The population argument for a young Earth

[Pete Harcoff]

It comes as no surprise that those at AiG are Christians who are all called to evangelise anyway. However I fail to see how you can ignore the huge contribution they make to reveal to others the scientific truth that you would not hear in an evolution polluted science class room

But they don't actually do science. They have it mandated in their faith statement that they will reject anything that doesn't jive with their interpretation of the Bible:

"The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer and Judge."

"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."

You can't adhere to that and proclaim to be scientific. It's incompatible. Face it, they are an evangelical organization and their only goal is to spread the Gospel. It's right there in their mission statement and faith statement. You should read it.

 

[Sheffey]

Don't bother. Why don't you use the thing God gave you to investegate this issue for yourself? You are now basically proclaiming unresearched claims by the people from AIG and say as if we never heard them before.

Let me give you a spoiler alert: we have. It's a pratt (points refutted a thousand times), and as the name implies has been refuted. Unless you have something new to contribute, you really shouldn't bother going over to AIG again. It makes you look like a brainwashed robot or something that can't think stuff up for yourself.

Okay Thanks for the heads up

if you have all read all the arguments and do not belive them then i wont say them.......

ill look for some more scientific evidence
course I am not a scientist so i will need to use some of the scientific websites and books. I will try to get some secular ones as well.

 

[Sheffey]

Why doesnt anybody who does not like AIG try to go the website, send them an email and try to SCIENTFICALLY prove Creationism wrong. not attack their science but try to disprove it with science.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Why doesnt anybody who does not like AIG try to go the website, send them an email and try to SCIENTFICALLY prove Creationism wrong. not attack their science but try to disprove it with science.

AiG isn't interested in science. They have it mandated in their faith statement that anything that disagrees with their beliefs is wrong. Period. You can't argue with people like that.

 

[wagsbags]

Just go to talkorigins.org or that other site I posted. They do a fine job of it.

 

[Mistermystery]

A4C, I ask you to please respond directly and logically to my post below.

Does not compute.

 

[Mistermystery]

Why doesnt anybody who does not like AIG try to go the website, send them an email and try to SCIENTFICALLY prove Creationism wrong. not attack their science but try to disprove it with science.

Because they won't accept it. Look at what Pete wrote:

But they don't actually do science. They have it mandated in their faith statement that they will reject anything that doesn't jive with their interpretation of the Bible:

"The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer and Judge."

"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."

You can't adhere to that and proclaim to be scientific. It's incompatible. Face it, they are an evangelical organization and their only goal is to spread the Gospel. It's right there in their mission statement and faith statement. You should read it.

They aren't practicing science my dear Sheffy..

 

[wagsbags]

*bump* *cough* rabbits *cough*

 

[Roman Soldier]

I'd make the opposite argument. The human population could not have increased enough from the time Noah got off the ark to Ancient times to explain the population of the ancient world.

 

[wagsbags]

So basically rabbits don't count because they negate your argument?