YEC and Fossil Fuels

consol · Feb 25, 2009

If you want to know how long coal has been in the ground, ask a coal miner,
ask him about seams of coal, ask him if he thinks it was all laid down at the same time,
ask him about deep mining, some mines today are well over a 1,000 metres deep,
(and there is coal at much greater depths than that)
it's OK for a creationist to dismiss reality in their own head or amongst other creationists,
but when you argue against reality to others, all you do is make yourself look like a fool.

Religion is religion, anything goes, imagine and believe whatever you want,
reality is reality, unfortunately there are rules you must abide by, never try to mix the two, ever.

Hespera · Feb 25, 2009

consol said:
If you want to know how long coal has been in the ground, ask a coal miner,
ask him about seams of coal, ask him if he thinks it was all laid down at the same time,
ask him about deep mining, some mines today are well over a 1,000 metres deep,
(and there is coal at much greater depths than that)
it's OK for a creationist to dismiss reality in their own head or amongst other creationists,
but when you argue against reality to others, all you do is make yourself look like a fool.

Religion is religion, anything goes, imagine and believe whatever you want,
reality is reality, unfortunately there are rules you must abide by, never try to mix the two, ever.

Better still talk to a petroleum geologist about the complexity of the strata that contain oil.

For all of it to have happened in 6 days or one flood or both would just look more and more ridiculous to anyone who actually LOOKED at the evidence.

A person might try to sell a new house with layers of paint over old peeled paint, gas lines for gas lamps still in place, old wiring abandoned and newer wiring in place. Under the carpet there is an older carpet and a worn dirty floor. Coal dust in the basement. Termite damage. Newspapers from the 1920's stuffed into the walls for insulation.

You might claim that it was a new house, and that any dings are just from one wild party. But even a yeccer would see that the evidence and the claim dont match up.

Anyone can understand something simple like a house, we are all petty familir with them. It takes study and time and effort to learn to read the earth. So is reading Chinese. Easier to just say there is nothing there to read.

I heard someone say that the hills were formed when the earth was liquid, the hills are actually waves that hardened in place. Why not? Its as good a theory as water canopy or hydroplate.

AV1611VET · Feb 25, 2009

Hi, Gawron ---

Gawron said:
There are numerous examples to be found in various threads where members have made use of the acronym YEC as a pejorative...

Here, it's "fundy".

Gawron · Feb 25, 2009

Posted by Cabal:

"What would you rather be called?"

How about my name, or at least the one I post under? Additionally, I am not an adherent of young earth creationism, nor did I state so anywhere in my prior post. I find that is a common assumption made on these forums about anyone who questions anything concerning evolutionary science, or just science in general.

The mentality is obvious: "this guys doesn't toe the party line, he's a YEC!!" Tiresome. I am not going to restate my positions here, they are scattered all over the evolution threads.

Posted by Hespera:

"Saying it is "hidden" is a prejudicial comment."

I disagree. Someone having a hidden agenda is as common as changing your underware. You seem to be implying that in all cases hidden agendas must be motivated by negative, selfish, or biased factors. In the case of this particular OP I would agree, but not always.

"Anyway, you will never get agreement on what names to use."

Was not my intention.

Cabal · Feb 25, 2009

Gawron said:
How about my name, or at least the one I post under? Additionally, I am not an adherent of young earth creationism, nor did I state so anywhere in my prior post. I find that is a common assumption made on these forums about anyone who questions anything concerning evolutionary science, or just science in general.

The mentality is obvious: "this guys doesn't toe the party line, he's a YEC!!" Tiresome. I am not going to restate my positions here, they are scattered all over the evolution threads.

Ok, perhaps I'm missing something here, but your first post in this thread was to complain about the general labels in the OP - seeing as the OP wasn't addressing you and CactusJack presumably isn't clairvoyant, what else do you suggest but to use a general, non-offensive label?

Sorry you had bad experiences with offensive labels on other boards - but frankly this isn't one of them.

Hespera · Feb 25, 2009

Gawron said:
Posted by Cabal:

"What would you rather be called?"

How about my name, or at least the one I post under? Additionally, I am not an adherent of young earth creationism, nor did I state so anywhere in my prior post. I find that is a common assumption made on these forums about anyone who questions anything concerning evolutionary science, or just science in general.

The mentality is obvious: "this guys doesn't toe the party line, he's a YEC!!" Tiresome. I am not going to restate my positions here, they are scattered all over the evolution threads.

Posted by Hespera:

"Saying it is "hidden" is a prejudicial comment."

I disagree. .Someone having a hidden agenda is as common as changing your underware You seem to be implying that in all cases hidden agendas must be motivated by negative, selfish, or biased factors. In the case of this particular OP I would agree, but not always.

"Anyway, you will never get agreement on what names to use."

Was not my intention.

Good grief. You are REALLY over interpreting. If I SEEM a certain way to you, when i totally am not, that says something about you, not about me.

I just said that everyone who posts here has an agenda. Nothing remotely
negative / selfish whatever in any way stated or implied.

"Someone having a hidden agenda is as common as changing your underware" (sic) QUOTE//

Unsure of what sort of "ware" that is but to say "hidden agenda" is to put a negatory spin.

"The mentality is obvious: "this guys (sic) doesn't toe the party line, he's a YEC!!"QUOTE//

There is no party line. I think you are after straw men.

"Anyway, you will never get agreement on what names to use."

Was not my intention.[/quote]

If you dont have any agenda, dont want anything to change, why even bring this up?

Gawron · Feb 25, 2009

"Sorry you had bad experiences with offensive labels on other boards - but frankly this isn't one of them."

With respect, the problem is rampant here, or I would not have broached the issue here. It is irrelevant whether the OP was addressing me or not, my objection was not an insult to me, simply the premise of his OP. In my opinion as stated, his OP was never meant to engender debate or even seek answers. It was meant to draw out a YEC or two so they could be pounded on. I have seen it on these forums countless times.

I do not feel threatened, nor do I feel my children threatened, by someone holding a belief in young earth creationism. Socialism, that is another concern. I tend to believe that my children, as are most, are smart enough to "learn" about creationism and not become a mindless vegetable, just as when I was a child I learned about fascism and yet didn't become a fascist. But trying to enact laws which forbid a certain subject to be discussed, let alone taught? Where does that fall within the pantheon of human history, on either side?

However, I don't want to belabor the point beyond what has been stated. We will just wind up going in circles.

AV1611VET · Feb 25, 2009

Gawron said:
It was meant to draw out a YEC or two so they could be pounded on. I have seen it on these forums countless times.

What's wrong with that, bro?

I say BRING IT ON.

I eat those who draw out YECs for breakfast.

Cabal · Feb 25, 2009

AV1611VET said:
What's wrong with that, bro?

I say BRING IT ON.

I eat those who draw out YECs for breakfast.

Tough words from the /threadmaster.

Hespera · Feb 25, 2009

Gawron said:
"Sorry you had bad experiences with offensive labels on other boards - but frankly this isn't one of them."

With respect, the problem is rampant here, or I would not have broached the issue here. It is irrelevant whether the OP was addressing me or not, my objection was not an insult to me, simply the premise of his OP. In my opinion as stated, his OP was never meant to engender debate or even seek answers. It was meant to draw out a YEC or two so they could be pounded on. I have seen it on these forums countless times.

I do not feel threatened, nor do I feel my children threatened, by someone holding a belief in young earth creationism. Socialism, that is another concern. I tend to believe that my children, as are most, are smart enough to "learn" about creationism and not become a mindless vegetable, just as when I was a child I learned about fascism and yet didn't become a fascist. But trying to enact laws which forbid a certain subject to be discussed, let alone taught? Where does that fall within the pantheon of human history, on either side?

However, I don't want to belabor the point beyond what has been stated. We will just wind up going in circles.

On the other hand we have.....

Evilution is FALSE!! And here's the Proof!!

The Evolution Fraud!!!

Atheistic evolutionists...

Absurdities of so called science

A Question for Evolutionists

What is the point of these except to bring out debate? As I understand it this is a, like, DEBATE forum? If you think debate is "pounding on" dont be here.

"But trying to enact laws which forbid a certain subject to be discussed, let alone taught? Where does that fall within the pantheon of human history, on either side?" QUOTE//
Laws forbidding discussion?

Pantheon:: a temple dedicated to all the gods2: a building serving as the burial place of or containing memorials to the famous dead of a nation3: the gods of a people ; especially : the officially recognized gods4: a group of illustrious or notable persons or things

Not sure WHERE you are going with this but it has some characteristics of a thread hijack.

Hespera · Feb 25, 2009

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

What's wrong with that, bro?

I say BRING IT ON.

I eat those who draw out YECs for breakfast.

Cabal said:
Tough words from the /threadmaster.

Now THAT is funny. First good laugh I've had this morning. I am now trying to imagine "drawing out yecs for breakfast".

AV1611VET · Feb 25, 2009

Cabal said:
Tough words from the /threadmaster.

I'd say for about every time I've "/thread" due to repetition, you guys' have simply left the thread w/o responding; and if I have to factor in every time I've had to ask the same question two, three, and even four times, well ... you get the idea.

I'm courteous enough to let you know I'm leaving.

Cabal · Feb 25, 2009

Hespera said:
Originally Posted by AV1611VET

What's wrong with that, bro?

I say BRING IT ON.

I eat those who draw out YECs for breakfast.

Now THAT is funny. First good laugh I've had this morning. I am now trying to imagine "drawing out yecs for breakfast".

Like a BEAR

Cabal · Feb 25, 2009

AV1611VET said:
I'd say for about every time I've "/thread" due to repetition, you guys' have simply left the thread w/o responding; and if I have to factor in every time I've had to ask the same question two, three, and even four times, well ... you get the idea.

I'm courteous enough to let you know I'm leaving.

*sigh* again with the generalising, AV. I can't recall the last time I threaded on you mid-discussion.

But I digress - just letting you know that /threading doesn't really correlate with eating YEC-baiters for breakfast.

AV1611VET · Feb 25, 2009

Cabal said:
*sigh* again with the generalising, AV. I can't recall the last time I threaded on you mid-discussion.

I can't either, but it doesn't matter to my point.

Here is an example: 22 .

Cabal said:
But I digress - just letting you know that /threading doesn't really correlate with eating YEC-baiters for breakfast.

It does to me --- along with having to ask two, three, and four times.

I may not have had you for breakfast yet, but sooner or later I'll ask a question you'll know better than to answer.

One of my favorite shut-you-guys-up answer is: When you can show me a machine that can do this:

2 Kings 6:17 said:
And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

--- then I'll consider [insert pwn here].

In addition, I consider when I relegate you guys to ad hominems and/or joking comparable to breakfast.

Split Rock · Feb 25, 2009

Gawron said:
"Sorry you had bad experiences with offensive labels on other boards - but frankly this isn't one of them."

With respect, the problem is rampant here, or I would not have broached the issue here. It is irrelevant whether the OP was addressing me or not, my objection was not an insult to me, simply the premise of his OP. In my opinion as stated, his OP was never meant to engender debate or even seek answers. It was meant to draw out a YEC or two so they could be pounded on. I have seen it on these forums countless times.

You really should not make assumptions about other people's motives.

Gawron said:
I do not feel threatened, nor do I feel my children threatened, by someone holding a belief in young earth creationism. Socialism, that is another concern. I tend to believe that my children, as are most, are smart enough to "learn" about creationism and not become a mindless vegetable, just as when I was a child I learned about fascism and yet didn't become a fascist. But trying to enact laws which forbid a certain subject to be discussed, let alone taught? Where does that fall within the pantheon of human history, on either side?

Can you explain why creationists are afraid to let science be taught in science classes? Are they afraid that their kids will become "evolutionists" because they learn what evolution really is, rather than the characature paraded around by creationist organizations?

AV1611VET said:
What's wrong with that, bro?

I say BRING IT ON.

I eat those who draw out YECs for breakfast.

Why should you care?... you are not a YEC.

Cabal · Feb 25, 2009

AV1611VET said:
I can't either, but it doesn't matter to my point.

It means you shouldn't run away as much.

AV1611VET said:
Here is an example: 22 .

You admitted you didn't know or care two posts afterwards. If you don't care or want to know, don't whine at us for attempting to answer before you reveal that convenient fact.

AV1611VET said:
It does to me --- along with having to ask two, three, and four times.

As opposed to the times you've run away on me when I've left you plenty of questions you've ignored and not even attempted to answer? I think I've had you for breakfast, lunch and dinner, several times over.

AV1611VET said:
I may not have had you for breakfast yet, but sooner or later I'll ask a question you'll know better than to answer.
One of my favorite shut-you-guys-up answer is: When you can show me a machine that can do this:--- then I'll consider [insert pwn here].

Wow, literally a deus ex machina. This is ever relevant to what we discuss, how, exactly?

AV1611VET said:
In addition, I consider when I relegate you guys to ad hominems and/or joking comparable to breakfast.

So, don't complain when it gets done to you? Or consider setting a good example for a change?

Anyway, to the point in hand - if you think a comparatively polite OP addressing a topic collectively to YECs counts as baiting, I strongly advise you to rethink this ill-advised persecution complex and escalating what was a calm discussion.

AV1611VET · Feb 25, 2009

Here's a doosey: 36 .

AV1611VET · Feb 25, 2009

Split Rock said:
Why should you care?... you are not a YEC.

No --- but I'm the next best thing to one.

And besides, why should they get all the fun pwning you guys?

AV1611VET · Feb 25, 2009

Cabal said:
Anyway, to the point in hand - if you think a comparatively polite OP addressing a topic collectively to YECs counts as baiting, I strongly advise you to rethink this ill-advised persecution complex and escalating what was a calm discussion.

Please show me where I think that --- by highlighting in red a post I made to that effect.

[speaking of breakfast]

I'll be glad to ask you to do it a second time, if I have to.

YEC and Fossil Fuels

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Conflation of Blathers

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency