Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DaveLoneRanger
Either of these possibilities shows that the "young earth" and "creation some 6000 years ago" ideas are wrong.

They contradict your own theory, that's about it. It does not disprove or prove young-earth either way.

My theory? Debating the out-of-Africa theory (160,000 years ago) vs. the more recent China data (multiregional, probably both 160,000 and 40,000 years ago) does not contradict a 6000 years ago earth? You really need to read some science. Two different theories of out-of-Africa migration, both of which deal with hundreds of thousands of years of time don't contraindicate a 6000 year old earth?


And even if both of these possibilities were subsequently shown to be wrong, that doesn't make your particular religious belief true.

By itself, this point does not further creationism a whole lot. It's just another two-pence tossed into the vault of evidence turned sour for evolutionists.

It doesn't further YEC creationism at all. It contradicts it.


Why don't you try to visit your college library, and really look at a few dozen or a few hundred of the technical journals dealing with evolution.

Some time I should share with you some of the recent materials I have been perusing from scientific journals the past few months while the crevo wars here have been quiet.

You are cruising the internet looking for articles which, in your limited understanding, may serve to cast some doubt--any doubt--on evolution. That does not amount to an understanding of science.


You are not getting a straight story from AnswersinGenesis.

Did I detect a subtle twitch when you said that? Coyote, listen to me. This has nothing to do with Answers in Genesis. Ken Ham didn't call me up and ask me to post this story, I didn't get any marching orders from Kent Hovind. (Well, he did ask me to help him break out of jail, but that's another story.) AiG may not even be aware of this story yet. Bringing them into this as a personal attack against me hints at a psychological obsession.

Not interested in Ken Ham or Kent Hovind. They don't post here. You do. And you post anti-science nonsense, which you have admitted you get from AnswersinGenesis. And you have admitted you are doing apologetics (defense of religion), not science.

Post in the Religion Forum and you won't get any challenges from me as long as what you are posting is religious belief and does not pretend to be science. That's where you and I tangle. (Note tagline.)

26 posted on 04/02/2007 8:35:42 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: Coyoteman

Hi, I’m still waiting for an answer to my question: in what direction will a pencil go if you let go of it tomorrow? I know it sounds like a stupid question, but there’s a reason I’m asking. thanks.


30 posted on 04/02/2007 8:50:25 PM PDT by rudy45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: Coyoteman

Maybe you should think about posting in “Evolution is a Lie” forum. There you’d be able to post all your articles from the evo sites. “Evo”, hmmm, really sounds like “evil”. Fancy that.


43 posted on 04/02/2007 11:55:54 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: Coyoteman

“Post in the Religion Forum and you won’t get any challenges from me as long as what you are posting is religious belief and does not pretend to be science.”

Interesting watching the two of you go back and forth.

A couple comments; many modern scientists treat their ‘science’ the same as a religion. They won’t admit it of course.

Second, do you believe that everything in the Universe can be understood by man?


48 posted on 04/03/2007 3:52:49 AM PDT by driftdiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: Coyoteman

Taglines 'R' Us...


(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
 
HMmmm...
 
 
Job 38
 
 1.  Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
 2.  "Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge?
 3.  Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.
 4.  "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand.
 5.  Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it?
 6.  On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone--
 7.  while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?
 8.  "Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb,
 9.  when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness,
 10.  when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in place,
 11.  when I said, `This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt'?
 12.  "Have you ever given orders to the morning, or shown the dawn its place,
 13.  that it might take the earth by the edges and shake the wicked out of it?
 14.  The earth takes shape like clay under a seal; its features stand out like those of a garment.
 15.  The wicked are denied their light, and their upraised arm is broken.
 16.  "Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea or walked in the recesses of the deep?
 17.  Have the gates of death been shown to you? Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death ?
 18.  Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth? Tell me, if you know all this.
 19.  "What is the way to the abode of light? And where does darkness reside?
 20.  Can you take them to their places? Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
 21.  Surely you know, for you were already born! You have lived so many years!
 22.  "Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or seen the storehouses of the hail,
 23.  which I reserve for times of trouble, for days of war and battle?
 24.  What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed, or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
 25.  Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain, and a path for the thunderstorm,
 26.  to water a land where no man lives, a desert with no one in it,
 27.  to satisfy a desolate wasteland and make it sprout with grass?
 28.  Does the rain have a father? Who fathers the drops of dew?
 29.  From whose womb comes the ice? Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens
 30.  when the waters become hard as stone, when the surface of the deep is frozen?
 31.  "Can you bind the beautiful  Pleiades? Can you loose the cords of Orion?
 32.  Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons or lead out the Bear  with its cubs?
 33.  Do you know the laws of the heavens? Can you set up [God's ] dominion over the earth?
 34.  "Can you raise your voice to the clouds and cover yourself with a flood of water?
 35.  Do you send the lightning bolts on their way? Do they report to you, `Here we are'?
 36.  Who endowed the heart  with wisdom or gave understanding to the mind ?
 37.  Who has the wisdom to count the clouds? Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens
 38.  when the dust becomes hard and the clods of earth stick together?
 39.  "Do you hunt the prey for the lioness and satisfy the hunger of the lions
 40.  when they crouch in their dens or lie in wait in a thicket? 
 41.  Who provides food for the raven when its young cry out to God and wander about for lack of food?
 

52 posted on 04/03/2007 4:55:41 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: Coyoteman
My theory?
The one you're advocating.
Debating the out-of-Africa theory (160,000 years ago) vs. the more recent China data (multiregional, probably both 160,000 and 40,000 years ago) does not contradict a 6000 years ago earth?
You think every find over 6,000 years contradicts young-earth. These scientists already had the assumptions of old ages in their heads, so it's not surprising that their conclusion was congruent with their assumption, as far as dates went.
You really need to read some science.
You are cruising the internet looking for articles which, in your limited understanding, may serve to cast some doubt--any doubt--on evolution. That does not amount to an understanding of science.
Wait, so you don't want me reading scientific journals? Or do you want me reading them only with YOUR bias, not mine?
Not interested in Ken Ham or Kent Hovind. They don't post here. You do.
YOU are the one that brought Answers in Genesis up, my friend. Out of the blue.
And you post anti-science nonsense, which you have admitted you get from AnswersinGenesis.
Not anti-science, and who has to "admit" something when the URL is as plain as day? You keep acting as if that's something to be ashamed of. And anyway, I didn't post anything from AiG on this page, and remind me again why MY behavior is superceding the substance of this article?
Post in the Religion Forum and you won't get any challenges from me as long as what you are posting is religious belief and does not pretend to be science. That's where you and I tangle.
I'm sorry; I don't let opponents determine the battlefield.
59 posted on 04/03/2007 6:11:56 AM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson