Ask a Young Earth Creationist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-05-2011, 07:01 PM
 
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 05:41 PM)Buddy Christ Wrote:  
(03-05-2011 05:19 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  The "spurious accusations and sarcasm" is definitely present, but it is most definitely NOT the bulk of the thread.

Yeah, that'd be me. I'm one of the more anti-theist atheists on this thread, so my posts are usually tinged in a seething rage with a hint of sarcastic venom.

Therefore I must have been correct, honest discourse cannot be had, and spurious accusations and sarcasm is allthat can be found I suppose.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ron's post
03-05-2011, 07:07 PM
 
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 03:17 PM)Spectre Wrote:  I see where you are coming from, but it seems like you are trying to tell me how to think, I don't let other people's thinking draw my conclusions. Now, your evidence that points to the contrary, I assure you, is based on interpretations of the evidence by secular scientists. Your point also sort of harmonizes with one of mine, if Creationists can "make" the data fit their beliefs, then it means that secular scientists can do the same thing. But Creationist research hasn't required "fudging" the data, whereas secular scientist's data did indeed require fudging. Inflation, the dynamo theory, and radiometric dating, in which you can get basically any age for a rock based on how you calibrate it. A good model should be able to make correct predictions, the model is even better if you can make the prediction before seeing the data.
I don't wish to tell you how to think, but I do want to convey the approach I would take to this question, and the approach that I think someone would take if they wished to determine whether Creationism was true or not. So, I guess it's the way you would need to go about convincing me that you're right Smile

As far as fudging the data, I can't take your word for that and you can't take mine, so regarding any data we would have to examine it along with the interpretation to determine what it says instead of taking a scientist's word for it(If we want to go to that much trouble). Although I should point out that many Christian scientists do not accept YEC, and I would expect less of a bias from someone who is secular simply because many are secular because they aren't convinced by any religion, not because they hate the idea of a religion or are strongly against it. Although who is biased isn't resolvable or really relevant to the argument if we accept that people from both sides are potentially biased. But it's one reason why I'm fairly confident in what the majority of the scientific community reports.

(03-05-2011 03:17 PM)Spectre Wrote:  I always approach everything I am told with skepticism. That is why I read atheist sources, secular sources, christian sources, sometimes I read sources from other religions such as islam and hindu. I am not one of those who has always only read Christian sources and blocked other perspectives. Smile

No, I see where you are going, I cover perspective some in one of my first posts. I don't believe that an old earth or a young earth is falsifiable because it is an unverifiable claim. I also want to make it clear that I am not here to convert everyone. I am doing this to 1. See how atheists think. 2. To test and sharpen my ability to defend and support my beliefs. 3. To show that there are YECs who can be rational and defend their claims.
Ok, I haven't read most of the topic since it's gotten so long, so I'm sorry about missing that. But I would have to disagree with it not being falsifiable. We can establish, through evidence such as radioactive decay, observations of other galaxies, etc. at least that one is more plausible than the other. Although which of these methods are reliable and what they tell us is a great topic for discussion.

As for your motivations, I agree that it's certainly not a good idea for any of us to expect to change each others' minds. Learning more about each other and our respective world views is a worthwhile goal for this discussion. And as for number three, you've demonstrated that to me beyond any doubt, unless by some twisted irony you happen to be an atheist Big Grin

(03-05-2011 03:17 PM)Spectre Wrote:  I don't think I can go to thethinkingatheist.com site and expect to convert people. Now, what are you saying? Are you implying that I am trying to harmonize Creation with evolution? Or are you talking about when I was talking about different interpretations of the evidence?
I was talking about ikester's post there, but my point is that I have no objections to claiming that YEC could be true no matter what evidence you give against it. But if there is so much that one must begin making very farfetched justifications, such as God placing light in transit to the earth and pre-aging everything in the universe, or the fact that technically we can never be sure of what we know, you should stop to think whether or not the explanations you're giving for the opposing evidence is remotely likely compared to the alternative explanation.

I know you aren't trying to harmonize it with evolution or anything else, and I'm not saying that you are giving farfetched alternatives(rather your position is, as you stated, that much of the evidence we assume disproves or makes YEC very unlikely is flawed), but telling Ikester that it isn't going to convince anyone. You could come up with the craziest conspiracy theory and find a way around anything you're told suggests it's wrong. That doesn't make it right. An example would be "The Flat Earth Society", they've got increasingly ridiculous counter-explanations for every single argument you could offer that the earth is round. I just don't want to head into a debate of that nature, but I don't think you're going to take the discussion in that direction.

(03-05-2011 03:17 PM)Spectre Wrote:  I suppose I could ask you the same question, but this isn't an "ask the atheist" thread. Haha.
We could make one of those too if you'd like Tongue

In all seriousness I'd be happy to answer any of your questions here or in a separate thread. I would reply to that one with I'm not assuming anything more than the reliability of what is agreed upon by the majority of scientists. I trust that the system that scientists use usually works, and that when something is found to be untrue it is thrown out in favor of the better explanation.

