Creationism's contribution to science (Darwin, Earth, evolution, genesis, myth)

[Sunstone]

(1) Paul an Apostle writes,

“New laws are not really new laws but already existing laws the scientists discover.”

To say that “new laws are not really new laws but already existing laws the scientists discover” is like saying that a cartographer does not create a map, but merely discovers a pre-existing map. I fear you confuse the map with the terrain, Paul. The terrain pre-exists the map, but the map does not pre-exist the cartographer’s creation of the map. In science, reality pre-exists the theorem, but the theorem does not pre-exist the scientist’s creation of the theorem.

Unless, you are Plato.

If you are Plato, then you get very confused thinking about such things as this, and in your confusion, you come up with the idea that the map somehow pre-exists the cartographer’s creation of the map. That’s what Plato did when he came up with his notion of pre-existing “ideals” (or, “forms”, “templates”.) However, professional philosophers have shown Plato’s idealism to be what it is, and have consequently discredited it. Surely, you are not trying to revive it!

(2) Can you think of any contribution that “creationist scientists” have managed to make to science? I myself can think of none.

[paul_an_apostle]

Your exactly right Deut - It is a statement of faith - and there is no way to absolutely prove or disprove it in this world - we are far too limited in our scope.

But as C.S Lewis said (I think it was C.S Lewis) - 'In the final analysis, when science can no longer answer the questions, there remains God'.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by paul_an_apostle

Your exactly right Deut - It is a statement of faith - and there is no way to absolutely prove or disprove it in this world - we are far too limited in our scope.

Talk about absolute proof/disproof is nothing but sophistry:

• there is no way to absolutely prove or disprove the Unicorn
• there is no way to absolutely prove or disprove the Faerie Kingdom
• there is no way to absolutely prove or disprove the Demiurge
• there is no way to absolutely prove or disprove the Sumerian Pantheon
• there is no way to absolutely prove or disprove the Hindu Deities
• there is no way to absolutely prove or disprove ...

The list is near endless.

Originally Posted by paul_an_apostle

But as C.S Lewis said (I think it was C.S Lewis) - 'In the final analysis, when science can no longer answer the questions, there remains God'.

And it was Charles Darwin who wrote:

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.

So tell us, are you a Young Earth Creationist? Can you suggest some approximate dates for (1) the age of the universe, (2) the origins of life on earth, (3) the Global Flood, and (4) the Exodus/Conquest?

[paul_an_apostle]

Originally Posted by Deut. 32.8

So tell us, are you a Young Earth Creationist? Can you suggest some approximate dates for (1) the age of the universe, (2) the origins of life on earth, (3) the Global Flood, and (4) the Exodus/Conquest?

x. I'm not young at all - ;-) - But I am a creationist
1. nope - only an estimate based on palientological evidence that shows up on earth - which is probably not even close to the real age of the universe - afterall, God is eternal and that goes backwards as well as forwards
2. yep - Life on Earth as we know it to day is about 6000 years old
3. Yep - The Flood happened around 4200 - 4500 years ago - after Methuselah died
4. Yep - Exodus happened sometime around 3500 years ago. The Conquest commenced about 40 years

Mind you I'm doing this without any notes so my times may be a little off.

[Ceridwen018]

paul_an_apostle,

I have one question. In general, what is the evidence you have for the earth being only 6000 years old? It seems to me that you're taking what the bible says and fitting everything else into it, instead of scientists (without relying on the bible) coming to that conclusion.

If the bible said the earth was 7000 years old, then the creationist theory would say that the earth was 7000 years old, do you see what I'm saying?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by paul_an_apostle

x. I'm not young at all - ;-) - But I am a creationist.

We have at least one thing in common.

Thanks for answering the questons.

[Ronald]

DR. Dino, AKA Dr. Kent Hovind, a living Sience Teacher believes in creation, read about him on internet. He has some interesting teaching tapes.

[(Q)]

only an estimate based on palientological evidence that shows up on earth

Palaentological evidence would not likely reveal the age of the universe - our bones haven't been here that long. However, when taking measurements of chemical elements on Earth, old globular star clusters and old white dwarf stars, we find the results from comparing their ages remarkably similar - and of course, considerably older than 6000 years.

Life on Earth as we know it to day is about 6000 years old

Yet, Egypt was first settled in 8000BC, large scale construction was well underway in 6000BC and large settlements had been established all along the Nile by 4000BC with dynasties soon to follow. These are documented facts.

Do we merely ignore these facts in favor of a few opening paragraphs to a single book?

[Ronald]

Here in Texas there is a Dinosaur foot print, in the same wet mud, a man's foot print.
With Carbon 14 dating Dinosaurs were exstinct millions of years before man came into being. We got an error! Who you gonna believe? I believe God.

[Mr Spinkles]

No, Ronald, you do not believe God. You believe a bunch of other PEOPLE who say they got it from God.