My Reconciliation Challenge

[AV1611VET]

How would you reconcile these two statements w/o being disrespectful to either one:

1. This rock has been in existence for 6100 years.
2. This rock is 4.57 billion years old.

 

[RealityCheck]

How would you reconcile these two statements w/o being disrespectful to either one:

1. This rock has been in existence for 6100 years.
2. This rock is 4.57 billion years old.

Math doesn't work that way. It's either one value or the other (or neither).

There is no way to reconcile these two claims - one is wrong, or both are wrong, but they cannot both be right.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

I cannot. It is impossible. That should come as no surprise, since this newest challenge of yours is the elaborate equivalent of "Add 1 and 1 without making it 2".

 

[pikatore]

You tell me.

One statement was written in a holy book, and one was derived from scientifically sound practices.

You choose to believe the one is the holy book, because you have an unshakable faith in it. No amount of scientific data will convince you otherwise.

And as that amount of data grows and grows, much like that for other controversial things such as evolution, you will continue to place your faith in supernatural claims that you have never once doubted due to your complete submission to your faith (aka OTHER PEOPLES UNPROVEN CLAIMS).

There are none so blind as those who don't want to see. If science is just going to remain to you as a big fat sham, as vague rubbish that is too silly for you to even have more than a glance at, then reconciliation is impossible.

Such extreme, unshakeable ideologies such as the one you mention will never be able to be reconciled.

 

[moogoob]

I cannot. It is impossible. That should come as no surprise, since this newest challenge of yours is the elaborate equivalent of "Add 1 and 1 without making it 2".

Reminds me of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four for some strange reason.

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

How would you reconcile these two statements w/o being disrespectful to either one:

1. This rock has been in existence for 6100 years.
2. This rock is 4.57 billion years old.

There is no reconciliation; the creationists have got it completely and utterly wrong. Of course this is not the worst of it, they peddle this bull**** to the religiously indoctrinated as fact, when it is based on nothing more that a bronze aged text.

 

[Staccato]

How would you reconcile these two statements w/o being disrespectful to either one:

1. This rock has been in existence for 6100 years.
2. This rock is 4.57 billion years old.

Should we give the correct answer, or the answer you wish to hear?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Reminds me of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four for some strange reason.

I bet that AV1611VET would feel right at home in the Ministry of Love. One, two, 6100, 4.5 billion, what's the difference? The we-have-absolute-truth claims of creationism meet postmodern arbitrariness - a scary thought indeed.

 

[Vene]

I accept the second one as factual and the first one as a work of fiction. And before you call this disrespectful I happen to like fiction.

 

[Molal]

There is no reconciliation between the two statements. Either one is right and one is wrong or both are wrong, but both cannot be right.

But, the answer to life, the universe and everything is 42.

 

[Braunwyn]

How would you reconcile these two statements w/o being disrespectful to either one:

1. This rock has been in existence for 6100 years.
2. This rock is 4.57 billion years old.

"Disrespectful" is an interesting choice of words.

 

[TheManeki]

Hold yer horses, AV. Your challenge jumps the gun.

We should start with finding out exactly how the holder of said rock arrived at both ages. Then move onto why the holder believes they must be reconciled, and respectfully reconciled at that. With those subjects out of the way, then can move onto the actual reconciliation.

 

[AV1611VET]

There are none so blind as those who don't want to see.
...
Such extreme, unshakeable ideologies such as the one you mention will never be able to be reconciled.

Then who's the blind one here?

 

[AV1611VET]

Should we give the correct answer, or the answer you wish to hear?

Just give me the answer I wish to hear, and you'll kill two birds with one stone.

 

[Ajnin]

The answer is simple. The rock is 4.57 billion years old, so it's easily been in existence for 6100 years and more.

 

[Braunwyn]

Just give me the answer I wish to hear, and you'll kill two birds with one stone.

Can you answer your own question? just curious.

 

[Mallon]

One statement was written in a holy book, and one was derived from scientifically sound practices.

For what it's worth, the OP's first statement isn't even written in the Bible.

 

[atomweaver]

Just give me the answer I wish to hear, and you'll kill two birds with one stone.

"We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. "

http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/religion_science_collaboration.htm

 

[Molal]

I'm with TheManeki on this one. We need to do this:

We should start with finding out exactly how the holder of said rock arrived at both ages. Then move onto why the holder believes they must be reconciled, and respectfully reconciled at that. With those subjects out of the way, then can move onto the actual reconciliation.

Before we go on. So AV, can you answer TheManeki's request?

 

[AV1611VET]

But, the answer to life, the universe and everything is 42.

Not bad --- 42 is the number of the Lord's first advent ---