Godlike Productions - Reply to Thread

Users Online Now: 1,769 (Who's On?)	Visitors Today: 177,912
Pageviews Today: 265,988	Threads Today: 98	Posts Today: 1,557
02:16 AM

Back to Thread

REPLY TO THREAD

Subject The earth is NOT 6000 years old.

User Name

Font color: Font:

In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.

[quote:Anonymous Coward 5164756:MV8yMDY2NDAzXzM0Nzg2MTU3XzFERTEwMTZD]
[quote:Anonymous Coward 28711488:MV8yMDY2NDAzXzM0Nzg1NzE0X0Y2QkM0NjhF]
[quote:Anonymous Coward 5164756:MV8yMDY2NDAzXzM0Nzg0OTc4XzFCNzJFNzRD]
1. Radioactive clocks tell us the world is 100% older than 4 billion years.

2. DNA from fossils shows us directly the family tree of evolution.

3. There is zero arguments to be had about this. These are not false dating methods as someone pointed out.

4. We have mapped the genome, but I'm sure that you're well aware.

who is this person who said our dating methods are incorrect. Where's your evidence? What source?

5. Creationism has zero credibility. 
There is no evidence.

6. Science has nothing but evidence.

7. There was no great flood. It's a metaphor, one that was never to be taken literally.

8. The bible does not state the age of the earth.

9. Your god has never penned anything as far as I know. 
A council of men who remembered the stories they were told did however. It was a lovely peice of fiction. And that's all it is.

10. I'm moving to England, where we actually don't allow these types to talk.
[/quote]

:sigh: Wrong about many counts:

1) radioactive dating failures are numerous when dating rock of known age resulting in an erroneous age. It is not an accurate method at all largely due to weather and erosion.

2) Genetics remain constant according to Mendel's Laws on Genetics. This was in contrast to the claims made by Lamarck and Darwin who claimed one creature would become another. DNA itself does not last longer than 10kyears. Any found would be younger than that.

3) better dating methods are the observed erosion rates.

4) the genome of what exactly?

5) true - the one with no evidence has zero credibility. Obviously there is a conspiracy.

6) Science and evolution theories are two different things.

7) Jesus spoke about the flood of Noah "taking them all away" as not metaphorically. Everyone was killed in a global flood, and all the animals giving us the resulting fossil record and sedimentary geocolumn.

8) Now you are an expert on the Bible too? The Bible specifically counts geneologies from Jesus back to Adam.

9) Prophets receive word directly from God who then came to earth that we may know him, recorded by all the historians of the day.

10) They dont allow Freedom in England? You must be mistaken.
[/quote]

. Rock dating failures are numerous? Based on what evidence? Show me some evidence that we are off by millions of years. Numerous huh? Don't think so.

. You obviously know nothing about genetics outside of this one creationist argument, that they all cling to, which is more than incorrect. In on an iPhone at the moment. I'll post some links. This argument has been made by all of you so many times, its been proved wrong yet again with it. You need the evidence crammed down your throat apparently.

Erosion dates.. that isn't also not the general scientific opinion, its laughed out the room by all science academics. Another one you guys cling to that nobody outside of creationists believe. But, wrong again.

Jesus spoke? That is obvious empirical evidence. Haha wow. 
Did you hear him speak, watch him being birthed of a virgin or any of it?
Had the men who selected the stories for the bible met Jesus? 
Your logic directly says that because lord of the rings has a map in the book that those places must exist, seriously think about that logic for a minute. That's your 'proof' of a flood. That's the saddest thing I've ever heard.

Not sure If that's sarcasm or you reached an epiphany that most of the intelligent people in the world have already reached. 
.
The genomes of many different animals. Would you like some links? They're not creation based you might not like them.

The story of the ark is an allegory. Ask any well respected, intelligent catholic. It's really frustrating that you treat this as historical fact. Again though no evidence whatsoever. None.

Yes I'm an avid reader of the bible. I use it to make fun of, and wipe my ass with.

What other bullshit fell from your mouth
Check out some surveys on religion.. 
Obviously I've given you no evidence here, I will if you can use a computer. Brought to you by science. I encourage you to check out some science unbiased.
[/quote]

Original Message Do the Christians of this forum have an opinion on this? Its pretty controversial to confront Christian belief of creation. What about when its done by one of your own?

[link to www.huffingtonpost.com]

Pictures (click to insert)

News