To all athiests out there: bring it on

[tacoman528]

to David Gould's second question,
please do, I'll do my best to answer them

 

[seebs]

tacoman58: Mr. Dino has simply *ignored* several people who have sent in to ask him to clarify the terms. The existing terms are so vague that God Himself couldn't win that reward without the use of force. Mr. Hovind is a disgraceful predator who has spotted an easy opportunity to make money selling videotapes to people who are afraid of evolution; he is not a scientist, and he has a consistent record of questionable morality, which supports the theory that he's just an outright con man.

I think the YEC cause is stronger when you don't include his nonsense. (To say nothing of how a guy who can't pay his taxes will come up with a $250k reward.)

 

[ifriit]

daughter of the king: how did the people get that age??? we God created the world he did not create in new he created it fully mature, adam was a man not a baby.

[...]

so who is to say God didn't create the world thousands of years old??!!

Radiometric dating is determined through the measurement of various radioactive isotopes.  If you wish to claim that the earth and the solar system were created with the "appearance" of age, then please explain why this is so, and show your evidence.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

I knew when I read the OP that Hovind was at the bottom of this. tacoman528, you seem like a nice (if confused) person, and you're new around here so you have no reason to know how often and how thoroughly Hovind's nonsense has been thrashed.

I'll repeat what others have written. If you want to argue for the YEC view, you will have to refer to science to support your points. If the best arrows in your quiver are arguments you have gleaned from Hovind's presentations, you might want to reconsider your challenge to us. "Dr. Dino" is a fraud and a bad joke with no scientific credentials, no real understanding of what he fights against, and a nice fat bank account thanks to those who share his prejudices and bewilderment.

 

[tacoman528]

To Aceldama,
Whew, this is gonna be a long one. I can't prove that the earth is exactly 6000 yrs old, but I can give proof of why the earth is just about that old. Here it goes.

The moon is slowly moving away from the earth, at about six inches per year. Using the information of this lunar movement we can calculate that If the earth is 6000 years old Then the moon was about 3/4 of a mile closer to the earth way back then. There is no problem with that. However, only 3.1 million years ago, the moon would have been so close, it would have affected the tides so that all of the dry land on earth would be flooded over twice a day! Not allowing for any life on dry land. And you say that dinosaurs lived 250 million years ago. Don't think so.

Another reason: When Nasa was planning the first trip to the moon. They assumed that the moon was millions of years old. They took into consideration that a heck of a lot of dust should have accumulated. They calculated that one inch of dust settles on the moon every 10,000 years. They were expecting miles and miles of dust because most of them thought that the moon was a billion years old. They even built large pads on the bottom to prevent it from sinking in the miles and miles of dust. They were wrong. When the lunar lander got there, they found only about a half-inch of dust. Showing that the moon was less than 10,000 years old.

I'm sorry, I am in school right now and the bell just rang. I'm not lying, God says not to lie. I'll finish this explanation in a few hours.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Receding moon and moon dust. <sigh>

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Originally posted by tacoman528

The moon is slowly moving away from the earth, at about six inches per year. Using the information of this lunar movement we can calculate that If the earth is 6000 years old Then the moon was about 3/4 of a mile closer to the earth way back then. There is no problem with that. However, only 3.1 million years ago, the moon would have been so close, it would have affected the tides so that all of the dry land on earth would be flooded over twice a day! Not allowing for any life on dry land. And you say that dinosaurs lived 250 million years ago. Don't think so.

Wrong

Another reason: When Nasa was planning the first trip to the moon. They assumed that the moon was millions of years old. They took into consideration that a heck of a lot of dust should have accumulated. They calculated that one inch of dust settles on the moon every 10,000 years. They were expecting miles and miles of dust because most of them thought that the moon was a billion years old. They even built large pads on the bottom to prevent it from sinking in the miles and miles of dust. They were wrong. When the lunar lander got there, they found only about a half-inch of dust. Showing that the moon was less than 10,000 years old.

Wrong

If you're going to bring Hovind arguments into this, you should be aware that virtually everything Hovind has claimed from a "scientific" stance has been soundly refuted time and time again.

And my flood questions remain unaddressed (though Willowolf took a shot, even if his answers didn't really address my questions in full).

edit: linked wrong page by mistake

 

[seebs]

The moon movement thing falls to the same problem as the "change in magnetic field" thing - it assumes that nothing ever changed. I'd have to see a citation from someone like, say, NASA.

As to the moon dust thing, long debunked; early *estimates* suggested that it should be pretty deep, but later estimates, before the moon landing, suggested "a couple of inches". The early estimates were based on a lot of pure guesses without any basis in fact. The thing about the large pads is simply untrue; they were not "to keep it from sinking in miles of dust".

Tacoman, you're a good guy, and I can tell you don't lie, because you haven't changed anything except the exact choice of words in repeating things other people said. However, it would do you well to consider the possibility that *those* people lie! Some of them do. Most of them are just mistaken, or confused, or unfamiliar with relevant math or science, but some of them are actually lying to you.

