INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

The earth is 6,000 years old.

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Message
Author
Bryn
Posts: 665
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:47 pm

The earth is 6,000 years old.

#1 Post by Bryn » November 8th, 2007, 12:20 pm

First of all, as someone who is biblically (and scientifically for that matter) illiterate I would like to know exactly where the idea of a young earth comes from. I've read Genesis and seen the conflicting accounts of creation but I haven't read any more of the Bible and I'm not clear why the creation was supposed to have happened so recently. Does it give an actual date in the Bible? I've no idea.

Secondly, in the absence of any YECs on this forum, I thought this could be our own thread devoted to creationist fun. For example, I happened on quite an amusing account of a visit to the Creation Museum in the USA, complete with pictures.
But back to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, where we discover the garden was like a luxury sex spa/vacation retreat of sorts. Here we see Adam and Eve in a pre-coitus setting amongst the foliage. Unfortunately for Eve, Adam is a Ken doll.
And there are plenty of visual aids like this one out there:

[img]http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x79/ ... omatic.jpg[/img]

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 9294
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: The earth is 6,000 years old.

#2 Post by Maria Mac » November 8th, 2007, 1:23 pm

Bryn wrote:Does it give an actual date in the Bible? I've no idea.
As I understand it, the young earth idea is worked out from a number of different passages in the Bible. The first hit on google was this site, which gives the "five Biblical steps necessary to determine the age of the universe".

Another visual aid:

[img]http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x79/ ... rtoon3.jpg[/img]

Beki
Posts: 710
Joined: July 5th, 2007, 8:43 am

#3 Post by Beki » November 8th, 2007, 4:06 pm

I thought it was to do with some Irish Monk that added up all the generations in the bit about "and so and so begat so and so" and multiplied it by 25 (as a 'generational' assumption).

But I could be wrong, I will freely admit that I haven't looked at the logic too closely! I am sure that there is tonnes more proof than that. :laughter:

User avatar
Oxfordrocks
Posts: 673
Joined: September 10th, 2007, 9:45 am

#4 Post by Oxfordrocks » November 8th, 2007, 4:36 pm

Wiki entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_earth

Some quacks theory:
http://www.evolutionofacreationist.com/clip4.html Quicktime needed. some of this is hilarious...."Man is the most evolved creature on Earth"...apart from you mate!

Useful site:http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Main_Page

Interesting:http://www.epicidiot.com/evo_cre/earth_age.htm

Yahoo Group on YE:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/earthage/messages

It's an interesting subject....not as interesting as the "Hollow Earth" debate, which we all know is a rational idea (I have proof)[
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating staying in EU.

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of staying in the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens will be caused by leaving EU?
3. Should the supreme court ruling on British subjects be based in UK?

Diane
Posts: 441
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 9:07 am

#5 Post by Diane » November 8th, 2007, 5:29 pm

Very informative links, OR, thanks!

And another visual aid:

[img]http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x79/ ... /faith.gif[/img]

User avatar
gcb01
Posts: 564
Joined: July 8th, 2007, 1:50 pm

#6 Post by gcb01 » November 8th, 2007, 5:32 pm

Please remember that creationists will tell lies, for example, replacing the term "creationism" with "intelligent design". This was simply an unsuccessful ruse to get round a US Supreme Court ruling.
Regards

Campbell

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

#7 Post by Alan H » November 8th, 2007, 8:04 pm

gcb01 wrote:This was simply an unsuccessful ruse to get round a US Supreme Court ruling.
Yes, but what'll be their next tactic (assuming we don't think they'll just give up!)?

Lord Muck oGentry
Posts: 633
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:48 pm

#8 Post by Lord Muck oGentry » November 8th, 2007, 8:38 pm

Alan H wrote:
gcb01 wrote:This was simply an unsuccessful ruse to get round a US Supreme Court ruling.
Yes, but what'll be their next tactic (assuming we don't think they'll just give up!)?


Nice warm words like diversity:

http://learning-together.org.uk/docs/called16.htm

Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

#9 Post by Nick » November 9th, 2007, 10:53 am

Does it give an actual date in the Bible?
No it doesn't. It would be a bit strange if the prophets had started off with "The world was created in 4004 BC". :grin:

From my A Level history, I remember learning about the C17th Archbishop Ussher, who, by taking the biblical genealogies and some guesswork, announce that creation occurred on October 23rd 4004BC. He wasn't the first, but his is the most famous and significant calculation. He has a Wiki entry, but I'm surprised he wasn't mentioned in the 'young earth' entry.

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

#10 Post by Lifelinking » November 10th, 2007, 5:48 pm

Interesting interview with Michael Behe on Point of Inquiry.


L
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

para handy
Posts: 587
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:39 pm

#11 Post by para handy » November 12th, 2007, 12:24 pm


DougS
Posts: 737
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 9:48 am

#12 Post by DougS » November 12th, 2007, 1:39 pm


Thomas
Posts: 459
Joined: July 21st, 2007, 3:54 pm

#13 Post by Thomas » November 30th, 2007, 12:29 pm

I sense this is a thread for making fun and therefore offer this contribution for those who haven't seen it

Ali G vs Kent Hovind

It gets a bit uncomfortable when Ali starts going 99999999999999999999 but get through that bit and it's quite rewarding.

allybalder
Posts: 82
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:21 am

#14 Post by allybalder » November 30th, 2007, 4:38 pm

see this link for a full page article in Belfast Telegraph Fri 30/11/07 with photos of the Niagra Falls and the Grand Canyon
I've contacted geologists at the Ulster Museum - closed for renovations at the moment - and suggested they ask the Tele for the chance of a rebuttal article - and worst of all - one of the members of the Creation Committee is a biomedical research student at the University of Ulster!!

headline
The creation of a new Giant's Causeway row
The supporters of the Causeway Creation Committee believe that the Giant's Causeway was created by Noah's flood. They also believe that dinosaurs walked the earth alongside humans. They would like to see these theories taught in our schools. Jonathan McCambridge reports on the creationism versus evolution debate in Ulster

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/featu ... 210680.ece
check out the Humani forum from our website http://www.nireland.humanists.net

fullerwiser
Posts: 113
Joined: November 29th, 2007, 3:47 pm

#15 Post by fullerwiser » November 30th, 2007, 9:03 pm

John Scalzi made a great photographic document of his trip to the museum a while ago. This is my favorite bit. As one of the commenters said, my first thought was, "Surpriz buttsechs!"

