence that converge to tell the story of life through time. In this section, we will explore the lines of evidence that are used to reconstruct this story. These lines of evidence include:
Fossil evidence
Homologies
Distribution in time and space
Evidence by example
Perhaps instead, He will ask Rick what things I claim He embedded into His creation, other than age? or maybe He will ask DerelictJunction what my definition of embedded age is?So what's your reason for the thinly veiled dishonesty this time? Did you change your mind about embedded age or is there some kind of semantic error you're pretending to not notice?
Sometimes I wish, only for the sake of justice, that a God does exist so you can reap what you sow for all your lying and disrespect.
Perhaps instead, He will ask Rick what things I claim He embedded into His creation, other than age? or maybe He will ask DerelictJunction what my definition of embedded age is?
False accusations are a dime-a-dozen.
Disclaimer: I could care less if we evolved or were created. The whole debate is non-sense, but some aspects of it are interesting, so no reason to go crazy over my question. I'm just curious, and looking for critiques.
I just wanted to get opinions on how this video is deceptive, and how creationist distort evidence to fit their pseudo-science.
I just got through the first few chapters of Jerry Coyne's book, "Why Evolution is True", and I didn't find the fossil evidence he gave that compelling. The whale evidence I thought was the worst (or maybe tiktaalik). Dinosaurs with feathers, eh, sort of convincing. The rest of the examples were just small variations within certain organisms, nothing impressive that I would throw all in and say evolution is true.
Finally, an honest admission. So you don't believe God created life except by naturalistic means. Classic Darwinian logic, there is nothing scientific or Biblical about it.
Rick said:To clarify, your answer is that the semantic you're pretending to the oblivious to is that he said "things" in place of "age", yet you knew exactly what he meant anyway.
Prompting Mark's reply:AV, you are the only one who claims God embedded things, which makes God a deceiver.
Then DJ chimes in with:Which is an absurd, if not blasphemous clutch phrase.
... when I've made it clear:AV is claims that God embedded 4.5 billion years of age and history in Earth's surface when He made it. Direct your accusation of blasphemy at him.
For the millionth time: embedded age is maturity without history.Embedded Age is defined as "maturity without history" (qv 1), whereas Omphalos is defined as "maturity with history". In other words, Omphalos is embedded history, not embedded age.
Maybe you should learn to use a mirror before you use a microphone?Perhaps one day you can learn how to be honest.
For the millionth time: embedded age is maturity without history.
Perhaps instead, He will ask Rick what things I claim He embedded into His creation, other than age? or maybe He will ask DerelictJunction what my definition of embedded age is?
False accusations are a dime-a-dozen.
That's it ... keep 'em confused, so they'll make these mistakes again.Then why do you include rocks with millions of years of history in your list of things with embedded age?
That's it ... keep 'em confused, so they'll make these mistakes again.
No, Rick, I'm not going to "please explain."Then please explain ...
No, Rick, I'm not going to "please explain."
Not when I'm being falsely accused of something.
You want to put words into my mouth; that's your prerogative, but don't expect me to take the witness stand and let you badger me about your own mistake.
Yes, the fossil record supports ToE explicitly.Disclaimer: I could care less if we evolved or were created. The whole debate is non-sense, but some aspects of it are interesting, so no reason to go crazy over my question. I'm just curious, and looking for critiques.
I just wanted to get opinions on how this video is deceptive, and how creationist distort evidence to fit their pseudo-science.
I just got through the first few chapters of Jerry Coyne's book, "Why Evolution is True", and I didn't find the fossil evidence he gave that compelling. The whale evidence I thought was the worst (or maybe tiktaalik). Dinosaurs with feathers, eh, sort of convincing. The rest of the examples were just small variations within certain organisms, nothing impressive that I would throw all in and say evolution is true.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkwhd_gIR7c&feature=youtu.be
Right here, for oneLink please?
The only way these two statements can both be true is if God created the earth 6,000 years ago with 4.57 billion years of age and history.Oh, indeed we can:
- The earth is 4.57 billion years old physically.
- The earth is 6000 years old existentially.
My apologies if I misrepresented you. However, your claim of embedded age without history then needs further explanation if I am to understand it.No, Rick, I'm not going to "please explain."
Not when I'm being falsely accused of something.
You want to put words into my mouth; that's your prerogative, but don't expect me to take the witness stand and let you badger me about your own mistake.
Right here, for one
The only way these two statements can both be true is if God created the earth 6,000 years ago with 4.57 billion years of age and history.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?