And yes, God says not to lie, and that's the thing that bugs me the most; people get so caught up in this that they'd rather disobey God than allow for the possibility that He's more subtle than they thought.

 

[seebs]

Guys, I know it's frustrating to see someone bringing up old Hovind arguments again, but remember, we're dealing with an honest kid who is doing his best to enlighten us. Good science requires that we try to correct him; good conscience requires that we do so politely, and patiently.

 

[lithium.]

Dang lol you guys already relied to tacoman528 post while I was replying lol another wasted post.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Originally posted by seebs
Guys, I know it's frustrating to see someone bringing up old Hovind arguments again, but remember, we're dealing with an honest kid who is doing his best to enlighten us. Good science requires that we try to correct him; good conscience requires that we do so politely, and patiently.

Personally, I thought his opening post was a bit hostile (at least the "I will personally make sure that you never use that against a new christian who doesn't absolutely know every little trick that you use on the likes of them" bit).

That said, I don't think he's ever been in such a debate before, otherwise he would have already realized the improbability of the task he set for himself. (That, and he would have avoided mentioning Hovind.)

 

[seebs]

I agree that his opening post was a bit hostile, but try to see it from the point of view of a 15-year old who just found all sorts of evidence on the web, and lots of misguided people... Let's give him a bit of a break.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

tacoman528, here are a few more links to consider when advancing the moon dust and receding moon arguments. They dovetail nicely with those provided by Pete Harcoff:

Moon Dust: www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moon-dust.html

www.infidels.org/library/modern/dave_matson/young-earth/specific_arguments/moon_dust.html

Receding Moon: www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moonrec.html (This is an article you can link to via Pete's link as well.)

www.infidels.org/library/modern/dave_matson/young-earth/specific_arguments/moon_recede.html

seebs, if I came off as unconstructively harsh, I apologize. You're right. tacoman528 seems to me like a nice, misguided kid who is looking for answers. My frustration lies not with him but with the people who have propagandized him with this sub-scientific claptrap. Knowing they can't make a dent in the scientific community with their foolishness, they target those who aren't in a position (either through age, inexperience, miseducation or intellectual laziness) to adequately assess their claims.

All of this Hovindesque garbage would disappear virtually overnight if the man had the stones to submit to a written debate with someone learned in the relevant field(s), but of course he won't, and so here we are again.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Originally posted by seebs
I agree that his opening post was a bit hostile, but try to see it from the point of view of a 15-year old who just found all sorts of evidence on the web, and lots of misguided people... Let's give him a bit of a break.

All right, in the interest of diplomacy, tacoman528 I'd urge you to visit http://www.talkorigins.org/ and familiarize yourself with the "evolutionist" side of the argument (I'll assume you're already familiar with the various creationist literature from places like AIG and ICR).

Picking up some books on the general sciences (biology, astronomy, geology), so you have a better understanding of why the scientific community accepts that the world is billions of years old, evolution happens, etc, would also help.

And it doesn't hurt to check the forum archives, so you won't retread old ground that has been covered time and time again in the past.

 

[seebs]

That's much better. I'm sure we'll all get along now.

 

[ocean]

I'm not even going to comment on this thread. tacoman528 is only 15 and he&nbsp;doesn't know what he's talking about. Maybe in a few years he can come up with some valid points.

I think you should have to be at least 18 before you can post on the science/creation/evolution board.

 

[Morat]

And, Tacoman? If you're going to play, you owe it to yourself to get better sources than Hovind.

Not that ICR or AIG is much better, (AIG at least has the grace to admit some arguments are insanely bad), but Hovind is bottom barrel.

Trained monkeys could spot the flaws, errors, and deceptions that Hovind uses. Using Dr. Dino is just setting yourself up for a nasty fall.

 

[JohnR7]

Originally posted by ocean
I think you should have to be at least 18 before you can post on the science/creation/evolution board.

I do not like the abuse teenagers have to put up with on here. But if they can handle it, they are more than welcome as far as I am concerned. Did you know that David was about 14 when he defeated Golieth? Did you know that Mary was not much more then 14 when she brought the baby Jesus into the world.

There is no question that God uses teenagers. The enemy uses them to if you have read up on the shootings in our schools.

 

[JesusServant]

Originally posted by seebs
I agree that his opening post was a bit hostile, but try to see it from the point of view of a 15-year old who just found all sorts of evidence on the web, and lots of misguided people... Let's give him a bit of a break.

I love you seebs, just thought you should know.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Originally posted by ocean
I think you should have to be at least 18 before you can post on the science/creation/evolution board.

I don't think age is a factor. I've seen people of all ages recycle the same oft-refuted arguments again and again. I think it's more an issue of education and experience.

That's why my advice for anyone wanting to jump in on a creation/evolution debate is to familiarize yourself with the arguments on all sides of the debate (and there are plenty of web sites for that). And try lurking on creation/evolution forums before jumping in.