The "standard model" of young Earth creationism is so easily decimated. A 6,000 year old cosmos ... dinosaurs coexisting with humans ... Noah's Ark ... It's amazing that anyone still believes in this stuff. Young Earth creationism is a house of cards. Prove any one part of it wrong, and the whole thing comes crashing down.

So, I thought I'd make a thread where we could all share "quick debunks" of YEC theory. These should be no longer than 1-3 paragraphs long. Just something to throw in creationists' faces upon encountering their weak ass arguments. It would benefit us all to be armed with a pocket-full of quick takedowns.

I'll go first: The Andromeda galaxy is 2.5 million light years away from us. That means that when we look at Andromeda through a telescope, we do not see it as it exists today. We see it as it existed 2.5 million years ago. If the universe is only 6,000 years old as you say, this means that when God created the cosmos, he actually stretched the light from Andromeda to Earth. Why? To give anyone with a telescope good reason to doubt the accounts in Genesis? It makes no sense.

Age of the Earth: In Missouri we find hundreds of feet of limestone. This is made from tiny sea creatures. Billions and billions of them would be needed to build up the amount of limestone we have here. Even with a life-cycle of a single day that's a long time. We also find fossil coral 468 feet above sea level in this area.

Australian marsupials evolved from a single common ancestor. Marsupials filled all the niches. Predator to herbivore.

Radioactive decay of minerals, such as Uranium-238 and Carbon-14 decay in organisms spring to mind. The amount there is present points to a 4.5 billion year old Earth for Uranium, as there's around half Uranium present and its fissionable material, that coupled with the fact it has a 4.468 billion year half-life means the Earth must be that old.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-238

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-14

How many kids would each generation of women need to have after the Great Flood to reach the current >7,000,000,000 world population?

How long would it take them to walk to Australia? To Tierra del Fuego?

The pressures, wind, and moisture requirements of the Deluge would be the equivalent of the megastorms we see on larger planets.  They would eradicate all life, all trace of life, most of the surface features, and leave this rock in an unrecognizable state.  The earth would look as though a massive bomb had gone off and flattened the place. We would not be here to believe in such a silly story, not even fish would have survived to remember us..and no gopherwood barge could ever have ridden out a planet killing storm.

(March 13, 2018 at 7:25 am)vulcanlogician Wrote: The "standard model" of young Earth creationism is so easily decimated. A 6,000 year old cosmos ... dinosaurs coexisting with humans ... Noah's Ark ... It's amazing that anyone still believes in this stuff. Young Earth creationism is a house of cards. Prove any one part of it wrong, and the whole thing comes crashing down.

So, I thought I'd make a thread where we could all share "quick debunks" of YEC theory. These should be no longer than 1-3 paragraphs long. Just something to throw in creationists' faces upon encountering their weak ass arguments. It would benefit us all to be armed with a pocket-full of quick takedowns.

I'll go first: The Andromeda galaxy is 2.5 million light years away from us. That means that when we look at Andromeda through a telescope, we do not see it as it exists today. We see it as it existed 2.5 million years ago. If the universe is only 6,000 years old as you say, this means that when God created the cosmos, he actually stretched the light from Andromeda to Earth. Why? To give anyone with a telescope good reason to doubt the accounts in Genesis? It makes no sense.

I guess that religious dogmas are as bad as atheists dogmas.
The two are located at the two extreme yet one extreme think that he is correct while the other is wrong.  

Not worth talk about it.  

(March 13, 2018 at 7:25 am)vulcanlogician Wrote: I'll go first: The Andromeda galaxy is 2.5 million light years away from us. That means that when we look at Andromeda through a telescope, we do not see it as it exists today. We see it as it existed 2.5 million years ago. If the universe is only 6,000 years old as you say, this means that when God created the cosmos, he actually stretched the light from Andromeda to Earth. Why? To give anyone with a telescope good reason to doubt the accounts in Genesis? It makes no sense.

YEC and some of the more fundy atheists remind me a lot of each other. 

But anyways, what I have found, is that in the example you gave, they will just say that the light was created part way along; similar to how Adam was created as an adult man.  And I don't think that your re-buttal goes very far, because; one can just point to your assumptions, vs their assumptions.  

The way that I've formed a question/thought experiment in the past, is that it is not just light of the stars, that we see, but a history. We see different things happening, we see stars dying.  So in essence, we have light that shows a star dying, that according to the young view never existed.  So it is possible, that God created the light in transit, so that we could see, just as it is possible, that God created Adam as a full adult.  However, I have difficulty, in thinking, that he was created as an adult human, with a past, that never happened.  Memory of a childhood, or even parents, that never existed. This is essentially the same thing that is being said with the light being made partially along the way.  It's not just light but a history, a past.  Similar to how by the time we see events on the sun, they already occurred eight minutes ago.

Some times it takes a few times repeating this.  But I have found that most when posed with the question will have trouble with Adam having the memory of a childhood, that never occurred.  The difficulty is often to get them past the argument of just light, and to see that; that light contains information (a past).  A past they are saying never occurred and at times for things they are saying are not even there.

Heheh fundy atheists.

(March 13, 2018 at 7:55 am)Little Rik Wrote:

(March 13, 2018 at 7:25 am)vulcanlogician Wrote: The "standard model" of young Earth creationism is so easily decimated. A 6,000 year old cosmos ... dinosaurs coexisting with humans ... Noah's Ark ... It's amazing that anyone still believes in this stuff. Young Earth creationism is a house of cards. Prove any one part of it wrong, and the whole thing comes crashing down.

So, I thought I'd make a thread where we could all share "quick debunks" of YEC theory. These should be no longer than 1-3 paragraphs long. Just something to throw in creationists' faces upon encountering their weak ass arguments. It would benefit us all to be armed with a pocket-full of quick takedowns.

I'll go first: The Andromeda galaxy is 2.5 million light years away from us. That means that when we look at Andromeda through a telescope, we do not see it as it exists today. We see it as it existed 2.5 million years ago. If the universe is only 6,000 years old as you say, this means that when God created the cosmos, he actually stretched the light from Andromeda to Earth. Why? To give anyone with a telescope good reason to doubt the accounts in Genesis? It makes no sense.

I guess that religious dogmas are as bad as atheists dogmas.
The two are located at the two extreme yet one extreme think that he is correct while the other is wrong.  

Not worth talk about it.  

For once I agree with you.  Our dogmas and theirs are next to nothing compared to those of spiritual seeker types.  Those fawning bastards give me the creeps.  They always speak too low and most of what they say just drips with innuendo, but I know you already thought of that, didn't you sport?  A lot like this guy.  (Not your teacher, was he?)