Four questions for YECs - (and a little history of creationism vs evolution)

[FreeGrace]

14 hours ago, Sparks said:

Radio Carbon dating does not work.  There is more C-14 being generated in the atmosphere today that before, and more today than has depleted because the world is not that old, and that is only partially why it fails.

If I may be so rude, does anyone know the approximate age of the earth?  When you said "world is not that old", it suggests that it is at least way older than Adam.

Thanks.

[The Barbarian]

9 hours ago, Sparks said:

The only type of evolution that is real and observed is microevolution.

As you noted, the definition of macroevolution is speciation.    I realize that creationists came up with their own definition, but it makes no difference at all to reality.

9 hours ago, Sparks said:

You mistake microevolution for macro, which is why you believe Darwinian Evolution is observed. 

You were misled there, too.  Darwinian evolution is merely in Darwin's own words, "descent with modification."   Which covers both microevolution and macroevolution.

BTW, your definition of "macroevolution" would mean that the evolution of humans and chimpanzees from a common ancestor would be "microevolution."   Rock and an hard place.

9 hours ago, Sparks said:

It is pointless to discuss this or most any topic with you.  I tried, though. 

You've actually been very useful.   You've galloped through pretty much all the old creationist misconceptions and our discussions of them are probably very useful for others here.

 

[The Barbarian]

23 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

If I may be so rude, does anyone know the approximate age of the earth?  When you said "world is not that old", it suggests that it is at least way older than Adam.

Thanks.

Physics and radioassays indicate it's about it's a bit over 4.5 billion years old. 

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/how-did-scientists-calculate-age-earth/

[Sparks]

2 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

If I may be so rude, does anyone know the approximate age of the earth?  When you said "world is not that old", it suggests that it is at least way older than Adam.

Thanks.

No one knows exactly, but young Earth creationists believe it is about 6,000 years because of historical/legal reasons.  Evolutionists and atheists believe it is 60 trillion years old, because their instrumentation cannot be calibrated, and they cannot really measure distances to the stars using 3 different techniques that also don't work (one method works, but only at relatively short distances).

[Sparks]

2 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

The word "theory" is what people "think" or "guess" what may have happened during the time gap.  I haven't offered what I "think".  

I have offered ONLY how key words in v.2 are translated elsewhere in the OT in order to understand more clearly what v.2 is really saying.  And it SHOWS a time gap between v.1 and 2.

It obviously takes some time for the earth to BECOME a wasteland, which it wasn't created as.

In a giant flood, it takes no time to be a wasteland.  As for the gap theory (whether you tell the legends that are not written or not), has no evidence.

[Sparks]

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

As you noted, the definition of macroevolution is speciation.    I realize that creationists came up with their own definition, but it makes no difference at all to reality.

You were misled there, too.  Darwinian evolution is merely in Darwin's own words, "descent with modification."   Which covers both microevolution and macroevolution.

BTW, your definition of "macroevolution" would mean that the evolution of humans and chimpanzees from a common ancestor would be "microevolution."   Rock and an hard place.

You've actually been very useful.   You've galloped through pretty much all the old creationist misconceptions and our discussions of them are probably very useful for others here.

 

As soon as you figure out microevolution is within species, and macroevolution is above species to become new kinds, you will have a handle on why all this bunk does not work.  It has nothing to so with time, it has to do with new information which actually never arrives, so macro never happens.  Worse, macro has NEVER happened.  It does not matter if you have infinite time.

The biggest problem in dealing with you on evolution is you don't even get the theory right, or understand it.  You make up your own through misinterpretation.

[The Barbarian]

44 minutes ago, Sparks said:

As soon as you figure out microevolution is within species, and macroevolution is above species to become new kinds, you will have a handle on why all this bunk does not work.  It has nothing to so with time, it has to do with new information which actually never arrives, so macro never happens. 

You missed that one because you don't know what information is, or how to calculate it.   Claude Shannon, who first worked out a usable theory of information applied it first to genetics.   It turns out that every new mutation in a population increases information for that gene.   Would you like me to show you a simple calculation?   And we know Shannon's theory works, because it tells us how to have spacecraft communicate over billions of kilometers with very low-powered transmitters.  

So would you like to see some numbers showing how new information arises in evolution?

50 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Worse, macro has NEVER happened.  It does not matter if you have infinite time.

It's been directly observed to happen, as you learned earlier.  The biggest problem in dealing with you on evolution is you don't even get the theory right, or understand it.  You make up your own through misinterpretation.

 

[Sparks]

18 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

You missed that one because you don't know what information is, or how to calculate it.   Claude Shannon, who first worked out a usable theory of information applied it first to genetics.   It turns out that every new mutation in a population increases information for that gene.   Would you like me to show you a simple calculation?   And we know Shannon's theory works, because it tells us how to have spacecraft communicate over billions of kilometers with very low-powered transmitters.  

So would you like to see some numbers showing how new information arises in evolution?

It's been directly observed to happen, as you learned earlier.  The biggest problem in dealing with you on evolution is you don't even get the theory right, or understand it.  You make up your own through misinterpretation.

 

There is either Creationism, or Evolution.  The two are diametric opposites. There is nothing in the middle, but you try to make a middle and mix the two as something called Theistic Evolution, which requires a massive misinterpretation of Bible. 

Neither side agrees with you.  God told you what he did, but you have to insert human thinking.  You think you see evidence for evolution, but that is evidence of a world-wide flood, and God's judgement.

Macroevolution has never been directly observed.  But Micro has. 

[kwikphilly]

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

If I may be so rude, does anyone know the approximate age of the earth?  When you said "world is not that old", it suggests that it is at least way older than Adam.

Thanks.

Lol.....Contrary to what ANYONE thinks or believes," No,they( people) do not"

There is but ONE Who Knows exactly how old ( or young) the earth is and does not have to approximate nor speculate

Glory to God! Yes, indeed the earth is older than Adam ( way older? That's hard to say,isn't it?) I cannot begin to fathom the idea that a Supreme,Eternal,Infinite GOD created " Time" and set it in motion,for us.... Mind boggling

In His Love, Kwik

[The Barbarian]

2 minutes ago, Sparks said:

There is either Creationism, or Evolution. 

You're assuming that YE creationism, as invented by the Seventh-Day Adventists, is the only kind.   That's a major error.   Since many evolutionists, including Darwin, have believed that God created the first living things, they are also "creationists", who recognized God's hand in nature.   So you're wrong about that.

YE creationism as you have seen, depends on a massive misinterpretation of Bible.   Other forms, not so much.   Some OE creationist and theistic evolutionist ideas tend to accept God's word as it is.  All of us accept that God created all things.   The point is that YE creationists don't approve of the way He does it.

All your denial notwithstanding.   God has it right, and you have it wrong.