Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 4:32 am
I think they'd label that under "scientific conspiracies" and forget about it
Scientific evidence for a young earth requires the redefining of the word science.
Posts: 6859
Threads: 50
Joined: September 14, 2014
Reputation:
44
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 5:11 am
(January 13, 2015 at 4:23 am)TubbyTubby Wrote: How can anyone reconcile the fact that the South American coast and Southern African coasts have seperated 5000km in 6000 years? That's not too far off 2.5m/day!
Or am I wrong to assume that believers actually give any credence to tectonic plate theory?
MAGIC of skydaddy can move planets.
No tectonic plate movement required.
Quote:To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty.
- Lau Tzu
Join me on atheistforums Slack (pester tibs via pm if you need invite)
Posts: 862
Threads: 51
Joined: May 14, 2014
Reputation:
11
Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 5:13 am
You're both quite correct. I continue to under-estimate the depth of delusion and cognitive dissonance that we are dealing with sometimes.
Posts: 22
Threads: 3
Joined: December 27, 2014
Reputation:
4
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 6:10 am
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2015 at 6:17 am by Landfish.)
Wegener is all through the old Testament
And Lord Alfred said: "Let the mantle remain nonstatic and maketh the Continents Drift"
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 8:30 am
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2015 at 8:32 am by Anomalocaris.)
(January 13, 2015 at 4:23 am)TubbyTubby Wrote: How can anyone reconcile the fact that the South American coast and Southern African coasts have seperated 5000km in 6000 years? That's not too far off 2.5m/day!
Or am I wrong to assume that believers actually give any credence to tectonic plate theory?
On the other hand, even most serious geologist - people astronomically more intelligent, reasonable and perceptive than any modern day young earth creatard, and have known since 1700s that the earth must be several orders of magnitude older than ancient Hebrews knew how to count - have managed to not believe in plate tectonics until 1965-1970, and have managed to reconcile the match between the shape of eastern coast of South American and western coast of sub Saharan Africa with pure coincidence during majority of time when geology existed as a modern science.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 8:35 am
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2015 at 8:36 am by robvalue.)
It says about the power religion holds, and the way humans can blot out inconvenient knowledge and evidence, that there are still people holding such ludicrous beliefs as flat or young earth.
It's really scary. Especially as a lot of them have access to the Internet where they can learn as much as they want about the truth of things with minimal effort.
Posts: 123
Threads: 2
Joined: November 7, 2014
Reputation:
8
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 10:01 am
(January 13, 2015 at 4:23 am)TubbyTubby Wrote: How can anyone reconcile the fact that the South American coast and Southern African coasts have seperated 5000km in 6000 years? That's not too far off 2.5m/day!
Or am I wrong to assume that believers actually give any credence to tectonic plate theory?
Well, let's look at it this way:
Geology is wrong - radiometric dating proves that strata aren't the age scientists claim.
Radiometric dating is wrong - even though they use it to disconfirm geology (which it doesn't do)
Anthropology is wrong - because the Bible says man was created as a unique creature
Paleontology is wrong - because the Bible says all creatures were created within a couple of days of each other
Cosmology is wrong - because the Bible says..... well, you get the point
I don't think that, after denying all other obvious discoveries of science, it is too complicated for them to deny tectonic theory.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 10:11 am
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2015 at 10:11 am by robvalue.)
I think are in so deep, and are so invested, one more lie or denial is easier than having to consider they are actually just wrong about the whole thing.
Posts: 2886
Threads: 132
Joined: May 8, 2011
Reputation:
31
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 11:42 am
(January 13, 2015 at 4:32 am)robvalue Wrote: I think they'd label that under "scientific conspiracies" and forget about it
Scientific evidence for a young earth requires the redefining of the word science.
I see it more as compartmentalization. Folks like GC and Statler can support some of their arguments with disparate single lines of evidence. The problem with that is their single lines of evidence usually disagree with a large body of additional evidence that supports a different conclusion than the one they like. So they take a handful of separate facts that used alone can be argued to support their position and ignore anything that along with their argument suggests a different conclusion.
Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.
Posts: 30129
Threads: 304
Joined: April 18, 2014
Reputation:
92
RE: Defending Young-Earth Creationism Scientifically
January 13, 2015 at 11:57 pm
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2015 at 11:57 pm by vorlon13.)
(January 13, 2015 at 10:11 am)robvalue Wrote: I think are in so deep, and are so invested, one more lie or denial is easier than having to consider they are actually just wrong about the whole thing.
BINGO!
And it sums up the mormon hierarchy too.
I realize by reading the Tanner's book, I've absorbed all the bullshit and folderol of LDS in a matter of just a few days. For generations of the mormon families, the crapola has oozed in just bits at a time. One more turd in the stack (which is now miles high) isn't anything to them now. Oh, blacks can be in the priesthood now, how about that? Weird we don't have an actual hard copy print out of the revelation, direct from god, on this one, since EVERY OTHER revelation has been been published, but, whatever. Let's just sit back, wear our magic underwear, and clear our minds that anything hinky has been going on now for almost 200 years . . . . .
|