Young earth

[Mock Turtle]

That's even more unsure.

The nature of what she had in the way of evidence - a small sample and a large margin of error. Hence why we often don't just grab at something in science unless it can be supported by many other studies. We have an example of this in things like alcohol use, where the known bad effects are often counterbalanced when we come across some good effects too. The same goes for things like caffeine consumption.

 

[Audie]

Not an answer.
When is " the beginning"?
If time as we know it didn't exist, all we have is a before ( when the earth was still formless) and an " after" once days and time starts.
Time has no meaning for a timeless Being.

If there were such a thing it might not-
butv ifn such hypothetical being were
omnscient it would know all
about time, so why take 6 "days" to make
everything if time is meaningless?

This stuff was evidently concocted by folks
who didn't much think things through,
leaving believers to do back flips and
form 40,000 sects tryin' to figure it.

Its all so hypothetical, many
levels unhinged from the observable
or otherwise verifiable.

Some guys say a god told them so,e stuff.
Then it eventually gets written in a dead language, translated with whatever skill
and then whoever wants interprets it however
they want. Like you.

 

[Audie]

The nature of what she had in the way of evidence - a small sample and a large margin of error. Hence why we often don't just grab at something in science unless it can be supported by many other studies. We have an example of this in things like alcohol use, where the known bad effects are often counterbalanced when we come across some good effects too. The same goes for things like caffeine consumption.

Only science that somehow seems to fit
a creo- concept is true.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Only science that somehow seems to fit
a creo- concept is true.

Surely it's just the nature of science to hone in on the truth and to be more sceptical as to initial findings?

 

[Audie]

Surely it's just the nature of science to hone in on the truth and to be more sceptical as to initial findings?

Of course. So...?

 

[Sand Dancer]

The funny thing is, YECs accuse scientists of having an agenda to "disprove God." That explains why they postulate that the Earth and universe are so old.

Like, yeah, pushing a falsified form of science in order to promote your agenda.... the irony is so rich!

They would rather put limits on science than religion. Oy.

 

[Audie]

They would rather put limits on science than religion. Oy.

Religion has no limits.

 

[vulcanlogician]

Religion has no limits.

I wouldn't say religion has no limits. I'd say apologists have no shame.

 

[Audie]

I wouldn't say religion has no limits. I'd say apologists have no shame.

Compromise: we are both right

 

[Sand Dancer]

Religion has no limits.

But they would rather ignore reality to keep their religious views intact, instead of learning and growing.

 

[Audie]

But they would rather ignore reality to keep their religious views intact, instead of learning and growing.

Well there you go, a limit I didn't consider.