Is YEC science? Is is even really a theory?

[AV1611VET]

Your make believe, personal devil brand of academia, mayhaps.

Your opinion is noted.

 

[Platte]

Correlation does not equal causation.
We have multiple evidences of humans living in areas of the world, not just in the Middle East, tens of thousands of years before the world is said to be created according to YEC claims.

Perhaps...but you don't have any History (recorded) before YEC claims creation was - 6000 years ago.

 

[Platte]

And exactly what do you mean by "Recorded History"? And when you answer, I want citations from the experts you're drawing from !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Platte. Don't get into it with me, bro! You're wrong, and you will be promptly spanked if you continue down this path.

I understand the pain you must feel....but don't hurt from it - just open your mind up and let it sink in....History (recorded) begins about 6000 years ago in the Middle East - same time and place The Bible claims creation occured. Don't dismiss or marginalize the importance of this because of ego.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Perhaps...but you don't have any History (recorded) before YEC claims creation was - 6000 years ago.

Except that the start of recorded history is just that: the start of recorded history. It's not THE start of history.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I understand the pain you must feel....but don't hurt from it - just open your mind up and let it sink in....History (recorded) begins about 6000 years ago in the Middle East - same time and place The Bible claims creation occured. Don't dismiss or marginalize the importance of this because of ego.

Ego? As if that's all it is ...

Quick, someone grab a Bible and quote 1 Corinthians 8:1 at me before things get out of hand!

 

[Shemjaza]

YEC does claim the earth was created 6000 years ago

Yes and recvorded history right up until 6000 years ago and artifacts demonstrating that isn't the beginning of time is a direct contradiction of that.

History (recorded) begins 6000 years ago....only 6000 years ago. And it begins in the Middle East! That is the same time and place that The Bible tells us the world was created. You claim the world is billions of years old....History (recorded) hitting that 6000 year old time in the billions of years you claim and place that the Bible tells us of the creation of the Earth is absolutely stunning.

It's a massive problem for YEC. The YEC claim is not simply that the Earth was created some Thursday around 4000 BC, it's that the whole literal narrative of Genesis took place... and that would mean that there was no artifacts writing or even recognisable language from 6000 years ago.

I understand the pain you must feel....but don't hurt from it - just open your mind up and let it sink in....History (recorded) begins about 6000 years ago in the Middle East - same time and place The Bible claims creation occured. Don't dismiss or marginalize the importance of this because of ego.

No one ever implied that Bible wasn't ancient or connected to very early civilisations... but the evidence that it is neither the oldest or literally accurate is overwhelming.

 

[Platte]

Yes and recvorded history right up until 6000 years ago and artifacts demonstrating that isn't the beginning of time is a direct contradiction of that.



It's a massive problem for YEC. The YEC claim is not simply that the Earth was created some Thursday around 4000 BC, it's that the whole literal narrative of Genesis took place... and that would mean that there was no artifacts writing or even recognisable language from 6000 years ago.



No one ever implied that Bible wasn't ancient or connected to very early civilisations... but the evidence that it is neither the oldest or literally accurate is overwhelming.

Good response.

How does History (recorded) contradict YEC - I don't understand the contradiction you say exists. And again - what is the massive problem you are saying exists? (I'm asking respectfully)

I agree the scientific evidence does not support the Earth being created 6000 years ago....but History (recorded) does - that's the primary point I was making and that is stunning to me.

 

[dlamberth]

History is not Science. Science is not History. The earth was created 6000 years ago - that is a historical statement.

Sorry, but that's nothing more than a religious statement.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Good response.

How does History (recorded) contradict YEC - I don't understand the contradiction you say exists. And again - what is the massive problem you are saying exists? (I'm asking respectfully)

I agree the scientific evidence does not support the Earth being created 6000 years ago....but History (recorded) does - that's the primary point I was making and that is stunning to me.

Some of this will depend on how one evaluates the use of human symbols as either art or human communication. Being that "recorded history" implies the advent of the invention of writing, it's slightly dubious to say all too firmly that 'recorded history' is or can only be that which we can recognize in systematic language.

I for one count the cave art of Lascaux, and of other even older caves, as a form of human representational depiction pertaining to human social life.

So yeah. I understand what you're saying about 'recorded history' emerging and coinciding roughly with seeming Biblical chronology and YEC, but there's a lot open in the meaning of that designation of "recorded."

 

[Ophiolite]

Hmmm. Recorded history begins in the same general time and place of creation. Interesting. Yeah. I agree just coincidence.

Hmmm. Recorded evidence by intelligent humans, showing important aspects of life, occurs in a different time (35,000 years ago) and in a different place (caves of southern Europe) to creation. Interesting, but inconvenient for your poorly evidenced position.

 

[Frank Robert]

lol - the fossils are recorded in the mud...but the time of the fossilization is not recorded.

More creationist distortion. Besides geology and paleontology what other cognitive distortions do you have? I would give you an lol except it is not a laughing matter.

 

[sjastro]

How should I know? I'm not into Egyptology.

I'll take a guess and say it was Thutmose I.

Of course you are not into Egyptology because it is in keeping with your philosophy of being willfully ignorant.
The story of Exodus is riddled with holes from a historical and archaeological perspective, using Ussher to date the Exodus adds a further hole.
The mummy of Thutmose I is a mystery because the poor chap died from an arrow wound not drowning in the Red sea.
In fact the identity of the mummy is open to question.