Seems as if most people on this board are European, so I'll offer a piece of insight from a native American (in more ways than one). In the early years of immigration from the Old World to the New, a sizeable portion of those coming here did so because their religious beliefs were too flat-out crazy to be accepted in Europe. They found it was much easier to believe these things in the wilderness, and eventually convert people whose weaponry was comparatively puny compared to the one-two punch of steel and smallpox. These people's descendants live here today, and many of them hold high office. The highest offices, in fact.

While always firm in their beliefs of American exceptionalism due to preferential treatment from the deity, this opinion grew to astronomical levels after World War II reduced the rest of the world to ash while our nation thrived. I cannot find a record of anyone at the time making the argument that geography rather than Jesus was the driving force in our ascension to world power status, and that makes sense, because such thinking would be out of character for the body politic.

For the next half-century and beyond, as our percentage of the world's wealth dwindled from 50% to less than a quarter, Americans have consistently plugged their fingers in their ears and sang The Old Rugged Cross at high volume in the face of growing evidence that the United States, in a very short time, will no longer be the dominant nation in anything but the number of functioning nuclear weapons. This seems to suit many of our citizens just fine, as the End Times will be here soon, and every fire needs a match to get it going.

Take the natural human inclination to prefer the simple over the complex (fundamentalism is on the rise globally, after all), add in several generations of unquestioned prosperity, and voila, you get a giant building full of people being told things they want to hear in complete opposition to the party poopers wielding clipboards who have the gall to suggest that maybe, just maybe, we aren't as special as we've always thought.

Thank you for your time, now I'm off to bang my head against the wall...

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

#16 Post by Lifelinking » November 30th, 2007, 9:21 pm

Hi fullerwiser, :welcome: to TH,


Cool rant :nod:

I like your blog,



L
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

fullerwiser
Posts: 113
Joined: November 29th, 2007, 3:47 pm

Heh

#17 Post by fullerwiser » November 30th, 2007, 9:32 pm

Thanks. Ranting's the only thing I'm good at. That and making waffles.

Jem
Posts: 973
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:37 pm

#18 Post by Jem » November 30th, 2007, 10:58 pm

That is one scary story allybalder - good to see Les Reid getting quoted at length though:
To date only the Belfast Humanist Society has spoken out publicly against Biblically-based theories being taught in science classrooms here. Its chairman, Les Reid, recently told the Belfast Telegraph that it was " totally inappropriate".

He added: "There is already scope in the curriculum for religious instruction. RE teachers have the classes to teach about supernatural beings and the creation of the universe as they see it. That's where creationism belongs.

"Our education system is liberal and accommodating as it stands."

But Stephen Moore from the Causeway Creation Committee says he is used to dealing with sceptics.

"Why can children not have all the interpretations? People often blame Christians for brainwashing children but we believe children are currently being brainwashed every day by the evolutionary message."
Great rant, fullerwiser. :thumbsup:


Finally a couple of lighthearted links from youtube:

Creation Science

Roy Zimmerman singing about creation science

ArbitraryMarks
Posts: 12
Joined: November 30th, 2007, 2:42 pm

Genesis Revisisted

#19 Post by ArbitraryMarks » November 30th, 2007, 11:07 pm

If you haven't seen Michael Shermer's Genesis Revisited yet, check it out...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-s ... iew=screen
In the beginning—specifically on October 23, 4004 B.C., at noon—out of quantum foam fluctuation God created the Big Bang. The bang was followed by cosmological inflation. God saw that the Big Bang was very big, too big for creatures that could worship him, so He created the earth...
(You can also call me "ck" for short)

"Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language." ~ Ludwig Wittgenstein

http://www.arbitrarymarks.com

User avatar
Heurismus
Posts: 224
Joined: November 10th, 2007, 8:04 pm

#20 Post by Heurismus » December 1st, 2007, 12:11 am

Oh goodie goodie goodie, a watchmaker thread. I'm going to enjoy.

On professor Behehehehehe! (Thanks for the links)
...and details some of his experiences as a key witness for the defense in the Dover, Pennsylvania Intelligent Design trial. He also explains the thesis of his new book, and talks about what he considers the biases of mainstream science. :hilarity:

But first by way of just easing in (watch to find out why the above statement is a vacuous assertion) , I thought for those who haven't familiarised yourselves with the current legal/academic debate you might enjoy:

Eugenie Scott on Intelligent Design and Young Earth Creationism from RichardDawkins.net, or if you'd like to just copy and paste into the Youtube search engine
Eugenie Scott: Intelligent Design & YE Creationism pt1 of 2
and
Eugenie Scott: Intelligent Design & YE Creationism pt2 of 2

Behe indeed!
:pointlaugh:
The most cogent reason for restricting the interference of government is the great evil of adding unnecessarily to its power. - J.S. Mill

Post Reply