In your opinion what causes christians to believe in Jesus

[Paleophyte]

I have no issues with you saying life began 6,000 year ago.

And I have no problem with you saying "The Earth is flat except at the poles." but you'll still sound like a gibbering idiot.

Life on Earth began at least 4 billion years ago.

[Sheldon]

I have no issues with you saying life began 6,000 year ago.

And I have no problem with you saying "The Earth is flat except at the poles." but you'll still sound like a gibbering idiot.

Life on Earth began at least 4 billion years ago.

The real comedy gold is the idea that a degree in psychology means he can second guess any belief anyone else holds, but science can fuck right off if it thinks the earth is 4.543 billion years old, and all living things evolved over billions of years. 

See I knew most of the claims religions make are pretty hilariously wrong, but I was unaware that scientific facts were a "pick & n'mix" where you get to decide which facts you champion, and which you discard in favour of unevidenced archaic superstition. 

Biology, physics, chemistry, archaeology, pah, psychology is where it's at.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

If I have a batch of raw pig iron sitting in my shop for a year, and use it to make a vase today, how old is the vase?

Good analogy. You understood exactly what Genesis describes: The earth existed like raw pig iron before day one. And on day one  it was shaped for life. Not that complicated right?

I have no issues with you saying life began 6,000 year ago.

That’s a dodge. I asked you, ‘…how old is the vase?’ Please answer.

I did not say life began 6000 years ago.

Boru

[Paleophyte]

Good analogy. You understood exactly what Genesis describes: The earth existed like raw pig iron before day one. And on day one  it was shaped for life. Not that complicated right?

I have no issues with you saying life began 6,000 year ago.

That’s a dodge. I asked you, ‘…how old is the vase?’ Please answer.

And if the vase is Created to look like it's a thousand-year-old antique, doesn't that make it a forgery?

[John 6IX Breezy]

That’s a dodge. I asked you, ‘…how old is the vase?’ Please answer.

How old is it as pig iron—a year. How old is it as a vase—a day. Same as a file on a computer, you have the date it was created and the date it was last modified.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Do plants need the sun or do plants need light? 

Both obviously...

Are you sure? Take a look at the following formula for photosynthesis:

6 CO2 + 12 H2O + Light energy → C6 H12 O6 + 6 O2 + 6 H2O

What do you see in the middle there? Do you see the Sun or do you see light energy?

[Paleophyte]

That’s a dodge. I asked you, ‘…how old is the vase?’ Please answer.

How old is it as pig iron—a year. How old is it as a vase—a day. Same as a file on a computer, you have the date it was created and the date it was last modified.

The vase is a day old. To say that the vase is 4.8 billion years old because nucleosynthesis formed the iron atoms at that time is wrong and potentially fraudulent.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Ah Johnny is engaging in a new mental gymnastics routine

[Sheldon]

That’s a dodge. I asked you, ‘…how old is the vase?’ Please answer.

And if the vase is Created to look like it's a thousand-year-old antique, doesn't that make it a forgery?

Ah, but you're forgetting faith, belief without "seeing", venerated for millennia by the sheeple. best not to question, no that's my simple uneducated atheist's dullard of a brain, I meant to say, best to question in the "right" way. 

You know, the way that discards scientific facts, from various fields of science, whenever they conflict with religious (in)doctrine(ation), and then sneeringly claim that psychology justifies this subjective bias. 

Psychology 1, the rest of science nil...

[Sheldon]

Both obviously...

Are you sure? Take a look at the following formula for photosynthesis:

Sun= Light energy 
Do you see the Sun or do you see light energy?

Still both.

Of course I could just deny the formula, I mean if you can deny scientific facts, why can't everyone else argue in the same vein. 

(magic) sauce for the goose, John...etc etc

I may just subjectively decide that psychology is the same hokum religions peddle, I mean why not, ay John? If you can dismiss scientific facts, why am I bound by any you produce? I'm genuinely curious as to your rationale on that, seriously.