Jump to content

Young Earther Roll Call!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Sound off if you believe the earth is 6k years old. Tell us about yourself. How did you come to believe this. Provide us any "evidence" you have to support your belief. Thanks in advance

I'll be your huckleberry. I 100% believe it. Evidence I have every bit of the evidence anyone else does just a different interpretation of the evidence. What do you want to discuss specifically? Like most I use to believe in evolution. There was a time it tried to merge the 2 creation and evolution like so many do. I was told it was proven and a scientific fact but always had questions concerning the whole process. It never made sense to me. As I got older and went to school and got some familiarity with thermodynamics I began to read on it. Much of what was said to be proof really was not the proof they claimed. There was one huge thing that turned me off to the whole notion of Darwinism though. it was the idea that something we can observe like adaptation was twisted to claim that Darwinism is proven. You can believe it does all day long but when you claim it is a proven fact that burden of proof rest on you.

This is not a scientific discussion though. This debate of origins is far from proven on either side and to claim other wise is intellectually dishonest. So if ya want a short list it would read that there is not the 1st intermediary that has been discovered. Then the is the law of the conservation of angular momentum. There is also the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Then there is the whole philosophical flaw that if you have nothing that you still have space. Sorry but like time and particles space is a physical property so it would be impossible for nothing to explode because it would have nothing to explode into. It is also the same for the inflation model as well. If you have a super particle that is spinning and expands then you have to have something to expand into. Then there is DNA its self it is most impressive, and what came first the protein or the protein that makes the protein.

In all honesty the theory has trouble from the 1st cause and even more trouble at every stop along the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be your huckleberry. I 100% believe it. Evidence I have every bit of the evidence anyone else does just a different interpretation of the evidence. What do you want to discuss specifically? Like most I use to believe in evolution. There was a time it tried to merge the 2 creation and evolution like so many do. I was told it was proven and a scientific fact but always had questions concerning the whole process. It never made sense to me. As I got older and went to school and got some familiarity with thermodynamics I began to read on it. Much of what was said to be proof really was not the proof they claimed. There was one huge thing that turned me off to the whole notion of Darwinism though. it was the idea that something we can observe like adaptation was twisted to claim that Darwinism is proven. You can believe it does all day long but when you claim it is a proven fact that burden of proof rest on you.

This is not a scientific discussion though. This debate of origins is far from proven on either side and to claim other wise is intellectually dishonest. So if ya want a short list it would read that there is not the 1st intermediary that has been discovered. Then the is the law of the conservation of angular momentum. There is also the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Then there is the whole philosophical flaw that if you have nothing that you still have space. Sorry but like time and particles space is a physical property so it would be impossible for nothing to explode because it would have nothing to explode into. It is also the same for the inflation model as well. If you have a super particle that is spinning and expands then you have to have something to expand into. Then there is DNA its self it is most impressive, and what came first the protein or the protein that makes the protein.

In all honesty the theory has trouble from the 1st cause and even more trouble at every stop along the way.

Question for ya. If you had never been told that some magic guy in the sky snapped his fingers and we all appeared, do you really think you would still have the same beliefs?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for ya. If you had never been told that some magic guy in the sky snapped his fingers and we all appeared, do you really think you would still have the same beliefs?

Actually that is not what I was told that is the conclusion I reached. So by your logic in the way you phrased that question it would be a impossible conclusion to reach short of someone being told about it. So let me ask you this with that apparently being what you think. How did that 1st person get the idea since it is so illogical?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually that is not what I was told that is the conclusion I reached. So by your logic in the way you phrased that question it would be a impossible conclusion to reach short of someone being told about it. So let me ask you this with that apparently being what you think. How did that 1st person get the idea since it is so illogical?

a lot of books that were written over the course of centuries were combined to make the bible and back then people would believe anything. Couldnt you ask the same question about the 30 other major religions? Using your logic they would all have to be true because someone came up with those stories too
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for ya. If you had never been told that some magic guy in the sky snapped his fingers and we all appeared, do you really think you would still have the same beliefs?

How do you explain multiple cultures on separate continents coming to the same conclusion that some magic guy exists in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you explain multiple cultures on separate continents coming to the same conclusion that some magic guy exists in the first place?

There are many different religions and cultures with a wide range of stories. People want too know how we got here so they will believe what they are told so they feel like they know something.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

a lot of books that were written over the course of centuries were combined to make the bible and back then people would believe anything. Couldnt you ask the same question about the 30 other major religions? Using your logic they would all have to be true because someone came up with those stories too

Well the topic was not on the bible and I do not need it to defend my position on origins. If you want to discuss how I reached my conclusion on the bible that would be another topic for discussion. Feel free to start a thread on it if you want I will gladly answer how I reached my conclusion. Do not get the wrong ideal I have looked at other religions as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a lot of books that were written over the course of centuries were combined to make the bible and back then people would believe anything. Couldnt you ask the same question about the 30 other major religions? Using your logic they would all have to be true because someone came up with those stories too

Are you referring to the Old Testament or New Testament? If you are referring to the New Testament, it is more likely that those books were all written within 30 years of Jesus' death. The fall of the temple nor the rebellion against the Romans were captured in any of the books. The significance of these events would not be discarded by every single writer of each of the books that make the New Testament. And that all began in 65AD. The oldest text we have are not prior to 65AD, but there is a higher likelihood of the one's we have not being the original text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you referring to the Old Testament or New Testament? If you are referring to the New Testament, it is more likely that those books were all written within 30 years of Jesus' death. The fall of the temple nor the rebellion against the Romans were captured in any of the books. The significance of these events would not be discarded by every single writer of each of the books that make the New Testament. And that all began in 65AD. The oldest text we have are not prior to 65AD, but there is a higher likelihood of the one's we have not being the original text.

The old testament. Plus how do you all of a sudden completley change the book that is suppose to tell people where we come from?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...