The World is only 7000 years old

The Vedic texts say the Universe is much older. The only way to salvation is through a belief in 100% word-for-word of what all the Vedic literature says. There is no other way. Fools. I'm trying to save you.

The Vedas were written by Satan.

I will when I see convincing evidence.

For example a god in the skies telling people the Bible is real and hence the earth 8000 years old, but nooo god is some fucktard that aparently likes to see people burn in hell for all eternity and doesn't want to do that. But instead demand us to follow some 2000 year old book which contradicts itself and hold claims that go entirely against what logic and reason tell us.

Problem is there isn't enough evidence. Besides you where asking for a bunch of lies in your first question. Hence I am expecting a totally retarded explanation such as *poof* god did it or da flood did it.

But anyways why don't you respond to the article I just posted?

Satan didn't exist until thousands of years later when he was made up when the bible was compiled. Vedas are older and wiser. And the bible tried to steal many of their ideas

Evidence?

Are you telling me that all the rock strata clearly visible to anyone who ventures out away from urban centres, is not enough evidence for you?

Do you know what?

I don't want to convince you of single thing except for this:

You have no future.

It is anti-black.

Satan is anti-black.

That's why he's called Satan.

Satan the Opposer.

The fossil record we have can only happen in a global flood the likes of the biblical flood. This flood seiment gives you your geologic layers which millions of years and erosion would not.

Carbon dating proves a young earth.Were the earth over 40,000yo there would be no carbon to test.

Can't trust NASA or the Jesuits with stellar theory, better stick with testable lab science.
How much salt in the ocean?
How much mud from erosion in the ocean?
How much has Niagra falls eroded?

2 things I find fascinating about this argument.

1) the amount of people who jump in saying how stupid you have to be to believe in a young earth and say the evidence is all around you, yet they are only going by the same old cliches they have been fed all their lives. Research the alternatives before you come on here bashing and don't just cut 'n paste from google. How can you say the evidence is all around when you are only rehashing what secular science has told you?

2) I find a young earth and creationism very compelling as it's the one thing that secular science and tptb don't want you to believe.

That's like saying history was written by man..history still happened. God still gave the Word to man to write it down as proven many ways.

I don't understand how 'The fossil record we have can only happen in a global flood the likes of the biblical flood.'

Where is the proof for this?

Plus, carbon dating does not prove a young earth... Even if the information you recived was correct (which I contest) it ONLY proves that carbon dating is flawed, not that the earth is 7000 years old.

I dont have to trust NASA or the jesuits for the speed of light. It's a fact, independantly proven. This is what I based my arguments on in the above quotation.

The rest of your questions were debunked in a previous thread.

The process of fossilzation requires certain conditions to be present. The process is RAPID.

This alone invalidates all "Fossil Record" theories.

What about the T Rex bone found with blood vessels. Millions of years old? I think not.

?? So again dinosaurs, reptilians, bugs... All different life forms which we can now discover and examine were put there just to annoy you??

Are you ********?

How about the Egyptians? It has been proven that the position of their pyramids matches the position of the stars of 12000 BC.

How about the minor tribes and societies that have been proven to be old as much as 70000 years?

I mean, really, you people should from time to time read some books, and not just that one with special fairy tales.

TRex is an arbritrary designation given to a phenomenon by scientists. No such creature existed.

If blood vessels were found FOSSILIZED you would need to invent a new term to describe the process. From observations the process of fossilization isn't fond of soft tissues.

There is nothing on Earth that is more than 7,000 years old.

Define rapid, and please show me any created fossils that where created really fast.

Most forms of fossilization are rather slow (there are several). Some are indeed faster but they are really rare.

[link to www.essortment.com]

Every fossil you find was created within the same short space of time 4,500 or so years ago.

you religious fanatic nutjobs are so utterly gullible and primitive that it's not even funny anymore...yet want to tell the people how "smart" and knowledgeable you are.

must suck to be you.

I told you not to present falsehoods here.

No carcass could remain out in the open for long enough produce the kinds of fossils we are talking about. The elements and scavengers would see to this.

This is the first logical reasoning behind the case for rapid fossiliazation.

The second has to do with the process which turns bone into stone. It is a very specific chemical reaction, so specific that it hasn't been observed.

The conditions necessary to achieve this occurred in history only once.

OK, then let's go to another question.


