Creationist and Uniformitarianism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-03-2014, 10:17 PM
Creationist and Uniformitarianism
Uniformitarinanism is a belief held that says that natural laws work in the past as they did today. Creationist usually reject this (well most of it) in an attempt to avoid problems like tectonic plate movement being slow and paleosalinity. However creationist forget a few things.

First, they forget to provide evidence for there claims of what should have happened in the past. For example creationist will try to use plate tectonics moving at super speeds to explain how pangea could move and form the continents faster. However when told and showed the evidence they go around saying you are assuming that. Just ask them for evidence that they did move that fast 4,000 years ago. When they wonder what they could use show them evidence that they plates have never moved that fast.

Second, they expect you to present no evidence. When you do show evidence they expect you to not go any further. When you go into detail they just quit and say god did it or sometimes say I don't know(this means they are being intellectually honest and you should take that in because only 1 out of 10 will say that.)

Third, they want to put projection. Many creationist know that they have no evidence for their claims, and they want you to not have any too. If you have evidence of the past that supports you claims and they don't what does that mean. It means they can't catch up and they will end up realizing that their view is wrong. This is something most creationist can't conceive.


Remember uniformitarianism means you have evidence that supports your claims about the past but destroys the claims of creationist.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] ♪僕は恐怖の一定した状態に住んで、不幸、逃すもう?僕は、それはもう痛いときも気づかないと
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Metazoa Zeke's post
08-03-2014, 09:55 AM
RE: Creationist and Uniformitarianism
(07-03-2014 10:17 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Uniformitarinanism is a belief held that says that natural laws work in the past as they did today. Creationist usually reject this (well most of it) in an attempt to avoid problems like tectonic plate movement being slow and paleosalinity. However creationist forget a few things.

First, they forget to provide evidence for there claims of what should have happened in the past. For example creationist will try to use plate tectonics moving at super speeds to explain how pangea could move and form the continents faster. However when told and showed the evidence they go around saying you are assuming that. Just ask them for evidence that they did move that fast 4,000 years ago. When they wonder what they could use show them evidence that they plates have never moved that fast.

Second, they expect you to present no evidence. When you do show evidence they expect you to not go any further. When you go into detail they just quit and say god did it or sometimes say I don't know(this means they are being intellectually honest and you should take that in because only 1 out of 10 will say that.)

Third, they want to put projection. Many creationist know that they have no evidence for their claims, and they want you to not have any too. If you have evidence of the past that supports you claims and they don't what does that mean. It means they can't catch up and they will end up realizing that their view is wrong. This is something most creationist can't conceive.


Remember uniformitarianism means you have evidence that supports your claims about the past but destroys the claims of creationist.

I just thought of a great way to use their own argument against them. They tell you that radiometric dating methods are not reliable because decay rates could have been faster in the past then you tell them that they also could have been much slower and therefore the earth is actually trillions of years old instead of billions. They tell you light speed could have once been faster you agree and say that of course that also means that it could have been slower as well. Continental drift could have been much faster in the past? Sure and it also could have been slower and therefore the Earth could actually be in the trillions of years old instead of billions.

Of course the evidence shows that these things are constants but they don't use evidence. But they do assume any errors or changes work in their favor and prove a young age for the Earth but it can go both ways.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like true scotsman's post
08-03-2014, 10:33 AM
RE: Creationist and Uniformitarianism
(08-03-2014 09:55 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(07-03-2014 10:17 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Uniformitarinanism is a belief held that says that natural laws work in the past as they did today. Creationist usually reject this (well most of it) in an attempt to avoid problems like tectonic plate movement being slow and paleosalinity. However creationist forget a few things.

First, they forget to provide evidence for there claims of what should have happened in the past. For example creationist will try to use plate tectonics moving at super speeds to explain how pangea could move and form the continents faster. However when told and showed the evidence they go around saying you are assuming that. Just ask them for evidence that they did move that fast 4,000 years ago. When they wonder what they could use show them evidence that they plates have never moved that fast.

Second, they expect you to present no evidence. When you do show evidence they expect you to not go any further. When you go into detail they just quit and say god did it or sometimes say I don't know(this means they are being intellectually honest and you should take that in because only 1 out of 10 will say that.)

Third, they want to put projection. Many creationist know that they have no evidence for their claims, and they want you to not have any too. If you have evidence of the past that supports you claims and they don't what does that mean. It means they can't catch up and they will end up realizing that their view is wrong. This is something most creationist can't conceive.


Remember uniformitarianism means you have evidence that supports your claims about the past but destroys the claims of creationist.

I just thought of a great way to use their own argument against them. They tell you that radiometric dating methods are not reliable because decay rates could have been faster in the past then you tell them that they also could have been much slower and therefore the earth is actually trillions of years old instead of billions. They tell you light speed could have once been faster you agree and say that of course that also means that it could have been slower as well. Continental drift could have been much faster in the past? Sure and it also could have been slower and therefore the Earth could actually be in the trillions of years old instead of billions.

Of course the evidence shows that these things are constants but they don't use evidence. But they do assume any errors or changes work in their favor and prove a young age for the Earth but it can go both ways.

I don't see why not, I mean if they are going to go that far you might as well.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] ♪僕は恐怖の一定した状態に住んで、不幸、逃すもう?僕は、それはもう痛いときも気づかないと
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: