1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Young earth creationism makes up 15% of the population

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by David T, Dec 3, 2017.

  1. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,022
    Ratings:
    +514
    I found a recent release of statistics. Yes I mined the statistics based on a pre disposition to prove a particular point. Which we tend to do. I am aware of most are not.

    It was an interesting one in that the number of young earth creationists made up 15% of the population. I had assumed it was a nuanced issue for a long long time. It turns out I was right.

    So based on that I am curious as to the curiosity by some in regards to creationism? It's a non starter actually as a topic. But I am curious why so many think it's more than it is? I agree creationism should not be taught in schools. I agree as most agree in this. ID should not be taught in schools. although I strongly strongly disagree that professors cannot offer alternatives to evolution in groups independent of accedemic classes. That's what happened at ball state interestingly. Free thinking isn't allowed apparently past certain doctrines in science sometimes.


    Anyway I can post the article but this topic creationism, meh really has zero to do with much its silly nonsense. although it certainly entertaining.
     
  2. Kemosloby

    Kemosloby Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2016
    Messages:
    4,886
    Ratings:
    +1,156
    Religion:
    Christian
    What percentage is Old Earth Creationism? Because there is an unlimited amount of time between creation and the fall of man.
     
  3. Grandliseur

    Grandliseur Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,324
    Ratings:
    +290
    Religion:
    Christian
    Excuse me for perhaps insulting a lot of people, but between the flatters, the chaos god worshipers who believed all things make themselves, the YECs, and all the other religions, especially the capitalists who worship mammon above even human life - I frankly don't care if people worship a toad as long as I can have my coffee, my books, my chocolate, my ice cream, and my daily food in a place I can sleep in without being kicked out the door.

    How do atheists, don't know if you are one, or, agnostic, etc., reconcile the ancient structures that cannot even be built with today's technology with their beliefs? Just curious, since the YEC I find ridiculous already, therefore, I would like an answer to another riddle of ridiculousness in the world.
     
  4. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Kissed by Fire

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    40,074
    Ratings:
    +11,278
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    Such as?
     
  5. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,823
    Ratings:
    +1,140
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    I need more information your calculations. The grey area between YEC and OEC is not significant when ~34-38% believe humans have always existed in their present form, and reject evolution.
     
    #5 shunyadragon, Dec 3, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2017
  6. Grandliseur

    Grandliseur Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,324
    Ratings:
    +290
    Religion:
    Christian
    Building with stones the size of those found in Baalbek is not even possible today: (The Forgotten Stones of Baalbek, Lebanon)
    ‘The Stone of the South’ at Baalbek, Lebanon is the largest worked monolith on Earth, weighing in at a staggering 1242 tons. It is even heavier than the ‘Stone of the Pregnant Woman’ which weighs an estimated 1000 tons, that sits on the other side of the road in the quarry. Neither of these stones made it to the main ‘Temple of Jupiter’, some 900 metres to the northeast, but some 400-ton and 800-ton stones did make their way to the temple, were raised 20 feet in to the air and were placed with machine-like precision into the foundations of this mighty ancient complex. Last week, Janine Abdel Massih and her team uncovered a further monolith that sits virtually underneath ‘The Stone of the Pregnant Woman’ that was once destined for the main Temple site (see featured image). Until recently, it was buried under a few feet of dirt, and has been measured at 19.6 metres long, 6 metres wide and 5.5 metres thick. " Because we have not yet reached the bottom of the rock to be completely cleared ,” Janine Abdel Massih said, “we have no idea of the volume or complete dimension of this ancient stone." ​
    I am not going to do this work for you, but the way the pyramids were built, the accuracy, the things in America, South America, much is of a sort we could not replicate presently. There is even signs in the technology used that crosses continents in an age where this presently is not part of the dogma of higher-learning (ha ha ha ha - higher learning! :D:D)
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  7. whirlingmerc

    whirlingmerc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2016
    Messages:
    1,349
    Ratings:
    +180
    Religion:
    Christian
    It's odd, you sound like you favor free thinking for your POV but not other POV
    case in point creation
     
  8. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,173
    Ratings:
    +675
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I didn't see a claim that it was impossible today. I only saw a claim that it was not known how they did it back then.
     
