Posts: 7155
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 4:10 pm
(October 21, 2013 at 3:45 pm)TheBeardedDude Wrote: (October 21, 2013 at 3:28 pm)snowtracks Wrote: if the 6 days is not taken literally, then geology makes sense so just adjust and accept, and it all works out. How do you figure that?
Easy. Each creative "day" lasted 750 million years.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 538
Threads: 16
Joined: October 3, 2013
Reputation:
25
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 4:18 pm
(October 21, 2013 at 4:10 pm)Tonus Wrote: (October 21, 2013 at 3:45 pm)TheBeardedDude Wrote: How do you figure that?
Easy. Each creative "day" lasted 750 million years.
The the order of creation makes SOOOO much sense. 
Posts: 4940
Threads: 99
Joined: April 17, 2011
Reputation:
45
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 5:42 pm
As we all know, God created the universe with the light from distant stars already on its way to earth. Gee, I thought all YECers knew that.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
Posts: 18503
Threads: 79
Joined: May 29, 2010
Reputation:
125
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 5:55 pm
Who raised this dead thread from the grave?
Posts: 1985
Threads: 12
Joined: October 12, 2010
Reputation:
24
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 6:01 pm
(June 27, 2012 at 7:24 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: I would guess that it's depressing to see the intellectual contortions creationists make in order to make their world view fit.
Oops! Your side does it too! 
“Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the illusion of design and planning.”- Richard Dawkins
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 6:08 pm
(October 21, 2013 at 6:01 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: (June 27, 2012 at 7:24 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: I would guess that it's depressing to see the intellectual contortions creationists make in order to make their world view fit.
Oops! Your side does it too!
“Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the illusion of design and planning.”- Richard Dawkins
He is being overly courteous by including human shaped sacks of shit like you amounts "us", sack of shit. Such infantile anthropamorphizing never impressed any of us real humans, sack of shit.
Posts: 1985
Threads: 12
Joined: October 12, 2010
Reputation:
24
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 6:19 pm
(October 21, 2013 at 6:08 pm)Chuck Wrote: He is being overly courteous by including human shaped sacks of shit like you amounts "us", sack of shit. Such infantile anthropamorphizing [sic] never impressed any of us real humans, sack of shit.
Wow, I really touched a nerve by pointing out your hypocrisy, Dawkins is that you? 
Posts: 686
Threads: 3
Joined: December 13, 2010
Reputation:
9
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 6:45 pm
(October 21, 2013 at 4:10 pm)Tonus Wrote: (October 21, 2013 at 3:45 pm)TheBeardedDude Wrote: How do you figure that?
Easy. Each creative "day" lasted 750 million years.
THe problem with that is that the claim is that the god was ALL KNOWING - past - present - and future
So - the word "day" would - for the god - have the same meaning today as it would at any other time
THE word "day" - for a Hebrew - can either mean
THE time between Sundown - and the next Sundown.
OR
WHen referring to "day" versus "night" refers to the time when the sun lights the earth at that particular location.
For those who claim that the word "day" somehow means something different - they are writing their own bible - and creating their own meaning - just as the ancient goat herders did when they wrote this one. AND their basis is just as nonsensical.
Posts: 7155
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 6:52 pm
Just as a point of clarification, all I did was divide 4.5 billion by six. I blame my propensity for dry wit and my sparse use of emoticons.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 879
Threads: 11
Joined: September 17, 2013
Reputation:
31
RE: The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old
October 21, 2013 at 7:00 pm
(October 21, 2013 at 6:01 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Oops! Your side does it too!
“Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the illusion of design and planning.”- Richard Dawkins Ooh, quote-mining! My favorite tactic of creationists. Nobody does it with more callous disregard for the truth than the Discovery Institute, though. You have a ways to go if you want to be in their league. I prefer to see quote-mining from peer-reviewed papers on actual experimental data, though- ideally, you should find a few words that, with the help of ellipses, you can make look like the exact opposite of the actual findings of the experiment.
Just trying to be helpful.
|
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/FJovzGlbuoEXm/giphy.gif)
