Young earth creationism makes up 15% of the population

[Altfish]

So we have a choice...

It was lifted or slid into position by rollers, soil displacement or whatever, like the pyramids

or

It was got there by magic

Let me think about this, I think I know which alternative I prefer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am sure that there is more than just one way to move large blocks. Here is an example of a man that figured out to move ten ton blocks by himself. He also applied his technology to move a pole barn:

Pyramids, Stonehenge, Easter Island and the Great Pyramid explained by Wallace Wallington!

Just because there may not be an answer for something is never a valid excuse to say "It must have been magic".

 

[Altfish]

I am sure that there is more than just one way to move large blocks. Here is an example of a man that figured out to move ten ton blocks by himself. He also applied his technology to move a pole barn:

Pyramids, Stonehenge, Easter Island and the Great Pyramid explained by Wallace Wallington!

Just because there may not be an answer for something is never a valid excuse to say "It must have been magic".

Yes, there are a few examples like that there was a programme on the BBC where an engineer (Mark Whitby IIRC) managed to erect a huge stone using just man power

 

[Grandliseur]

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?

You are soo stuck in your nonsense evolutionary dogma that you cannot see that something else is going on. Look at this one on the vases found made with technology that would be nigh impossible today. None seem to have been made today with this material, and that is telling:

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are soo stuck in your nonsense evolutionary dogma that you cannot see that something else is going on. Look at this one on the vases found made with technology that would be nigh impossible today. None seem to have been made today with this material, and that is telling:

You need to quit making false claims about others. I tell you what, if you can show one bit of honesty, admit to your earlier errors and apologize for your false attacks and I will watch your video for you.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

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! )

I'll play nice here and just ask one little question . . .

what do you think happened?

 

[Grandliseur]

I'll play nice here and just ask one little question . . .

what do you think happened?

Have you seen videos from Peru? They have building remains built with a kind of technology we do not have, brought stones from quarries far away without wheels in mountain terrain. Yet, now their buildings lie destroyed, with only a few of the huge stones standing, where you cannot even tell what it was before.

What happened to these places, to the old world? Why do you ask me what destroyed these places?
However, right outside Cuba, in perhaps 700 meters water or more, they found pyramidal type structures on the bottom, this has never been more seriously investigated, but what would cause such changes?

What I am saying is that the history we have been told is not true, and that the evidence is clear and evident, the ancient technology still remains in various forms.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Have you seen videos from Peru? They have building remains built with a kind of technology we do not have, brought stones from quarries far away without wheels in mountain terrain. Yet, now their buildings lie destroyed, with only a few of the huge stones standing, where you cannot even tell what it was before.

What happened to these places, to the old world? Why do you ask me what destroyed these places?
However, right outside Cuba, in perhaps 700 meters water or more, they found pyramidal type structures on the bottom, this has never been more seriously investigated, but what would cause such changes?

What I am saying is that the history we have been told is not true, and that the evidence is clear and evident, the ancient technology still remains in various forms.

More claims of "I don't understand, therefore magic". And please, give us a valid source, not a woo source, on the Cuba claims. You do not seem to be able to do that.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

What I am saying is that the history we have been told is not true, and that the evidence is clear and evident, the ancient technology still remains in various forms.

So what do you think happened?

 

[Grandliseur]

So what do you think happened?

Well, I am Christian and take the Bible's word on the deluge as a fact. However, much is not really explained. I think the earth was struck by major asteroids or meteorites causing huge changes in the earth's crust, in the depth of the seas, with nearly all life wiped out. This accompanied by volcanic eruptions probably caused the ice-age. I would even go so far as to say that it changed the earth's orbit enough to change our year from about 360 days a year to 365.xxx a year. The would explain the lunar calendar's popularity and the changes in ancient times a little.

I am just ruminating - this is just thinking out loud.

 

[David T]

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.

ID IS NOT EVEN WRONG!!! No conditional statement whether it be science or religion is fundemental in context to either the term God or nature is. All conditional statements when fundemental for the individual are symptomatic of the intellect attempting to move the cosmos why the cosmos is moving the intellect.. God nature cosmos, same thing, to spit that is to not understand any of that. It just turns into a clock of cogs this does that to this does that to that is all. It starts at about 4. It's normal. Congenital from my perspective.