Egypt to use DNA tests to identify pharaoh Tuthmosis

Egypt will run DNA tests on an unidentified mummy to determine whether it is the pharaoh Tuthmosis I, who ruled over a period of military expansion and extensive construction, state news agency MENA said on Tuesday.

www.reuters.com

 

[AV1611VET]

Of course you are not into Egyptology because it is in keeping with your philosophy of being willfully ignorant.

Who's the ignorant one?

Your post 486 shows a mummy of someone who died of an arrow through his chest.

Then you claim he's the guy who followed Moses into the Red Sea.

You even name the guy, and he didn't even take the throne until AFTER his predecessor drowned.

Fact is, you have no idea who this guy is.

I'll tell you who I think it is:

It must either be Jimmy Hoffa or Harold Cookii.

 

[sjastro]

Yes but YEC also says the earth was created about 6000 years in the Middle East.

This makes as much sense as the snake that swallowed its tail and ended up devouring itself.

 

[Gene2memE]

Creationism belongs in history class, not science class.

As a historian by training and former teacher, yes. But also no.

Creationism could be taught in a history or science class as "this school of thought was once the prevailing belief among the populations of Christian dominated Europe and North America" or "this was the prevalent Christian belief concerning the diversity of life on earth prior to the development of the Theory of Evolution".

In history, it would probably be taught as part of a unit on how humanity's concept of our place in the world/universe has changed thanks to the development of the industrial and scientific revolutions. In science, it would probably be taught as a concept in the introductory part of a unit on evolutionary biology. Something like "that was what was believed then, this is what the evidence from science points to now".

If creationism appeared on a curriculum I was teaching, I'd discuss it much in the same way as notions of the luminiferous aether, phologiston, early models of the atom, the steady state universe, catastrophism or shrinking/expanding earth theories.

But, there's a qualitative difference between those and creationism. The latter is an explicitly religious doctrine, a portion of the population sincerely believes it, and its modern formulation is primarily a response to the success of evolutionary biology as a scientific theroy.

Given that creationism is a wholly different category than failed/superseded scientific theories, teaching about creationism is a much better fit for a religious class.

Again, if it was my class, I'd teach about it in a comparative setting as one of the many religious origin stories about the formation of life on earth. If you also lump in beliefs like catastrophism, geocentrism, various cosmonogies, astrology and other superseded/discarded religious notions of how the physical world works, there's enough there for a bunch of classes.

 

[sjastro]

Who's the ignorant one?

Your post 486 shows a mummy of someone who died of an arrow through his chest.

Then you claim he's the guy who followed Moses into the Red Sea.

You even name the guy, and he didn't even take the throne until AFTER his predecessor drowned.

Fact is, you have no idea who this guy is.

I'll tell you who I think it is:

It must either be Jimmy Hoffa or Harold Cookii.

Your legendary lack of basic comprehension skills is on show once again to the point you have confused yourself over who made what statements.
Have you forgotten my responses are written in the context of your claim the Exodus occurred in 1491 BC according to Ussher?
To put it in the simplest possible language for you to comprehend, there is no pharaoh who died in 1491 BC, the very latest date according to the evidence is Thutmose I died in 1493 BC.
Since you cannot provide any evidence of this 1491 BC date as requested by @Kylie, the counterevidence refuting this date is overwhelming.
Since Thutmose I died in 1493 BC, and the mysterious pharaoh of the Exodus died in 1491 BC which is cutting it fine lets play the devil's advocate and claim they are one in the same individual.
Here is another problem, the Egyptian Empire during Thutmose I reign.

The big question is how Egypt let alone the Egyptian empire survived for around another 400 years after Thutmose's death when it lost most of its population through the Exodus, or how 2 million individuals roaming the Sinai for forty years left absolutely no archaeological evidence of their presence.
Biblical archaeologists of the kind who try to fit the evidence to the Bible which is a form of pseudoscience mostly argue the Exodus occurred at a much later date during Egypt's 19th dynasty some 200 years after the Ussher date.

 

[AV1611VET]

To put it in the simplest possible language for you to comprehend, there is no pharaoh who died in 1491 BC, the very latest date according to the evidence is Thutmose I died in 1493 BC.

Then who reigned from 1493 - 1482, when Thutmose II took the throne?

 

[Gene2memE]

Hmmm. Recorded evidence by intelligent humans, showing important aspects of life, occurs in a different time (35,000 years ago) and in a different place (caves of southern Europe) to creation. Interesting, but inconvenient for your poorly evidenced position.

It's older than than.

Our ancestors have been deliberately creating cave art for at least 60,000 years.

We've been wearing animal skins for at least 400,000 years (and likely as far back as 750,000 years), making jewelry for at least 140,000 years and burying our dead for at least 125,000 years. Even complex activities, like making flutes and pipes, dates back at least 60,000 years.

 

[Astrid]

It's older than than.

Our ancestors have been deliberately creating cave art for at least 60,000 years.

We've been wearing animal skins for at least 400,000 years (and likely as far back as 750,000 years), making jewelry for at least 140,000 years and burying our dead for at least 125,000 years. Even complex activities, like making flutes and pipes, dates back at least 60,000 years.

So disgraceful to not acknowledge
that ancestors even existed.

 

[sjastro]

Then who reigned from 1493 - 1482, when Thutmose II took the throne?

????
The consensus is Thutmose II reigned from 1493-1479 BC.