The Defective Image: How Darwinism Fails to Provide an Adequate Account of the World
Ben M Carter
Starts at 7pm.
http://debatelive.org/?utm_source=creation-museum-creation-evolution&utm_medium=Banner&utm_campaign=bill-nye-ken-ham-debate
“implying that there are two equal sides to a debate that has already been settled scientifically.”
Hmmmm. Where have I heard that before?
You don’t have to even watch. Just read “The Edge of Evolution.”. Mathematically, macro evolution is not possible. Micro evolution within distinct species, yes. The Theory of Evolution rests on one word, and one word only: Randomness. It is the major flaw.
It can hardly be called a debate. Intelligent design is irrefutable and Darwinism is unsupportable.
...and yet Darwinism is doctrinally taught in government schools as fact and the intelligent design proof of creationism is basically banned. Time for a change.
The CREATIONIST will win this debate!
http://debatelive.org/?utm_source=aig-homepage&utm_medium=banner&utm_campaign=bill-nye-ken-ham-debate-campaign
Heck modern civilization is older than that! The Sumerian civilization is over 8,000 years old.
No where in the bible does it say the earth is only seven thousand years old! The bible was not written as a science textbook! and so and so begot so and so DOES NOT HAVE TO BE LITTERAL ! example, I am a descendant of John Adams, so one “could” say... John Adams begot Texasfreeper2009, and be technically correct but have missed several hundred years in between.
Perhaps the Lord is not amused... there is an ICE STORM developing in that area right now. They may ALL be spending the night together in that building!
Funny stuff!
1. Abiogenesis is laughably impossible, but evolution must be true!
2. Evolution from one fish to reptile, etc., has zero evidence, but evolution must be true!
And they claim theirs is not a religious faith????
THIS is when we(and Mankind) “Won”:
Genesis 3
King James Version (KJV)
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Each side in something like this always thinks they won. Debates like this are silly.
“Ham is a young-Earth creationist. That means he believes the world is only seven thousand years old or so, because if you look at the Bible in the most literal way possible, that’s the timeline. God literally created the world in seven, 24-hour days, and so on from there.”
The science of evolution may have its faults, errors and weaknesses, but even without the science of evolution the scientific view of the age of the earth as more than just a few thousand years is more defensible, more defensible than a young earth.
There was even a post here on FreeRep by a scientist with knowledge of phsyics and a lot of its math who explored the “six days” of creation from an orthodox science view. It was so detailed I cannot do justice to it in this space. But, in the final analysis he was saying that if you take the “day” to mean not “one earth day” but a “G-d day” from a perspective beginning at the point science refers to as the “big bang”, and understanding what Eisteins theories say about time, and the “traveling at the speed of light” altering of the perspective of time, to those travelling or looking back over great distances, which is NOT the same as from a point of refersence at the beginning of it all that never changed, he found he could mathematically break down the time since the big bang to the early earth era into six distinct periods that are represented by different “earth years” each, but from G-d’s perspective - from that point in creation just preceding the big bang - would be each just one of six “G-d days”. That is a VERY rough idea of what he produced.
The problem with the “young earth” theory is not its objections to evolution, but its lack of ability to refute the much older earth-theories in science that do not need evolution to substantiate them.
I have no problem with the “days” in the Bible, regarding creation, NOT referring to “earth days” in the litteral since. It is enough for me that I don’t have to understand HOW G-d created the universe, whether in any number of litteral days or any number of virtual days, it will always be beyond the undersstanding of humans to fully comprehend. I can take THAT on faith, without an “old earth” shattering my faith in G-d.
I knew this was a fool’s errand, Ken Ham. This food debate has successfully damaged the cause of Christ.
Creationists would have claimed they won if nobody at all agreed to debate them. The real question is did the debate accomplish it’s true purpose - generate some funds for Ham’s financially strapped Creationism Museum?