Posted on 09/04/2009 8:50:36 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Once again, a NASA space probe is supporting the 6,000-year biblical age of the solar system...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Water is flowing downhill now, and water flowed downhill then, Wacka. Some things don’t change. A river changes course, or becomes a lake, until a higher elevation is surmounted. Rivers tend to follow geological faults for this reason. Erosion is associated with volume and speed of water, the characteristics of the substrates underlying it, or both.
Rivers are fed via numerous sources; rainwater, snowmelt, springs, etcetera. There is a geological concept known as the “Continental Divide,” most prominently on the west coast, but there’s also an eastern one, which runs through my home state. On the east of that divide, water flows downhill, generally and inexorably to the east, with rare exception due to unique topography. On the west, westward.
Funny how that works.
I hadn’t really thought about the concept of the Devil being the great Deceiver.
The Bible does not IMO support a 7000 year cycle for all of Creation. The day of man is of course a 7000 year cycle, but all of Creation is not.
I cannot understand why any rational thinking persons could ever defend the idea that all of Creation is 7000 years old or less.
It is not supported by the text.
I was correct in calling him out since “ We ARE supposed to judge, and to expose, and to call out when error is evident-“ and this statement was as you said - This command refers to rash, censorious, and unjust judgment.”
Well at least we can agree on something.
No, I don’t think he gets paid for these posts, I generally don’t think anybody is getting paid to post.
Why would I ask him when I have no reason to believe he is being paid, and asking would suggest there was some evidence?
You are the one making the claim that he is being paid, and since your claim is out of the norm, it would be up to you to provide evidence.
In your short 2-sentence post, you called the author of the article a buffoon, said he was ignorant, and then called him a hypocrit.
That is “multi-pronged”.
“honest Evos”? I didn't notice until one explained he was honest, or claimed, I should say since I've not rec'd a reply.
Yes I do believe in each of those statements as a matter of faith
So, you're saying that one "day" of Biblical Creation, is an entirely, radically shorter "day" than others, that there is variance? That the day, yom, era, age, eon, or what have you, of Adam was 7,000 years, and all others were hundreds of millions of years?
Talk about not supported by the text, that's just bizarre.
And, where are you getting 7,000 years for this "yom?" That's unsupported by the text as well. The six days, plus the day of rest, under the interpretation of "yom" as a millennium, is 7,000 years, but that's seven days, not one.
I get five cents a word.
It adds up.
You do realize that the Evo-atheists you are constantly shilling for mock Christianity as a fairytale because science cannot empirically verify any of the faith questions I asked you?
ID is theology, so it is funny. Admittedly, some people under the ID mantle have been doing scientific work, but it hasn't been at all successful. Scientists often don't bother to even shoot down the claims anymore, because after the 50th making essentially the same claim you're wasting their time.
pointing out the anti-science religious motivations behind your derisive comments
My motivations are entirely pro-science. I have no stake in the theory of natural selection. As I've said before, I would LOVE to be the person to disprove it. I'd be famous for taking down such a strong, long-standing scientific theory. Work like that can get you a Nobel Prize. In the end, science is always better for taking down theories and replacing them with something better.
But, alas, nothing has come close to disproving natural selection and displacing it as the dominant scientific theory in the area. YEC certainly has zero scientific basis. There you're beating a horse that's been dead for hundreds of years.
#2 was neither, and you're overly-sensitive.
I guess you don't remember the scopes trial where someone trying to bring science into the classroom was prosecuted.
So your explanation for the Grand Canyon is the Continental Divide??? The entire Colorado system is to the west of the Divide.
I don’t know what you are talking about with regards to that.
I was taking about causes of the Colorado being made vs the creationist Noah’s flood myth. The rate of erosion is greater than the rate of the uplift of the land, roughly keeping the river flowing at about the same altitude it’s always been. The land got higher.
Same thing is happening near my house on a smaller scale. Again, this Creek drains the entire area near my house. No other canyons on this side of the bay are deeper or steeper. How else did the area manage to drain? The water didn’t run uphill. Give me another plausible mechanism that fits the facts.
I mean the Grand Canyon in place of the word Colorado.
These are basics in Roman Catholic teachings.
Evolution, biology, paleontology, archeology, geology, cosmology, chemistry, physics, and engineering are all perfectly compatible with the RC Church and the rest of Christianity.
You credit geological uplift for forming the Grand Canyon, while oddly maintaining that the altitude of the Colorado River remained roughly the same, Wacka. Think about it, and think about those other two, more notable instances of geological uplift that I mentioned.
How much of a change in altitude, do you suppose, caused the Mississippi to flow “backwards” for a period of time, and caused the formation of Reelfoot Lake, back in the early 1800’s? I’m referring to activity on the New Madrid fault.
The Mississippi didn’t just eat it’s way through and continue on course, and Reelfoot is a lake to this day. Geological uplift. Temporary in the first instance, lasting in the second.
Why isn’t a canyon forming there instead, Wacka?
You get 5 cents for each word?
I get 5 cents each time I get someone to call me a liberal.
I’m saving for retirement by posting in the Romney threads.
:-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.