Why do creationists insist that the theory of evolution is inherently atheistic?

[AV1611VET]

Both say the earth is only 6,000 years old. How is that not a young earth belief?

Either way it is just making stuff up.

Again, just making stuff up.

The only difference is the context in which it is used.

I kind of like poofed. What about "said" and "let"?

I believe the consensus of theologians is heavens. The KJV version is wrong, though a minor error.

That happens when one has to translate from one language to another.

And I thank you too for demonstrating what I'm talking about.

No, perhaps you should.

From Wiki: "The word polystrate is not a standard geological term. This term is typically only found in creationist publications".


SOURCE

You're worried about the non-use of "standard geological terms" when you just said what you did?

Wow.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Fine, feel free to use the word "polystrate". It does not really matter. They myth of "polystrate fossils" was dealt with over 100 years ago.

If you want to try to use an argument that your side lost that long ago it is fine with me.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you want to try to use an argument that your side lost that long ago it is fine with me.

No, thanks.

Science can take a hike.

And frankly, I find using (or trying to use) science to confirm Scripture is an act of faithlessness.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, thanks.

Science can take a hike.

And frankly, I find using (or trying to use) science to confirm Scripture is an act of faithlessness.

In other words, AVET admits he is wrong.

I do agree that there is no point in using science to confirm superstition. That would be a crazy idea.

 

[TheReasoner]

I find using (or trying to use) science to confirm Scripture is an act of faithlessness.

In other words you admit that your view has no basis in reality at all, as objective study of it will contradict you on every issue.

Doesn't sound like faith to me.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I wasn't referring to dad, I was referring to someone who is ... shall we say ... likes to think he is very sincere in his posts.

He is. You should learn form him.

 

[AV1611VET]

In other words you admit that your view has no basis in reality at all,

I'll let you guys do that for me.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'll let you guys do that for me.

Expose your nonsense for you? With pleasure.

 

[RickG]

And I thank you too for demonstrating what I'm talking about.

Except the difference is that I conveyed the absolute factual truth instead of playing word games.

You're worried about the non-use of "standard geological terms" when you just said what you did?

Wow.

Yeah wow. You are the one who gave the Wiki reference and represented it as a geologic term. I merely pointed out that in your reference it clearly states that it indeed is not, rather an invention of creationists.

 

[RickG]

Science can take a hike.

So you are leaving the science forum? Miracles do happen.

And frankly, I find using (or trying to use) science to confirm Scripture is an act of faithlessness.

That is what I have been saying all along. Does that mean you are now abandoning the embedded age fallacy?

 

[AV1611VET]

Yeah wow. You are the one who gave the Wiki reference and represented it as a geologic term. I merely pointed out that in your reference it clearly states that it indeed is not, rather an invention of creationists.

So? it was invented by creationists.

Are creationists off-limits to coining phrases?

(And please be aware that I consider TEs as creationists also.)

 

[AV1611VET]

So you are leaving the science forum?

Ya -- just like someone else who said he was leaving, but is still here venomizing YECs with fly-by threads.

Miracles do happen.

Please keep that in mind the next time you hear something about a global flood.

That is what I have been saying all along. Does that mean you are now abandoning the embedded age fallacy?

As I said here:

I'll take questions on Embedded Age Creation:

• Definition = maturity without history
• Method = creatio ex nihilo
• Unique features:
  • requires omnipotence
  • laws of science not in effect
  • occurred BC4004 (according to Ussher's dating)
  • no evidence left behind
  • no scarring
  • completed in 6 days (on purpose)
• Described in detail in Genesis 1
• Witnessed by the angels

... embedded age is not about science.

 

[KWCrazy]

In other words you admit that your view has no basis in reality at all

News flash. Science does not equal reality. Science is only the study of the physical world.

 

[Split Rock]

News flash. Science does not equal reality. Science is only the study of the physical world.

And reality = what we see in the physical world.

 

[TLK Valentine]

So? it was invented by creationists.

Are creationists off-limits to coining phrases?

Of coutrse not -- but only phrases that are useful will be taken seriously.

(And please be aware that I consider TEs as creationists also.)

Please be aware that nobody cares what you consider.

 

[AV1611VET]

Please be aware that nobody cares what you consider.

Except Wikipedia?

Theistic evolution or evolutionary creation is...

 

[KWCrazy]

And reality = what we see in the physical world.

Only if you deny all things unseen. Electricity was once unknown. The power of the atom was once unknown. Nobody knew rocks would burn before they discovered coal. There are many, many unexplained things in thei word that intelligent people can't simply ignore.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Except Wikipedia?

Nope, not even Wikipedia.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Only if you deny all things unseen. Electricity was once unknown. The power of the atom was once unknown. Nobody knew rocks would burn before they discovered coal. There are many, many unexplained things in thei word that intelligent people can't simply ignore.

And then we found them and they're not unknown anymore. Who helped out with that?

 

[Split Rock]

Only if you deny all things unseen. Electricity was once unknown. The power of the atom was once unknown. Nobody knew rocks would burn before they discovered coal. There are many, many unexplained things in thei word that intelligent people can't simply ignore.

And which are understood by ignoring what the reality of the physical world tells us? None.