"To those of the same mind as me (creationists), let me just try to calm you minds by making you realize that you don't have to try and defend the word of God from science as if science is inherently evil."
You then demonize scientists.
"Let me give you a very SICK joke. A guy goes to his father and says dad, i want to marry your mother. The father says why would you do that and the son said because you married my mother.
now to this guy it was logical that if his father can marry his mother then that's evidence that he should be allowed to marry his. Now that's obviously sick and doesn't make sense at all, but how many times have you seen some scientists make crazy conclusions from any given sort of data?"
"Because everything can out of nothing then there is no need for a creator". that's just absurd, yet do some hold this belief to almost delusional proportions."
And that's an evangelical strawman, not what atheists or scientists generally say.
"These guys don't follow the evidence to wherever it leads, they have a destination already and everything must lead there!
Now don't be afraid of those scenarios in the bible that contradict science. As an example, science tells us that continents moved apart over millions of years yet the bible tells us it happened faster! Genesis 10:25And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided
No, that's how you interpret it, not what it explicitly says.
"this obviously contradicts the thousands of years science proposes so who are we to believe?"
You get that continents are moving as we speak, right?
"Given that the bible was not written as a response to skeptics or as an alternative to science we can safely conclude that it simply recorded what happened."
The book of genesis was written by people who did not see what happened. It wasn't written by adam or eve, it was recorded from oral tradition about 2900 years ago by unknown authors around 3,000 years after the events supposedly took place. Why trust anonymous authors repeating claims from other anonymous people over empirical evidence? And they recorded two versions of the creation account because there were several floating around at the time. Genesis 1 and 2 give two different orders for creation. Are they both infallible? How does that work?
"Whether you chose not to believe it is immaterial."
Then why are you here?
"We can find many events in the bible that make it hard to apply the current observable laws to things in the bible thereby creating the controversies but as i said, that's no reason not to believe the bible because the people who wrote were just recording what had happened unlike nowadays when even what i'm writing is a response to what I've heard. So according to the law of first mention we can safely take what the word says because we know that it is within the real of the Almighty God to do it anyway!"
The people who wrote this stuff down weren't alive when these events supposedly happened even according to the bible. That makes no sense. And if we should trust people to be telling the truth, why not trust the authors of the holy books of other religions who were "just recording what happened"?