Posted on 03/26/2014 12:22:41 PM PDT by EveningStar
A new Facebook meme paints two leading Republicans as anti-science because of their alleged views of the age of the Earth.
The Facebook group Being Liberal posted a picture March 10, 2014, featuring side-by-side images of Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., looking somewhat sheepish. Bolded text under the images describes the senators’ views on the age of the Earth and the extinction of the dinosaurs.
According to the meme, Rubio "believes Earth (is) 9,000 years old," and "humans hunted dinosaurs to extinction." Paul, the image proclaims, says the Earth is 10,000 years old and believes "God made dinosaurs disappear to make space for humans." The post received about 5,500 likes and was shared more than 4,000 times.
Upon seeing this, we couldn’t resist digging in and finding out just what these two senators believe about the age of the Earth and the demise of the dinosaurs.
(Excerpt) Read more at politifact.com ...
Although science must recognize its limitations, it is not an answer to throw up your hands and say you don’t know, when the best scientific evidence is pointing in a certain direction.
And honestly, I would be wary of a politician who said that they rejected science in favor of the Bible on scientific issues. You can’t argue that the Bible is an absolutely correct scientific history, because you cannot empirically prove the Bible is anything more than a book.
I believe that the Bible is God’s Word. But, truth can be expressed by poetry and allegory as well as by a factual account.
Yes, and the language that the bible was written in has discernably recognizable styles for poetry, allegory, narrative, apocalyptic, and HISTORICAL.
And, Genesis is the least allegorical and most historical in writing style of all the books of the Bible.
Neither.
The closest answer, while not completely correct, would be "Perihelion".
Answer: I don’t know, I don’t care it is irrelevant. Next question.
Well Mr Senator does that mean you don’t care about the earth? No it means I dont know, I don’t care, and your questions are irrelevant. Please current relevant questions pertaining to the here and now. Next
If King Obongo was asked this question, I suspect he would answer “it’s above my pay grade”.
I thought the earth was about 6000 years old.
Seriously.
Hmm, if only God, who was there, would have written a book so we could know for sure.
The greatest scientist ever was a young earth creationist.
Ok, have to ask it then, were T-Rexes and men on the Earth at the same time?
Through high school and college I was subjected to the humanist scripture of science that never questioned any claims or methods. Simply put, there was evolution and the Big Bang and hence, no place or need for God.
Years later while doing an earthquake risk survey for a facility in Australia, for reasons I forget, I examined some material at the Los Alamos National Laboratory web site. Several scientists had written articles critical of the assumptions of radiometric dating with proof of severe errors. Further exploration led to more information about carbon 14 dating and how it is grossly misused, assuming accuracies so far from normal that I could only conclude some "scientists" are either morons or frauds.
This got me thinking that everything I had been taught about origins was a concocted crock of liberal crap to dissuade me from even exploring a different view of "science". What I was seeing, starting with radiometric dating was a wanton and deliberate disregard of evidence contradicting the so-called "scientific" viewpoint. The more research I did in numerous areas convinced me this was a widespread conspiracy of like mindedness to crush nonconforming interpretations. What I saw being practiced was not science but censorship.
So much for science going in a "certain direction." In fact, I give extra credit to anyone brave enough and principled enough to be honest about what they believe. I know - it is a naïve expectation from politicians.
Okay, should have said “aphelion or perihelion”. My bad! lol
If you follow scripture you will read: “In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the earth”.
There is no reference (or time frame) as to when or how long before he created man that this happened.
The actual time though could be billions of years, we just don’t know.
(It is however, the beginning.)
Scripture doesn’t say how long each creative day is in Genesis Chapter 1 but only gives the order of creation.
Genesis Chapter 2 verse 4 describes all of the creative days as one day.
The seventh ‘day’ is described as God’s day of rest, correct?
(I take this to mean that God is not ‘creating’ at this time because .. I doubt that he is tired) 8)
Paul indicated that God was still in his day of rest when he referred to the earlier words of David (ps95: 7,8,11) and to Genesis 2:2 where David urged: “Let us therefore do our utmost to enter into that rest”.
(God’s sabbath)
By Paul’s time that day of rest was already thousands of years old.
My last reference as to a days length is at 2Pe 3:8 where Peter says: “one day is with God as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day”.
I don’t believe that Peter was saying God’s day was actually a thousand years here, I think that he was just indicating that God had no actual 24 hour time as being a day .. for him (God).
(See my comments on the rest day above)
These are just my thoughts, simple as they may be and not all encompassing for sure but .. I do believe a lack of study is why I think the Young Earthers are wrong and why some Christians are losing what should be .. a winning argument.
Other Christians can probably add more than what I have said here because .. there is so much more!
I apologize if I have upset any of my friends on the forum.
Then he was wrong.
He may have been a scientist but he wasn’t anywhere near a biblical scholar.
A young earth is supported nowhere in scripture.
(as I hope my last post explains .. when it gets posted)
question: Does every post have to go through a delay on the forum?
No, posts don’t have to go through a delay. Maybe you need to refresh.
Christians didn’t doubt the Bible’s explicit rendering of creation until evolution gained a foothold. Christians started doing scriptural gymnastics to make it fit. So, what caused death and suffering?
Iirc written history goes back 6000 years
On the other hand, the hundreds of artifacts that humans have drawn or carved of dinosaurs combined with stories about dragons (that look a whole lot like a dinosaur) is pretty compelling evidence that humans and dinosaurs lived together.
The word dinosaur didn't come along until the 1800’s. Dragon was the word that people had for dinosaurs.
They believed in the Bible and Creation.
It’s impossible to say whether if they continued to live to today, whether they would accept the current Scientific hypotheses about the age of the earth as fact or not.
The fact is, their belief in creation did not stop them from being excellent scientists. The two are not incompatible.
Rejecting current science’s interpretation of observations and extrapolations and assumptions regarding the age of the earth doesn’t make someone anti-science.
That’s just evolutionist’s labeling to try to win an argument by default. The fact is that none of us were there, nobody can say with certainly except for God how the earth was created and how long it took.
Jesus’ first recorded miracle in the New Testament was to create wine, something that has the appearance of age. Science doesn’t know how Jesus died it. And they don’t know how God created the earth either. They have some interesting observations and hypotheses.
If there is a scientific basis for rejecting a scientific theory, that is no problem. The Bible, however, is not a scientific basis. What’s more you cannot claim that it is God’s Word by citing the Bible itself for this authority. Anyone could write a book claiming to be the word of God(many have)and there is no way to prove empirically the their book is not the word of God.
For myself, I don’t think there is an issue reconciling science and faith. When I hear about the vastness of the Universe or the sub-atomic world, I am awestruck at the power of God.
Like other trick questions ... “Is the capital of Kentucky pronounced ‘Louis-ville’ or “Loo-eee-ville”?
Neither - it’s pronounced “Frank-furt”.
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.