How do you religioners explain the continents as they are.
We all know that at some time all the continents were glued together forming a single large continent. Which gradually broke and new smaller continents were formed.

if this all was happening merely 7000 years back, you would have it all written by some civilization.



And let me say this, until this day there is not a single evidence which you religioners showed us which would prove your thesis.

Science can show you billions of clues in nature, in ourselves, billions of evidences of life on Earth dating millions of years back...

While on the other hand you people only quote your precious little book and rely on trying to disprove the view of the scientists.


Sun damn it, half of you probably still think that the Earth is flat. Go and jump off of it if you can. :)

This is actually the main reason why fossils are so few and far between (there must have been trillions of lifeforms in the history of the earth yet there are only millions of fossils (of which like 90+% are sea creatures living in favorable conditions for fossilization)).

The fossils we do find where unlucky twats getting stuck somewhere they where buried without oxygen available or tarpits etc.

i would suggest that they shoot themself in the head (they're useless eaters anyway...and now with possible food crisis...my oh my, would we be WAY better off WITHOUT em'...). works better, since the earth is NOT flat

I am not talking simply of fossils.

i am talking about real, living animals which we find in deep jungles on a daily basis.

Talking about the reptilians who are proven to be from a time way before our own.

I am talking about living insects, bugs, birds who have survived the destruction of dinosaurs.


But again, you all resort to trying to discredit the information. Why don't you present some facts for yourselves which we could examine and study... Oh, that is right, the only evidence that you people have is in your heads.

Hmmm, maybe we should still examine them, I bet we will find an explanation of your believes in there somewhere.

You have no proof that the bible is the word of God, just some human's telling you it is. Humans tend to lie, especially when power and control are involved.

Yes history was written by man, and is very flawed too in my opinion. It happened, but what is recorded as history is not necessarily the truth.

FISH with delicate fins and JELLYFISH and many other land animals fossilized.Today they do not.Animals die all the time in the woods or in the ocean, they are devoured by pest and weather. In order to make a fossil the creature must be covered imediately with mineral sediment.

There are mountains and canyons of evidences for a global flood. This global flood destroys the geocolumn dating method.

The layers of the geocolumn themselves show to have been deposited in a short time while soft,not millions of years which would leave erosion between the layers.
geocolumn
[link to www.answersingenesis.org]
straight lines show no erosion
[link to www.scenic.com]
normal erosion
[link to www.nwcreation.net]

The extent carbon dating is useful is well known to most.

Does carbon dating prove the Earth is millions of years old?
Author: Dr.Kent Hovind

Whenever the worldview of evolution is questioned, this topic always comes up. Let me first explain how carbon dating works and then show you the assumptions it is based on. Radiation from the sun strikes the atmosphere of the earth all day long. This energy converts about 21 pounds of nitrogen into radioactive carbon 14. This radioactive carbon 14 slowly decays back into normal, stable nitrogen. Extensive laboratory testing has shown that about half of the C-14 molecules will decay in 5730 years. This is called the half-life. After another 5730 years half of the remaining C-14 will decay leaving only ¼ of the original C-14. It goes from ½ to ¼ to 1/8, etc. In theory it would never totally disappear, but after about 5 half lives the difference is not measurable with any degree of accuracy. This is why most people say carbon dating is only good for objects less than 40,000 years old. Nothing on earth carbon dates in the millions of years, because the scope of carbon dating only extends a few thousand years. Willard Libby invented the carbon dating technique in the early 1950's. The amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere today (about .0000765%), is assumed there would be the same amount found in living plants or animals since the plants breath CO2 and animals eat plants. Carbon 14 is the radio-active version of carbon.

Evolution or Creation: What do the rocks reveal? Global Flood?

[link to video.google.com]

I still cannot understand why - in the case of the oldest buildings known to man - pyramids or neolithic structures, are 4-5000 years old, yet they are decaying and in another 1000 years maybe more, they will be dust. And yet when archaeolgists find a skull and date it from a million years ago, its mostly intact and 'fossilized'. Even if its fossilized, it still would not keep for a million years. Same with rocks, rocks weather and decay,theres no way they can last for a billion years as some rocks on earth are dated at.

Just because we question our known science, doen't mean we insane fundamentalists. I have seen no argument reasonably putting the case for a 4.5 billion year old earth.

Okey, a quick question...

Where did the water for this global flood come from and more importantly where did it go afterwards?

(And please restrain yourselves with answers like "God" did it, it is childish and inapropriate for an adult discussion)