 

[Darkstorn]

Look at this one on the vases found made with technology that would be nigh impossible today.

Why would it specifically be nigh impossible today?

Instead of being nigh impossible because we have lost the knowledge?

I'm pretty sure some people don't know how to operate a VHS player without instructions. It's the same thing.

 

[ChristineM]

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.

I am assuming the 15% of the population is actualy the American population which accounts for just 5% of the world population.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Well, I am Christian and take the Bible's word on the deluge as a fact. However, much is not really explained. I think the earth was struck by major asteroids or meteorites causing huge changes in the earth's crust, in the depth of the seas, with nearly all life wiped out. This accompanied by volcanic eruptions probably caused the ice-age. I would even go so far as to say that it changed the earth's orbit enough to change our year from about 360 days a year to 365.xxx a year. The would explain the lunar calendar's popularity and the changes in ancient times a little.

I am just ruminating - this is just thinking out loud.

Doesn't sound very biblical to me. You've got your own story here. Does it include Noah and an ark?

The lunar calendar needs no explaining. The moon's monthly cycle is a natural way to keep track of time, just like the daily day-night cycle due to the earth's rotation about its axis and the annual cycle of the seasons due to a tilted earth's revolution the sun.

How about some calendar fun:

Spoiler

The problem for calendar makers is that none of these cycles can be defined by the others in round or even rational numbers. A year is neither a round number of days nor months. And getting the year right was important given the requirements for planting and harvesting and the annual migrations of the beasts.

Defining years in terms of months can be done, but is unnecessarily complex and even then still not very accurate. One needs to add leap months from time to time since a year is between 12 and 13 lunar cycles long. This is much clumsier than adding leap days. Presently, we add 97 leap days every 400 years (Gregorian calendar), which gives us a 365.2425 day year on average, very close to the 365.242199 days for the tropical year.

How are you going to do that with a lunar calendar?

Are you aware that the date for Easter is based on the lunar cycle? Easter is the first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the vernal equinox, which comes about March 21st. This results in Easter varying from March 22th to April 25th. Some years, the full moon appears on a Saturday just after the vernal equinox, and Easter is the next day. Some years, the full moon occurs just before before the equinox, and 29+ days, a lunar cycle, must pass before the next full moon occurs, which might be a Monday, meaning Easter is still 6 days away.

Imagine trying to plant the fields using such a method.

Incidentally, even if the year were 360 days, which I presume you got from the Bible, we'd have a similar problem using a lunar cycle to keep track of the year. The time from full moon to full moon (or new moon to new moon) is a little over 29.53 days (approximately 29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes, and 3 seconds). After 12 of these cycles, only about 354⅓ days would have passed - about 5⅔ days short of a year, an error that would accumulate rapidly without some leap month protocol, meaning that a lunar calendar would be no more useful for measuring out a 360-day year than a 365.242199 day (or 365.2425 day) year.

 

[leibowde84]

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.

This doesn't really surprise me. There are so many people in this country that completely disregard facts and evidence in favor of clinging to their previously held beliefs. Young Earth Creationists tend to ignore every piece of evidence that doesn't support their irrational worldview as fraudulent. Not much you can do to help people like that.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

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.

How many of them really believe it, though? And how many are just saying what they think they're supposed to?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How many of them really believe it, though? And how many are just saying what they think they're supposed to?

Not many, at least that is what their actions here say. If they really believed it they would not run away when confronted. I have yet to see one of them stick with a debate. Cowardice appears to be another creationist trait.

 

[David T]

I am assuming the 15% of the population is actualy the American population which accounts for just 5% of the world population.

Yes so it's a fractional loon well put. But we must keep an eye on it and ferret it out in us.

 

[David T]

This doesn't really surprise me. There are so many people in this country that completely disregard facts and evidence in favor of clinging to their previously held beliefs. Young Earth Creationists tend to ignore every piece of evidence that doesn't support their irrational worldview as fraudulent. Not much you can do to help people like that.

Christine pointed out its about 15% of 5 percent. It's a fractional. Loon but we all can be that. It is dishonest to not say that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes so it's a fractional loon well put. But we must keep an eye on it and ferret it out in us.

Dang!!! Now all of my delusions of American mental superiority are shattered.