Yours favorite arguments for creationism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-06-2013, 11:01 AM
RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(09-06-2013 09:13 AM)theword Wrote:  It's not rocket science folks. Human civilization began about 5000 BC, you can factor back the worlds population and roughly figure that date as well.
If man is 200 million years old? Where's the proof? Aren't you people all about proof? I've got civilizations to back up my claim. Language and hieroglyphics too.What do you have? A fossil?

Why do you keep saying 200 million years? Did you pull that out of your ass?

The evidence for the timeline of human development comes from fossils, archaeology, carbon and other radiometric dating, DNA, and history.

What is your claim?
That there were no humans before there were civilizations?
That's dis-proven by the evidence of artifacts that predate those civilizations.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2013, 11:02 AM
RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(09-06-2013 11:00 AM)theword Wrote:  You people are all about logic and reason. If man were on earth for 200 million years, and for the population to get to 5 million in 5 BC (as most history sites indicate), the population would increase by only 10 people every 40 years. Does this make sense? Any reasonable and logical thinker would certainly say no.

Why the fuck do you keep saying 200 million years?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
09-06-2013, 11:37 AM (This post was last modified: 09-06-2013 11:41 AM by Stephen Charchuk.)
Re: RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(06-05-1974 07:42 AM)Chas Wrote:  Why the fuck do you keep saying 200 million years?

Because he's retarded and can't read numbers. Maybe that's why he's a creationist?

He also don't realize that the majority of our population growth has been in the last 70 years. This mainly due to better medicine and agriculture provided through science.

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2013, 12:59 PM
RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(09-06-2013 11:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(09-06-2013 11:00 AM)theword Wrote:  You people are all about logic and reason. If man were on earth for 200 million years, and for the population to get to 5 million in 5 BC (as most history sites indicate), the population would increase by only 10 people every 40 years. Does this make sense? Any reasonable and logical thinker would certainly say no.

Why the fuck do you keep saying 200 million years?
My bad, 200 Thousand. Doesn't change the math that much. I that time the population would only increase about 25 people a year.
Are you happy now?
Your claim is still ridiculous.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2013, 01:13 PM
RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(09-06-2013 12:59 PM)theword Wrote:  
(09-06-2013 11:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  Why the fuck do you keep saying 200 million years?
My bad, 200 Thousand. Doesn't change the math that much. I that time the population would only increase about 25 people a year.
Are you happy now?
Your claim is still ridiculous.

For most of that time, humans were hunter-gatherers with very short lives and very high infant mortality. The total population was nearly constant. It wasn't until agriculture and husbandry that there was any real growth in population, and it wasn't until the fruits of science - sanitation, diet, antibiotics, surgery, etc. - that population growth was explosive.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
09-06-2013, 01:22 PM (This post was last modified: 09-06-2013 01:27 PM by Stephen Charchuk.)
Re: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
Did the moron actually say that there wasn't that much difference between 200 million years and 200 thousand years? 200 million years ago there were very few mammals around. I think the closes relative to primates was a shrew like creature.

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2013, 01:31 PM (This post was last modified: 09-06-2013 01:37 PM by Stephen Charchuk.)
Re: RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(09-06-2013 01:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  For most of that time, humans were hunter-gatherers with very short lives and very high infant mortality. The total population was nearly constant. It wasn't until agriculture and husbandry that there was any real growth in population, and it wasn't until the fruits of science - sanitation, diet, antibiotics, surgery, etc. - that population growth was explosive.

Which was during the last 70 years that it has gone up from 2 billion to 7 billion, and at least double that in a few decades.

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2013, 01:35 PM
Re: RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(09-06-2013 11:01 AM)Chas Wrote:  Why do you keep saying 200 million years? Did you pull that out of your ass?

The evidence for the timeline of human development comes from fossils, archaeology, carbon and other radiometric dating, DNA, and history.

What is your claim?
That there were no humans before there were civilizations?
That's dis-proven by the evidence of artifacts that predate those civilizations.

You must remember that he's religiously insane and should be pitied above all men......

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2013, 01:55 PM
RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(09-06-2013 01:22 PM)Stephen Charchuk Wrote:  Did the moron actually say that there wasn't that much difference between 200 million years and 200 thousand years? 200 million years ago there were very few mammals around. I think the closes relative to primates was a shrew like creature.

His not thinking that three orders of magnitude is no big deal might be a clue to his knowledge and intelligence. Just sayin'. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
09-06-2013, 01:58 PM (This post was last modified: 09-06-2013 04:07 PM by Stephen Charchuk.)
Re: RE: Yours favorite arguments for creationism
(09-06-2013 01:55 PM)Chas Wrote:  His not thinking that three orders of magnitude is no big deal might be a clue to his knowledge and intelligence. Just sayin'. Drinking Beverage

In other words he has someone else enter his words while he sits there in his straightjacket and drools after the lobotomy surgery. Yes. He should be pitied above all men...

Sent From My NEO x5....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: