Creationists Present: Arguments Creationists Should Not Use

[Joshua-777]

What you believe does not make you a racist, how you act on your beliefs determines if you are a racist.

If you believe that your race is superior to any other race for any reason, whether you act on it or not, you are racist in my opinion. But this is beside the point. Whether a theory is racist or not, which evolution is clearly not, doesn't change whether it is true. And whether a theory's origins were racist or not doesn't change whether it is racist now.

How can the basic theory of evolution be called racist? What part of the survival of the fittest do you have a problem with. It may be able to be used to pseudo-scientifically support racism, but the theory itself would not be racist. I just don't think it's a valid argument for anything.

Even if evolution is racist, which it's not, what's your point? Are you trying to make evolutionists feel guilty or discredit evolution? What's your aim with this point?

Ya know, we can bring this into more bias.

Evolutionist, YOu are a racest!!! because you are racist against creationists.

Creationist You are racist, because you are racist against evolutionists!

Just kidding, lol please dont take that seriously

The way I see it though,

We've got we are Children of a lower primate

Or we are children of the LIVING GOD.

I'm a child of the father of lights, The living God, who if you knew, you would know the reason for my faith in him.

[SaturnV]

You are under the misconception that most christians believe the earth is 10,000 years old. The majority of us believe in an old earth. My personal belief is 300 Billion years. I also think that the most modern science agrees with that number.

Then you are one of the more rational Christians here. As you say, most Christians believe in an old earth. Most of the Christian posters here , however, believe in the literal reading of Genesis - that it took 6 days to create the universe. Your figure is out the other way - the current theory is a 4.6 Bn year-old Earth, and 13 Bn year-old Universe.

Actually if you look at the newest research in astrophysics, they now believe the Universe is very close to 300 billion years old.

The Earth in its current form is much younger. Current form being, post lunar birth.

I've really not been keeping up on the latest in astrophysics. If you're right, though, that is seriously cool.

Would you mind providing a source that I could check into on that?

[TomPJr]

You appear even more goofy when you come onto a Christian board to "learn about Christian beliefs" with your fingers stuck into your ears. And you preach some sophomoric fable about rocks somehow turning into beautiful babies!

Psst Dave!

We are not children, we know babies come from their mothers!

Sorry, Joe, I'm sure you're a nice guy in the flesh, but when you reply to me, you come across as someone on hallucinogenic drugs. I am here, since this forum is entitled 'apologetics - Faith vs Science' ie You are the apologian defending your faith, I represent science.

If you want everyone on here to agree, then you'd have one thread that ran something like:

HorizonEast: 'God did it all, in 6 days'.

Fresnjoe: 'I agree. Praise Jesus'!

There would be no need, nor, indeed, any point, in continuing.

I am not attacking your faith. Indeed, if I did, and let off full bore, I'd be a lot less kind than I am being.

But I do care about science, and the truth that it reveals. This is an absolute truth, not a metaphysical truth.

I do not, and never have, talked about rocks turning into babies. Indeed, no scientist ever has, as far as I am aware.

I talk about evolution, and defend it, because I can see the evidence with my eyes. I talk about geology, becasue I have expertise in that area.

What science reveals is so amazing and astonishing, that it is incapable of being fully understood by the human brain. It puts me in awe as much as your God does you.

You, on the other hand, would be telling me that water wasn't wet, if it happened to conflict with a verse in the bible. To me, your attitude is really sad, because it prevents you from seeing the true wonder of the Universe.

You are allowed to see the world in front of you, accept what it tells you, and still believe in your God. Most Christians do this without any problem at all.

Hi Dave,

Yes science is very interesting, and awe inspiring, but what is even more awe inspiring is the God who created all the laws of nature which science can observe. Science observes and tests what our awsome Heavenly Father created.

I ask you to be open minded and consider the possibility that many scientific theories could be false. Most of them are based on big assumptions, and then taught as if they are proven facts. Is it possible that you don't know everything and that maybe the truths behind the creation are not part of the knowledge that you do have? I am not trying to insult you.

I know that I don't know everything also. I used to be an athiest, and I grew up believing in evolution. Then when I finally believed in God, I thought he used evolution to create the universe. However, after more study, trying to put it all together, I ran into many things in the evolution theory that just don't add up. Either side you look at takes faith to believe in and so they are both religion. Evolution is not science. It is a theory which relies on faith. There is evidence that appears to support it, but upon further scientific study, all the evidence that points to evolution has been proven false. But evolutionists and athiest choose to plug their ears and cover their eyes to it.

Basically I believe..."IN THE BEGINNING GOD...."

AND

You believe..."IN THE BEGINNING DIRT...."

I challenge you to give me evidence that supports evolution and I will show you where it has already been proven false or that the alternative creation by God can work as well.

love in Christ,

Tom

[apothanein kerdos]

You are under the misconception that most christians believe the earth is 10,000 years old. The majority of us believe in an old earth. My personal belief is 300 Billion years. I also think that the most modern science agrees with that number.

Then you are one of the more rational Christians here. As you say, most Christians believe in an old earth. Most of the Christian posters here , however, believe in the literal reading of Genesis - that it took 6 days to create the universe. Your figure is out the other way - the current theory is a 4.6 Bn year-old Earth, and 13 Bn year-old Universe.

Just a side note for accuracy -

Though they haven't published anything yet, the date of the universe is about to increase. After finding a planet that is approximately 12.9 billion years old, it makes it quite hard to accept a 13 Bn year-old universe.

If I remember right, they're exploring and testing the idea of a 15-18 B year-old universe.

[SaturnV]

I have recently gotten information from two sources on this. First was a special on Either the Discovery Channel or the Learning Channel I forget which, entitled something like "birth of a planet." The second source, which completely agreed with the television special, was from Dr. Hugh Ross' Podcast. I am quite sure he will have info. on the subject on his website buried somewhere in the vast amounts of astrophysics research available there. It is kind of weird, he is a theistic evolutionist that he is held in high regard by the evolutionary community and almost completely shunned by the christian community. I am quite sure his website has the info.

Thank you. I'll check that out when I have the time.

EDIT: That is sweet, AK. It looks like I might be taking a bigger interest in astrophysics in the next while.

Edited March 8, 2007 by SaturnV

[SaturnV]

Quasar 3C 279 Is 5.9 billion light years from earth. The Hubble telescope can see it. What does this tell you the minimum age of the universe is? At least Over 5.9 billion years.

No, this tells me that light APPEARS to be coming from an object which APPEARS, based on trigonometry and optical effects and other circumstances, to be coming from an object 5.9 billion light years away. However, if the universe were created "as is", as recorded in the Bible, then the light could be less than 7000 years old.

----------------

Now answer these questions, which I know the answer to, or rather can get it fairly quickly.

Assume two quasars are discovered. One appears to be 12.8 Billion lighter years in the "north" direction from the earth, the other appears to be 12.8 billion light years in the "South" direction. Both are moving away form the earth at approximately 85.33% of the speed of light.

According to Einstein's Relativity, How far away is the second object form the first object, as observed from the first object?

How fast is the second object moving away form the first object, as observed from the first object?

How fast is photon a, emitted by object 1 in the direction of the earth moving as observed from the reference frame of photon b, emitted by object 2 in the direction of the earth?

If the Big Bang theory were true, how long would it ACTUALLY take light to reach the earth from either of these objects?

By the time you solve these, you will see why all of modern cosmology is bunk. Guaranteed.

According to Relativity, the speed of light remains constant even when emitted from a moving object. The light from both quasars would would be traveling toward earth at 3.00x10^8 m/s, and would reach Earth at the same time. That would give a result of 12.8 billion light-years for each.

[Guest]

Yeah, thought so, its over his head.

Like I said, if you really understand relativity, you now it can't be true...

Way over my head too but I did take 12 semester units of college physics as part of the engineering curriculum.

So I can follow a little.

I would have agreed with cousin rocket, hum, SaturnV on his understanding of the speed of light.

A very close Christian brother of mine holds his degree in Physics.

I'll talk to him in a hour or so (nightly fellowship) and ask him to explain it to me ever so slowly.

I do know physics is just starting to see the very tip of what makes up God's universe!

It must be exciting just to read the monthly journals and watch the excitement of new perceptions and understandings flow by!

Thanks guys, this is fascinating stuff.

Keep it coming teach!

Get to learn about God's creation and fellowship at the same time....This isn't your average Church picnic!

"When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;"

"What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?" (Psalms 8:3-4)

Love, Joe

[MorningGlory]

What science reveals is so amazing and astonishing, that it is incapable of being fully understood by the human brain. It puts me in awe as much as your God does you.

I totally agree with your statement, davem. The universe is unbelievably awesome. The awe you feel is a response to the creation of the Almighty; in essence you are feeling the same wonder which is inspired by religion.

[MorningGlory]

I ask you to be open minded and consider the possibility that many scientific theories could be false. Most of them are based on big assumptions, and then taught as if they are proven facts. Is it possible that you don't know everything and that maybe the truths behind the creation are not part of the knowledge that you do have? I am not trying to insult you.

Scientific theories are based on evidence, not assumptions. There is a big difference here. Before Lyall and Darwin, the evidence was the bible. It fitted the observable facts. After Lyall established the geologic column, the evidence was weighed up, and the bible lost out. The observable geologic evidence was overwhelming - an old Earth then became the current theory.

However, after more study, trying to put it all together, I ran into many things in the evolution theory that just don't add up. Either side you look at takes faith to believe in and so they are both religion.

Sorry, that's just not true. I've never seen any evidence that refutes it so far, outside of 'Answers in Genesis', and the like. The whole of biology and geology overwhelmingly confirm it.

Actually the Theory of Evolution is not confirmed at all. It is simply the set of facts which most adequately explains the origins and subsequent changes, over time, of species. Darwin's theory is based upon his conclusions , not indisputable truth. His theory will most likely stand until displaced or disproved.

[SaturnV]

Yeah, thought so, its over his head.

Like I said, if you really understand relativity, you now it can't be true...

Actually, I was out all night after making that post.

Perhaps you should rework your equations and take into account the Relativistic Doppler Effect, as well as the fact that the expansion of spacetime is taking place behind the photon's path of travel.