(03-05-2011 03:17 PM)Spectre Wrote:  The answer is no. Everyone has presuppositions. The best way to validate The Bible using Science is to make models based off of The Bible with predictions of how things should turn out if the literal interpretation of The Bible is true. One of the best examples of this(Because there was NO data for him to help draw his conclusion before he made this model.) Is Dr. Humphrey's model for Uranus and Neptune's magnetic field. He used The Biblical account of the universe being about 6,000 years old and Uranus having a similar creation event to earth. He successfully predicted the strength of both planet's magnetic fields without having to make any modifications to his model. This successful model, while not proving the literal account of Genesis(In the realm of science, origins are unverifiable.) does provide evidence and support for it. The reason being that the prediction was correct and was made before Voyager II reached Uranus or Neptune.

Models on both sides are approached with presuppositions, including The Big Bang and other theories. It is just how it works I suppose, one can not be completely objective no matter what side of the spectrum you are on. Wink
I agree that it is true that you must make assumptions for anything, but that alone can't justify any assumptions one wishes to make. An assumption should be based on something we already have demonstrated to be true(or likely to be true), or something necessary to have a logical discussion(like the fact that we exist and are having the discussion).

But that example you gave sounds interesting. I'd like to take a look at it, do you happen to have a link? If not I'll try to find it myself.

(03-05-2011 03:17 PM)Spectre Wrote:  I agree. I showed my first piece of a Creationist prediction that was validated above. Smile Thanks for the insightful post.
And thank you for the insightful reply Smile

I think I replied to most of what you said, but if I missed something point it out and I'll address it. I'm a little tired and this is becoming a very long post Tongue
Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 07:46 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
@Spectre
Ok , then let me further ask you , how do you know the Bible is the inspired word of god as opposed to say the Koran , or Talmud , or Satanic Bible ?

Atheism is a religion like OFF is a TV channel !!!

Proud of my genetic relatives Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 07:52 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 07:01 PM)Ron Wrote:  Therefore I must have been correct, honest discourse cannot be had, and spurious accusations and sarcasm is allthat can be found I suppose.

Honest discourse cannot be had by someone who doesn't take part in the discussions. Spectre seems to be having no problem taking part in this mess of "spurious accusations and sarcasm." So if you are looking for honest discourse, then stop cherry-picking insults, stop being so passive-aggressive, and jump in and follow the discussion. Make your argument, address counter arguments, and repeat. You left off at step 2 after I addressed your counter argument.

If on the other hand you wish to sit on the sidelines and add rubbish to the the conversation, then I would like to ask you to stay out and not publicly complain ("troll" if you prefer the term). If this were my home with people discussing like this, I would kindly show you the door.

Of all the ideas put forth by science, it is the principle of Superposition that can undo any power of the gods. For the accumulation of smaller actions has the ability to create, destroy, and move the world.

"I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul." -W. E. Henley
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 08:00 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 07:46 PM)gaglamesh731 Wrote:  @Spectre
Ok , then let me further ask you , how do you know the Bible is the inspired word of god as opposed to say the Koran , or Talmud , or Satanic Bible ?

And if your answer is anything other than "demographics" or "geography," know that I disagree with you.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 08:28 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
Hey sorry guys, I'm going to have to take a hiatus. It was nice talking to all of you. I can say that I had a positive experience here. Smile

"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:" Peter 3:15

http://www.answersforhope.org
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Spectre's post
03-05-2011, 08:33 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
It's been a pleasure talking with you, and I'm always glad to hear a theist say he had a positive experience with us heathens Tongue. You're more than welcome to come back anytime, it's nice to have a different opinion around.

Of all the ideas put forth by science, it is the principle of Superposition that can undo any power of the gods. For the accumulation of smaller actions has the ability to create, destroy, and move the world.

"I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul." -W. E. Henley
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 09:26 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 08:28 PM)Spectre Wrote:  Hey sorry guys, I'm going to have to take a hiatus. It was nice talking to all of you. I can say that I had a positive experience here. Smile

I hope you come back. I know we never had much direct communication, but I always enjoyed reading your posts.

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 10:10 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
One sentence caught my eye as I scrolled past:

(03-05-2011 03:30 AM)ikester7579 Wrote:  If an animal had a soul, how would a person present salvation to it?

There are many ways we can converse with animals; we have guaged the intelligence of animals like dogs, elephants and dolphins. The latter two, for example are self aware as they notice and investigate markings on their head.

Anyway, who says we have to present salvation to an animal?

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use." - Galileo

"Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do." - Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes daemonowner's post
04-05-2011, 12:23 AM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2011 12:37 AM by Observer.)
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 08:28 PM)Spectre Wrote:  Hey sorry guys, I'm going to have to take a hiatus. It was nice talking to all of you. I can say that I had a positive experience here. Smile
Ok Spectre. I hope to see you again. I'm really looking forward to your input on my questions.

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: