RE: I'm a YEC. Challenge me.
October 3, 2013 at 2:40 pm
(This post was last modified: October 3, 2013 at 2:48 pm by JeffB.)
Crossless1, max-greece, Cthulhu Dreaming, Esquilax and others:
I’ll take a moment to put a final post, then perhaps search other atheist forums.
To review: I mentioned that I spent the last few years reading arguments against YEC. I really had, not to prove anything to anyone, but to myself.
During my search, I didn’t care about the person’s credibility, but what was said. When I came across a ridiculous argument (numerous times), I simply skipped it and moved on.
I came here looking for more. I went and read the links provided (one was a large website, I did my best at doing a search within it).
I mentioned challenges to the age of the universe. Some were curious. I provided links.
All I got in response were excuses not to read them: discrediting the source, or stopping at the weak argument considered weak.
And here's what's most ironical, I’M told the following:
I’m going to try another forum. Perhaps I’ll eventually find an atheist not afraid to do that same level of research: not afraid to read challenges to his own beliefs, willing skip past the bad ones (yes, unfortunately they do exist).
Surely there must be some out there. So far I have found not one.
Good day.
-Jeff
Oops, one last post: pocaracas, you were posting this while I was writing also.
Thank pocaracas you for at least reading through those.
I’ll take a moment to put a final post, then perhaps search other atheist forums.
To review: I mentioned that I spent the last few years reading arguments against YEC. I really had, not to prove anything to anyone, but to myself.
During my search, I didn’t care about the person’s credibility, but what was said. When I came across a ridiculous argument (numerous times), I simply skipped it and moved on.
I came here looking for more. I went and read the links provided (one was a large website, I did my best at doing a search within it).
I mentioned challenges to the age of the universe. Some were curious. I provided links.
All I got in response were excuses not to read them: discrediting the source, or stopping at the weak argument considered weak.
And here's what's most ironical, I’M told the following:
(October 3, 2013 at 2:04 pm)Esquilax Wrote: So, are you interested in what is true, or what you want to believe?
I’m going to try another forum. Perhaps I’ll eventually find an atheist not afraid to do that same level of research: not afraid to read challenges to his own beliefs, willing skip past the bad ones (yes, unfortunately they do exist).
Surely there must be some out there. So far I have found not one.
Good day.
-Jeff
(October 3, 2013 at 2:37 pm)pocaracas Wrote:(October 3, 2013 at 12:29 pm)JeffB Wrote: Here are a few links:Lots of "I don't know, hence god"... based on very sketchy data...
http://creation.com/young-saturn
(October 3, 2013 at 12:29 pm)JeffB Wrote: http://www.icr.org/article/7200/Some remark about some magnetic field aligning well with some other creationist calculations of magnetic fields from water...
Wait until real scientists explain that... Not even googling it.
(October 3, 2013 at 12:29 pm)JeffB Wrote: Items 1 – 3 here: http://www.icr.org/articles/view/1842/264/1 is not true. There is no "winding up dilema" That thing was made up by creationists... Also, "evolutionists" do not make claims about the Universe, only maybe about evolution of species on Earth... perhaps stretching it to other potential planets.
2 is idiotic, failing to account for all the supernovae that occur at the galactic center, where the star density is greater and so more supernovae would exist there... Also, more stars around, means all the gas gets quickly sucked into some of them.
3 "According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to " Couldn't read anything else... sorry, that's just stupid.
(October 3, 2013 at 12:29 pm)JeffB Wrote: Items 65 through 95 here: http://creation.com/age-of-the-earthToo many to list individually.
Moon Origin_of_the_Moon
argghhh I stopped at 80, Only half-truths and flat out lies...
Come on.
Have you even tried to find out if these people are lying to you?
Are you that gullible?!
A friend of mine, once, came up to me with something he'd heard about from another guy who he wouldn't doubt. It was about an alleged beneficial effect on your overall health from eating peach cores. One a day. Google about it, there are tons of sites claiming that it's good for you.
Then you find that some doctors have actually tested that... not just once!... and guess what? There's nothing suggesting any improvement on anyone's health.
My friend was wowed by all the sites claiming the same thing, but never bothered to look for actual data.
I showed it to him and he stopped eating those things.
Don't be gullible. Research...
(October 3, 2013 at 12:31 pm)John V Wrote: No, I accuse you of confirmation bias when you only see 4 - 4.5 billion year ages despite a significant number of other ages. Some older in fact. As you guys sometimes say - they can't all be right, but they could all be wrong.
They are all wrong!
That's why they should have an error bar attached to each value.
Usually, when you take into consideration the error bar, they can match.
When most of the methods match, but a few don't, a few reasons for that can be that the method was not properly carried out, or some assumption inherent of that method was not followed (ruling it a useless waste of time by the researchers), or the method is not valid for that kind of rock, or the researcher was cheating and lying, YES it does happen.
Now, this thread is about YEC, and I still fail to see how to reconcile radiometric dating with the YEC alleged age of the Universe.
Oops, one last post: pocaracas, you were posting this while I was writing also.
Thank pocaracas you for at least reading through those.