  9. Grandliseur

    Grandliseur Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,324
    Ratings:
    +290
    Religion:
    Christian
    Why don't you do your own studies on this one. One site from which I quote is really not a study.

    "
    Today, modern engineers would have a hard time transporting a 50 ton block. However, ancient people seemed to have had a way to transport blocks of stone of incredible size with ease.
    "
    "
    Surprisingly, in the vicinity, researchers discovered another huge block of stone partially buried with staggering dimensions: 19.6 meters (64 feet) in length, 6 meters (19.6 feet) in width, and about 5.5 meters (18 feet) in height.

    Researchers estimate that the weight of this huge stone block is around 1,650 tons which would place it as the largest known stone block quarried from antiquity. But why did ancient builders halt its construction?
    "
    ‘Impossible’ Ancient Engineering: The Megalithic Stones of Baalbek

    According to contemporary history, what is found is not what taught. The sphinx has water erosion, telling us that the civilization that made this is not the Egyptian one. I also remember reading that the inside of the large pyramids have water level marks.

    Our taught history is nothing but fancy stuff invented by people who want to have fancy tittles and teach their concept of history which has nothing to do with reality.
     
  10. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,173
    Ratings:
    +675
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I did my research. You did not do yours "a hard time" is not impossible. It is far from it. Covering up your error by spamming does not take your error away.

    Try again.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,022
    Ratings:
    +514
    Well I actually encourage free thinking but creationism is free speech as compensation for freedom of thought which clearly creationism is not it's actually embarrassing and really it has zero to do with the bible. It's disrespectful. So the only thing that people know sometimes is this childish disrespectful nonsense to lazy to actually learn to think and engage reality head on. Oh like jesus. Never mind over your head.
     
  12. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,022
    Ratings:
    +514
    You hit the nail on the head!!!!! I don't believe, I don't not believe, I am absolutely not agnostic about that. The little parrot meme we grow up with "everyone believes in something" in context to what? As being fundemental? Hardly. Belief is a handy thing I use when I am driving and need a bathroom "I believe" McDonald's will have one. I know that "not believing" won't effect my requirement for a second, and any uncertainty doesn't matter either. All the above worthless in context to the need to go to the bathroom just a simple minded general tool nothing more. I am all about nature. Science isn't, science is about the study of nature, that's not being about nature, not even close not even the same reality. I am like john Muir. I have a simple saying that religion and could use if not so hung up. To understand God, you must understand nature. To understand nature, you must understand God. To split this, is to negate this. To negate this, is to not understand this.


    That's who I am. No conditions just that. Walk in the forest alone. Understand what I just said and you will be walking where no atheist has ever walked, where no believer has ever, walked where no agnostic has ever walked. I am very fortunate but it is a road less traveled and not easy to find. The faith believe it the atheist sees no proof of it, the agnostic is uncertain but I know. It's in the landscape hiding in the open.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Grandliseur

    Grandliseur Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,324
    Ratings:
    +290
    Religion:
    Christian
    I suggest you try again, thousand and 1500 ton blocks we do not have the way of building with. We do not move that kind of stone in one go. We do things by dividing and conquering, not with this kind of megaliths.
    Show me any crane or manner of moving this kind of material. We might have ships that can take the load, but getting this kind of load going from a to b on land is simply not done. Once we have ships built they are put in water, and there they might move, but on land or in the air, this kind of tonnage is not moved.
     
  14. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,173
    Ratings:
    +675
    Religion:
    Atheist
    You made the bogus claim, it is up to you to defend it. The article did not support your claim. And the reason that we do not do this today is mainly because there is no reason to do so. You need to work on your logic skills.

    ETA:

    I did your homework for you. We do move structures that large. Here is an example of a far more difficult move. Not only is this house massive, 1,600 tons,, it is far more delicate than a stone block. If they could move this without breaking it moving a solid block would be easy in comparison:

    [​IMG]

    https://www.wolfehousebuildingmovers.com/services/house-building-moving/

    I have not researched it, but it is likely that some of the structural members for large bridges may approach this in mass too.
     
