102 replies to this topic

[ikester7579]

But the problem is, there is so many ways to find out how the Earth is...None of them date the Earth to 6,000 years old.
Now I like the idea of 'information theory' but no one upholds to it, only creationists. If it was against information the majority of sciencetists would believe it.

They don't have to. God said:

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

God admits that during creation He did not use time to age the matter in which He used to create the earth.

Also, if all matter came from one source as the big bang suggests, then all matter should date back to that source and be of the same age. But it does not. Neither is it related in it's composition.

[Scanman]

They don't have to. God said:

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

God admits that during creation He did not use time to age the matter in which He used to create the earth.

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." 2 Pet 3:5

Your interpretation is a bit of a stretch.

Also, if all matter came from one source as the big bang suggests, then all matter should date back to that source and be of the same age. But it does not. Neither is it related in it's composition.

This is a misconception...

Dating is based on several things...with physical matter itself, Radiometric dating of decay rates of particular elements is used. Dating of a 4.5 billion year old earth is based on the most ancient metamorphic rocks. Formation of metamorphic rock (When it was last molten and then has achieved closure temperature) determines the point that decay begins...not the beginning of the universe.

In Cosmology, dating is based on the speed of light, red shift and the known distance of the farthest objects.

Peace

[Cata]

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." 2 Pet 3:5

Your interpretation is a bit of a stretch.
This is a misconception...

6000 years isn't a long time?

[Cata]

It isnt ad populum. I have never seen Antartica yet I believe it is real. I believe There are other galaxies out there, I havent seen any. I believe them because its logical. Science debates. If sciencetists dont all agree they debate. If there is a lot of agreement in the community then you have to agree sought of agree wtih them, its not a conspiracy.

Answers in Genesis tries, has some great articles but is still in the relam of religion (the majority of articles are)

I don't get what you are saying. You said that because most scientists don't believe something, it is not valid. That is not true, as number of people who believe it has no relation to the validity of something.

For example a turtles over a period of time formed shells...

Evidence?

I was still developing on this idea but now i have it.

In the Bible lots are cast. When the Israelites were finding out who gets what land lots were cast. Was this chance? or was God's hand over the lots?

This is how evolution works. It is not random, but God's hand is over it. For example a Brown bear God changed the Genetic code for it to be a polar bear. We can ask why would God help a bear and pherhaps not a spider?

Yet the Bible says that by the word of God the heavens were of old. God could have merely created the universe with the appearance of age.

For example, if in a video game there's a city in the game that appears to be old with damaged buildings and such, did that really happen or could the game just have been made that way from the start?

God has the power to make the universe as he wants.

And you still have no evidence of evolution anyway.

Did spiders have fangs in the GoE?

Possibly.

What was the purpose of the fangs?

Some spiders eat mostly plants.
http://www.answersin...etarian-animals

I don't know the purpose of fangs in a death free world, but that doesn't mean there isn't one that I simply don't know.

[Scanman]

Yet the Bible says that by the word of God the heavens were of old.

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." 2 Pet 3:5

You are looking at that scriputre incorrectly.

God could have merely created the universe with the appearance of age.

God is not a deceiver.

Peace

[Cata]

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." 2 Pet 3:5

You are looking at that scriputre incorrectly.

Is 6000 years not long enough for you?
You ignored me the first time i said this.

God is not a deceiver.

How would God be a deceiver if he merely makes the universe mature and developed, instead of spending billions of years slowly building it?
God can make the universe however he wants, and he has the power to make it as quickly as he wants.

Lets look at the shark - a perfect killing machine. You cant tell me that the shark evolved in a few thousand years to be the perfect killing machine.

Why couldn't God have made them the way they are(But less corrupted)?

Sharp teeth help for eating plants.

[Scanman]

Is 6000 years not long enough for you?
You ignored me the first time i said this.

No, it isn't....not by a long shot.

How would God be a deceiver if he merely makes the universe mature and developed, instead of spending billions of years slowly building it?
God can make the universe however he wants, and he has the power to make it as quickly as he wants.
Why couldn't God have made them the way they are(But less corrupted)?

Sure he does...if you're saying that God has the ability to lie.

Would God create a mature tree with rings?

Would he create a mature mammal with a belly button?

Would he create the earth with strata?

Would he create soil that was composed of organic detritus?

Would he create sand, which is a product of erosion?

Would he create a rounded stone, which is normally polished by water?

Would he create light that appeared to come from a particular origin but was already in transit?

Would he create effect without cause?

If so, then he is a deceiver....and God is not a deceiver.

Sharp teeth help for eating plants.

Actually, molars help to eat plants...canines and most other sharp teeth are for tearing flesh.

What did God plan for the Venus flytrap prior to the 'fall'.

What did the scorpion do with it's tail?

What did the lion do with it's claws?

What did the bombardier beetle do with it's volcanic squirt-squirt?

What did the skunk do with it's spray?

What did the hornet do with it's sting?

...all prior to the 'fall'?

Peace

[Cata]

No, it isn't....not by a long shot.

You are definitely a person to say that having lived less than 1% of that time.

if you're saying that God has the ability to lie.

Creating something mature does not equate to saying that it is mature. Contrary, the Bible tells us that the heavens were created of old.
You cannot argue with God.

2 Peter 3:5 "For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water"

Actually, molars help to eat plants...canines and most other sharp teeth are for tearing flesh.

Thank you for ignoring my picture. Fruit bats are herbivores. They eat plants, yet they have sharp teeth.

...all prior to the 'fall'?

Do you expect me to have an answer for everything?
Could have had a purpose that we don't know.

[AFJ]

1) Lets say the world is 4.5 billion years old. Would it be possible for macro evolution?

It's an engineering problem--not a time problem. Evolutionists like to talk about the so-called genetic evidence for evolution, while at the same time ignoring the overwhelming evidence of design in the cell. The problem is you've got to have many things in place at the beginning to have life--even in bacteria.

2) Why hold to a 6,000 year old Earth. When trees have been dated older than that? (I think the Earth is 50,000 - 20,000)

Really? A tree with 6000 rings? A tree cluster I've heard of--but I've heard 8000, 13000, 30000, and 5000--these are estimates from uniformintarians--do you suppose they're motivated to prove the scripture? You must be talking about carbon dating and we have threads on that subject.

3) In my opinion the geologic column is evidence for evolution. Cyanobacteria is found in old rocks, but in these same rocks no humans, no mamals no nothing besides simple multicellular organisms have been found. how do you explain this?

Cyanobacteria is a 'fossil' that is alive today. If your reasoning is valid, then we should find man next to cyanobacteria--since they have existed at the same time. So why don't we? The data you present is therefore an argument against your argument.

The cyanobacteria are 'index fossils' by which the rocks are relatively dated. If you want to look at the inconsistencies and assumptions of radiometric dating--Andrew Snelling or Steven Austin are PhD's, as well as experienced field geologists, and well able to write.


I'll leave the rest for now. If anyone reads this then we can discuss the rest.

[Scanman]

Contrary, the Bible tells us that the heavens were created of old.
You cannot argue with God.

2 Peter 3:5 "For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water"

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." 2 Pet 3:5

You are looking at that scripture incorrectly.

Thank you for ignoring my picture. Fruit bats are herbivores. They eat plants, yet they have sharp teeth.

They are still bats...75% of bats are insectivores, the most of the rest are frugivores with a few remaining that feed on animals...such as vampire bats. Adaptaion does not dictate that all past evolutionary traits be eliminated. It is obvious that the canines are an evolutionary trait that is still useful.

Man has held on to his canines and incisors from his evolutionary ancestors.

Peace

[Cata]

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." 2 Pet 3:5

You are looking at that scripture incorrectly.

You can't seem to grasp the truth that 6000 years is a long time.
Long ago does not mean billions of years.

They are still bats...75% of bats are insectivores, the most of the rest are frugivores with a few remaining that feed on animals...such as vampire bats. Adaptaion does not dictate that all past evolutionary traits be eliminated. It is obvious that the canines are an evolutionary trait that is still useful.

They are still herbivores. That means that canines can be used for eating fruit.
Why couldn't sharks have used their teeth to eat fruit?

[Yorzhik]

Do books require heat???

You've got to be kidding me.

The 2nd law says the integral of delta Q/T=-N.  Apply that to evolution.

With the statement you make above, I'm not sure you are worth answering. But as I ascribe to "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or miss-communication" I'll give you another chance.

Before we change the subject, perhaps you can first respond to these claims: All information is carried on information carrying media. (is this true?)

For information carrying media to be built, heat must be used. (perhaps it is built with no energy at all?)

For the information to change, additional heat must be used.(as is obvious, right?)

And for the information to change in a specific way, even more energy must be used.(here is where you need to object, offering us an alternative or a reason why this might not be true)

Unfortunately, without a system in place to direct this energy, the energy will disperse in the path of least resistance; either destroying the system that directs it or building the information media in a place unlikely to follow the specified course required by evolution.(or do you think undirected energy can build DNA?)

[ikester7579]

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." 2 Pet 3:5

Your interpretation is a bit of a stretch.
This is a misconception...

Changing the word of God to fit your needs makes you the one who has the misconception.

Dating is based on several things...with physical matter itself, Radiometric dating of decay rates of particular elements is used. Dating of a 4.5 billion year old earth is based on the most ancient metamorphic rocks. Formation of metamorphic rock (When it was last molten and then has achieved closure temperature) determines the point that decay begins...not the beginning of the universe.

In Cosmology, dating is based on the speed of light, red shift and the known distance of the farthest objects.

Peace

But, true or not:

If all matter came from the bit bang, then all matter is really as old as the universe, right? So why does it not date to that age? Because age dating is flawed and always has been.

Example: The earth dates to 4.5 billion, right? But where did the matter to create the earth come from? The big bang, And how long ago did that happen? 13-15 billion year ago, right? So if the matter cam from the big bang that the earth formed from, why does the matter only date to when it cooled off? It's because dating markers can only be left after the matter cools. Not before. Which means the matter existed before then, it cannot be dated until it cooled. Knowing that problem means that dating methods of matter is actually hendered by it having to cool. So the real age of the matter is 13-15 billion years but it dates to 4.5 because of that dating problem that matter has to cool first.

Question: Did ir did not the matter to create the earth come from the big bang according to what you believe? So does that make it as old as the big bang, or not and why?

[ikester7579]

6000 years isn't a long time?

He is changing the word to fit his needs for what he believes.

[ikester7579]

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." 2 Pet 3:5

You are looking at that scriputre incorrectly.
God is not a deceiver.

Peace

You are changing scripture.

And your answer about God being a deciever is what evos use. You are going to have to prove how God would be a deciever and liar by doing this.

One cannot be a deceiver if one says what he has done, and exactly how he did it.

Now why would God say: By the word of God the heavens were of old? It's because God knew the laws of physics. He was relaying that what He did does not go along with the laws of physics as we know. Now since God told us what He did, what part of what he did becomes a deception and why?

[Scanman]

If all matter came from the bit bang, then all matter is really as old as the universe, right?

Yes, all of the atomic building blocks of matter are relatively the same age

So why does it not date to that age?

Because Radiometric dating only measures to the beginning of nuclear decay...after metamorphic rock has reached 'closure temperature'.

Because age dating is flawed and always has been.

Radiometric dating measures the minimum age of a measureable material (not all matter is a candidate for radiometric dating).

Example: The earth dates to 4.5 billion, right? But where did the matter to create the earth come from? The big bang...

Yes

And how long ago did that happen? 13-15 billion year ago, right?

Yes...13.7 billion years to be more precise.

So if the matter cam from the big bang that the earth formed from, why does the matter only date to when it cooled off?

Because that is how radioactive diffusion and 'closure temperature' work...once the rock reaches closure temperature, diffusion of radioactive isotopes basically ceases.

It's because dating markers can only be left after the matter cools. Not before.

Correct

Which means the matter existed before then, it cannot be dated until it cooled.

Correct

Knowing that problem means that dating methods of matter is actually hendered by it having to cool. So the real age of the matter is 13-15 billion years but it dates to 4.5 because of that dating problem that matter has to cool first.

Correct...most scientist would regard the 'solidification' of matter in the earth to be a good starting point for determining the 'minimum' age of the earth.

Prior to this, the earth would have been in a 'proto' state.

Question: Did ir did not the matter to create the earth come from the big bang according to what you believe?
So does that make it as old as the big bang, or not and why?

Yes, all matter originated at the 'Big Bang'.

The 'building blocks' of matter?...yes...relatively speaking.

Peace

[Scanman]

You are changing scripture.

I am not changing scripture...

NIV: "But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water."

NASB: "For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water.."

ESV: "For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water..."

You are interpreting your KJV as saying the heavens were already old, when it is actually saying that the heavens existed long ago (indicating a place in time...not age).

Peace