[__ Science __ ] "Why I'm not a YE creationist"

[Edward]

How ironic, since if you ask any physicist they will refute you. Like I said (https://christianforums.net/threads/why-im-not-a-ye-creationist.90488/post-1669952), if you don't like the "establishment" science books, you can read the creationist book, which gives a much better explanation of relativity than either you or I could articulate.

I don't need to read that. If that's some of the material which has you so mixed up then why bother? Besides, it doesn't sound like you are keeping up with science. With all of the new techno;ogy, they are discovering many things that they did not know before. So you better catch up boi.

Stop relying on old information and theory. Old theory is going away every day lately. Physicists were wrong! The universe is not ifinite! It id finite. Google it boi and do some homework. Look up some Chuck Missler videos, He explains it all and with scriptures.

Science doesn't prove the Bible. But the Bible does prove science.

 

[T. E. Smith]

I don't need to read that. If that's some of the material which has you so mixed up then why bother? Besides, it doesn't sound like you are keeping up with science. With all of the new techno;ogy, they are discovering many things that they did not know before. So you better catch up boi.

Stop relying on old information and theory. Old theory is going away every day lately. Physicists were wrong! The universe is not ifinite! It id finite. Google it boi and do some homework. Look up some Chuck Missler videos, He explains it all and with scriptures.

Science doesn't prove the Bible. But the Bible does prove science.

Old theory? I am laughing out loud right now. The theory of relativity is not "old", it is very current and embraced by all physicists. Your Christian scientist doesn't prove anything.

Here's what's old: creationism.

 

[Edward]

Old theory? I am laughing out loud right now. The theory of relativity is not "old", it is very current and embraced by all physicists. Your Christian scientist doesn't prove anything.

Here's what's old: creationism.

You are weird. You act like you have no interest in learning anything. You believe what you believe and nobody can tell you different. I wonder if your whole agenda here is just to start arguments. Just wasting Christians time with bs rabbit trails which many times you simply ridicule good answers given to you. You are really trolling, right? I mean, you can't possibly really be that stupid to say your conversations are on the level...can you?

 

[eddif]

"One of the most painful experiences of my life was abandoning my belief in young earth creationism. I had been raised in a wonderful Baptist church that was fundamentalist but, as it was on the edge of a potato field in rural New Brunswick, Canada, it lacked the hard political edge that makes American fundamentalism so unappealing. It was a great place to grow up, to learn to love God, and I have nothing but fond memories of the believers with whom I worshipped as a child.
...
My studies led me to question the assumptions supporting my creationism–assumptions that soon dissolved and left my childhood belief in creationism without a foundation. Eventually I abandoned creationism and embraced theistic evolution–the belief that God creates through natural processes over billions of years. I discovered, to my surprise, that creationism required a certain willful blindness to both the natural world and the Bible.
There were several reasons I abandoned creationism. And now, years later, I am convinced that creationism poses insurmountable problems for anyone who would defend creationism today. I would like to mention a few general concerns and then some specifics to make my point.
Creationists have to “explain away” a gigantic mountain range of evidence that the scientific community has accumulated in the past century. Neither the scientific community nor the scientific data is is on their side. They have to believe that God created a profoundly deceptive world, with countless markers inexplicably pointing to evolution, even though that was not how things originated.
...
I am humbled to think that God’s creative work is of such grand coherence and scope that the universe is one gigantic narrative of creation. This seems far richer than my former creationist view that the universe is a collection of separately created things. And, to top it off, God created us with minds capable of unpacking the whole amazing story.
Why would any Christian find it hard to believe that evolution was God’s way of creating?"

Why I am not a creationist

Debates About Faith

www.beliefnet.com

Genesis does not place a time definition on days 1,2,3.
The first 3 days could ( if we had a formula) be millions of years. A dark and a light period.

Day four is when our present day time started. The sun moon and stars establish time as we know it.

I am not surprised some people think days 1,2&3 were 24hour days. People just do not think. It took a long time before I realized how stupid I am. The solar syste and stars are just a big clock.

The only fossil record for day 1,2,3 are trees ( plants ?).

eddif

 

[T. E. Smith]

Genesis does not place a time definition on days 1,2,3.
The first 3 days could ( if we had a formula) be millions of years. A dark and a light period.

Day four is when our present day time started. The sun moon and stars establish time as we know it.

I am not surprised some people think days 1,2&3 were 24hour days. People just do not think. It took a long time before I realized how stupid I am. The solar syste and stars are just a big clock.

The only fossil record for day 1,2,3 are trees ( plants ?).

eddif

However, atomic clocks count time without concern of the celestial bodies.

You are weird. You act like you have no interest in learning anything. You believe what you believe and nobody can tell you different. I wonder if your whole agenda here is just to start arguments. Just wasting Christians time with bs rabbit trails which many times you simply ridicule good answers given to you. You are really trolling, right? I mean, you can't possibly really be that stupid to say your conversations are on the level...can you?

Sure, whatever you say.

 

[eddif]

However, atomic clocks count time without concern of the celestial bodies.

I thought fission and fusion in stars were directly involved in atomic clocks. Are you telling me that star age has nothing to do wirmth atomic decay? Light years etc.

eddif

 

[T. E. Smith]

I thought fission and fusion in stars were directly involved in atomic clocks. Are you telling me that star age has nothing to do wirmth atomic decay? Light years etc.

eddif

Light years are not related to stars by necessity. If you have point A in space, and point B, and they are 8 billion-light-years apart, it would take 8 billion years for light from one point to reach another, whether there are stars or not.

Yes atomic decay happens all the time in stars, but not the atomic clocks we have on Earth. Your understanding seems to be convoluted.

 

[Barbarian]

Stop relying on old information and theory. Old theory is going away every day lately. Physicists were wrong! The universe is not ifinite!

Yep.

 

[Barbarian]

*Imagine this: My father graduated Harvard in the early 60s and was taught that there was little to no life in the deep parts of the ocean do to lack of photosynthesis.

I was in high school in the early 60s, and they taught me that there was much life in the deep parts of the ocean. How odd that Harvard hadn't gotten the word. The existence of life and ecologies in the deep ocean has been known since the 1800s.

Deep-sea exploration - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I attended a smaller conference in my homes city of NY and walked out. I'm not sure when I stopped supporting it, but I remember being at The Museum of Science in Boston and reading something about evolution at the whale display and thinking to myself, "This is all speculative bull crap that can't even withstand the crucible of criti

Ironically, the 1980s were a time of discovery for fossil whales, and the fossils showed a clear transition from land ungulates as scientists had predicted. More importantly, there were no transitionals for things not predicted by evolutionary theory.

Pretty much every step in the process is now in evidence.

 

[Cooper]

Genesis does not place a time definition on days 1,2,3.
The first 3 days could ( if we had a formula) be millions of years. A dark and a light period.

Day four is when our present day time started. The sun moon and stars establish time as we know it.

I am not surprised some people think days 1,2&3 were 24hour days. People just do not think. It took a long time before I realized how stupid I am. The solar syste and stars are just a big clock.

The only fossil record for day 1,2,3 are trees ( plants ?).

eddif

What you say is true. The Hebrew word yome (day) means a period of time, anything up to eternity. We are living in the seventh yome.