    #14 Subduction Zone, Dec 4, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. Grandliseur

    Grandliseur Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,324
    Ratings:
    +290
    Religion:
    Christian
    No I don't. You need to work on understanding what reality we live in. And, we do not live in a reality where people in the past had higher technology in some areas, or maybe all, than we do, except we do, obviously. The problem of the megalith building blocks is just a small part of the picture. There are art works cut out of stone we cannot work in, with internal curvatures no tools at present could create.

    So, I say, get your head out of the sand and look at the real world to understand that in the past there was way more than the neanderthal stuff that is claimed by the atheists 4 monkeys who do not see, hear or whatever - because they simply do not want their paradigm disturbed.
     
  16. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,173
    Ratings:
    +675
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Yes you do. How ignorant are you? You were the one that made an affirmative claim. That puts the burden of proof upon you. And don't worry, I went back and found that you were wrong by finding a "real world" example". So you not only failed to support your claim, I showed that your claim was wrong.

    Oh my, you really should never ever tell people to pull their head out of the sand. And you, like most creationists, are projecting your flaws upon others.

    One more time, when you make a claim, such as something being impossible, you put the burden of proof upon you.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,173
    Ratings:
    +675
    Religion:
    Atheist
  18. gnostic

    gnostic The Lost One

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    13,632
    Ratings:
    +2,622
    Religion:
    Pi π
    Sorry, but ID isn’t alternative to evolutionary biology, because ID isn’t science.

    It is neither provable as theoretical physics (like String Theory) by finding solution through maths.

    But even more important, ID isn’t empirical, because it don’t follow the protocol of Scientific Method, which mean the hypothesis isn’t “testable”, because it was never falsifiable.

    Intelligent Design is unscientific, because their so-called Intelligent “Designer” isn’t testable, no evidences for its existence.

    Beside that, science like physics, chemistry and biology, is all about acquiring knowledge by answering two major categories of questions:
    1. the WHAT,
    2. and the HOW.
    For instance, a scientist will try to find basic answers to -

    WHAT it is?

    HOW does it work?

    Can we test it? If he answer “yes” to this question, then the question is: HOW do he test it?

    And if it has an application, then HOW do we make it work?​

    You don’t need to ask the WHY question, because answering the WHAT and HOW questions, can often give answer as to the WHY.

    And science is never interested asking WHO question, because the “who” isn’t relevant in science.

    When an anthropologist, archaeologist or any scientist come across a remain or fossil of early human, there is no “who”, no personal name associated with that body or skull, because there are no written record of any kind, to identify who this person is, like his or her name.

    Where they found, if they were buried or not, what were found near the bodies, might tell us something about these early people, like how they lived and how they died, but that would be the extent of our knowledge about who they are, minus the personal details that we take for granted, and posted them online, like on Facebook.

    God, Creator, Designer, Ra, Zeus, Odin, Brahma, Vishnu, etc, are all the WHO figures that no one can test and verify their existence, and how they supposedly create the world.

    If you want to present alternatives to evolution, then it need to be tested theory that can explain how species change, and the mechanism for such change to occur, etc, better than the current theory.
     
  19. Grandliseur

    Grandliseur Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,324
    Ratings:
    +290
    Religion:
    Christian
    That you are totally blind to the technology of the past and what that means in terms of what existed, how they were brought back to the stone age by some catastrophe just as we might be if some major catastrophe struck us - is beyond understanding. All you can think of it seems is if we can move such blocks instead of looking at them actually doing this as if it were no big deal, and putting that into perspective as to what they were capable of in the past opposite all present day claims.

    You ask me, "How ignorant are you?" I think that is the question for you.
     
  20. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,173
    Ratings:
    +675
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Oh my! You really are funny. You have no clue about the technology of the past. You make claims that you refuse to support and are easily refuted and instead of being an adult and admitting your mistake you double down on your ignorance. Worse yet you accuse others of your wrongs.

    You may not understand things, don't make the error of others do not understand.

    Let's review, you claimed that something was impossible even with today's technology. I told you that you needed to prove that. You cited an article that did not make the same error that you did. When I pointed out your error you demanded that I do your homework for you. I pointed out that you made the claim and put the burden of proof upon yourself by doing so. Then for fun I did your homework for you and I found out that you were completely wrong and that we could move such massive blocks today. And you still could not own up to your error.

    So once again, how ignorant are you?
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...