(March 14, 2018 at 6:13 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: Yeah, that was a bit too much. It's not like there is any kind of relation between religion and power. There isn't an evangelical voter bloc. Nobody is out there saying: "Don't change our marriage laws or God will take vengeance in the form of weather patterns." No congressman ever said, "There's no need to worry about global warming because God promised Noah he wouldn't flood the earth again." Nobody has ever been burned at the stake over a fairytale or anything. None of that is true, right? Because if it were true, that would be batshit crazy, right? Good thing none of that's true.

Are there YECs who want power? Probably. Are there YECs who don't care about it? Definitely. My church fits that group. To my knowledge Amish are generally YECs, and they want extremely little to do with political power. So, YEC doesn't seem to be causative regarding desire for power.

It's like saying we should be concerned about fasting during Ramadan because some Muslim groups want power and they fast during Ramadan. Well, yeah, but there are Muslims who fast during Ramadan and aren't after power, so that's a fail.

It's the correlation and causation thing. You screwed up, said something stupid, and now instead of admitting it and correcting it, you're trying to save face by moving the goalposts.

Quote:I see two extremes here.

Being so concerned that one is correct that one can't be happy otherwise, and (at the other extreme) not caring if one is correct, so long as one is happy. I endorse neither. I say, be happy first.

OK, I've got that.

Quote:Then, from the comfort of a happy and leisurely life, take a little time to examine your own views for correctness.

And I've done that. I've just reached a different conclusion than you.

---

(March 14, 2018 at 6:42 pm)Whateverist Wrote: Have a problem with you providing support for a literal reading by demonstrating how it can be read literally?  It just isn't responsive to my question.  Can you see that?

As I said - yes, and again, that's why I clarified my intent. Still don't get why that's not good enough for you.

(March 15, 2018 at 1:46 am)Minimalist Wrote: God couldn't even make creatards mature.

He's such a fuck up!

God did so make creatards manure!

(March 14, 2018 at 2:44 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(March 14, 2018 at 2:30 pm)Divinity Wrote: The idea that people stop believing so they can sin guilt free is the one of the dumbest fucking ideas out there.

Seems like a couple times a year some newbie atheist comes on and starts a thread about how they still fear hell and want convincing that it's not real.

Wrong, what happens is that a number of your fellow religitards come on here looking for reassurance from us atheists over hell, despite them following the instructions of their local priest, sorry I mean kiddy fucker to the letter.

It's as if they almost grasp that the whole point of sin is to make them feel like shit and theregore more suscepticle to priestly manipulation, yet they cannot see the final step.

(March 15, 2018 at 5:17 am)Wololo Wrote: Wrong, what happens is that a number of your fellow religitards come on here looking for reassurance from us atheists over hell, despite them following the instructions of their local priest, sorry I mean kiddy fucker to the letter.

It's as if they almost grasp that the whole point of sin is to make them feel like shit and theregore more suscepticle to priestly manipulation, yet they cannot see the final step.

You know you're saying the same thing I am, but just adding a negative spin toward religion, right?

Here's one quick debunk: there are literally trees that are older then Creationists universe

(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.

You'd make an excellent argument, IF it wasn't based on false equivalence...

I find this hard to get my head around.

Do people really believe this stuff, or do they say what they want to be true? Are they saying what they are expected to say by their peers? Is it possible to truly believe the Earth is so young?

Is it physically distressing to try to keep yourself convinced of this? Why is it important? Is it just to try and hang on to some sort of literal interpretation of a story book? Why that aspect, when other parts of it are so easily ignored?

I don't really expect any answers here, I'm just thinking out loud. It gets to the point where I feel that I'm in a different dimension. I guess the most likely answer is indoctrination, having these things drilled into your head before you can properly think about them. I shouldn't be surprised by its power at this stage.

(March 15, 2018 at 9:20 am)robvalue Wrote: I find this hard to get my head around.

Do people really believe this stuff, or do they say what they want to be true? Are they saying what they are expected to say by their peers? Is it possible to truly believe the Earth is so young?

Is it physically distressing to try to keep yourself convinced of this? Why is it important? Is it just to try and hang on to some sort of literal interpretation of a story book? Why that aspect, when other parts of it are so easily ignored?

I don't really expect any answers here, I'm just thinking out loud. It gets to the point where I feel that I'm in a different dimension. I guess the most likely answer is indoctrination, having these things drilled into your head before you can properly think about them. I shouldn't be surprised by its power at this stage.

That was my question too, and I think Alpha basically owned it.  Weird.

(March 15, 2018 at 6:13 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: Here's one quick debunk: there are literally trees that are older then Creationists universe

The argument on their end is that these trees were created by God in a way as if they looked older than a few 6 thousand years ago when they're not. I know, it's not very compelling, but this is what we're dealing with here.

(March 15, 2018 at 9:20 am)robvalue Wrote: I find this hard to get my head around.

Do people really believe this stuff, or do they say what they want to be true?

Really believe it. I don't want the world to be any particular age. Has no bearing on my life. I'm just going where the evidence takes me. Note that as a Christian, the Bible is evidence to me - the most important evidence.

Quote:Are they saying what they are expected to say by their peers?

No. There are plenty of churches (including the largest one) that accept mainstream science on such matters. There's no need to be in a YEC church.

Quote:Is it possible to truly believe the Earth is so young?

Yes.

Quote:Is it physically distressing to try to keep yourself convinced of this?

No

Quote:Why is it important?

It isn't particularly important. You don't see me bringing it up. Why is it important to you guys?

Quote:Is it just to try and hang on to some sort of literal interpretation of a story book?

No. The Bible can be interpreted other than literally where the context warrants it. I've just never seen a good argument that Gen 1 was intended allegorically.

Quote:Why that aspect, when other parts of it are so easily ignored?

No parts are easily ignored by me. Some parts don't apply to me, but I reach that conclusion through study. I don't ignore them, and I still read them to learn about God, even though they don't specifically apply to me.

Quote:I don't really expect any answers here, I'm just thinking out loud. It gets to the point where I feel that I'm in a different dimension. I guess the most likely answer is indoctrination, having these things drilled into your head before you can properly think about them. I shouldn't be surprised by its power at this stage.

Not indoctrination. I accepted the mainstream science view because I went to public school and was indoctrinated into that.  We went to a typical protestant church sporadically, and I don't recall the church ever addressing origins issues.

Anyone who's interested in understanding, rather than mocking, might want to check out this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Six-Days-John-Ash...F8&qid=&sr=