creation science vs. evolution

[mikeandronda]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

and what proof of this do they give other than a theory?????????

 

[Toad2001]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Well, they are scientists after all...with more funds committed by Bush. Its obviously important research, and has more basis to it than merely a theory. The images they are viewing are of stars being born millions of years ago.<br />If our sun was blowing up for example, we could figure out its approximate distance from the earth by measuring how long data (images) took to return to the telescope (images return in light years). From this we could calculate it's minimum age. Thats basically what they are doing with newly discovered images with some of the newest discovered galaxies I believe.<br /> <br />I suppose its a theory, but then again, I've met some people who don't change their engine oil either. They think its just a theory that oil changes make an engine last longer. Who knows eh?

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

no, it's not a theory at all gang, it's the only<br />universal/perfect language know to man. it's<br />called "mathematics".

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Originally posted by LadyFish:<br />Please start a new thread about Global Warming and don't hijack this very important thread.<br /><br />Global warming is another debate that could go to 300 posts.

Well said LadyFish.

 

[Carphunter]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Hey mikeandronda, didn't you know that they have those magical telescopes that can see into the past? <br /><br />More theories is all it is.

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

sorry carp, but what they are doing is calculating<br />movement of light in deep space. speed of light is<br />not a theory.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

the question here is how old is life on earth not how old the universe is right?

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

correct M&R, but you had asked; <br />"and what proof of this do they give other than a theory?????????"<br />so I thought I would answer you.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Your right i did ask that but what I should of asked was how does that prove we are distant relitives of an ape? There are some bible experts who beileve that in between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 the earth was created and then it became empty, a formless mass cloaked in darkness. And then God created the earth as we know it,and in 7 days, meaning the unverse could be old and earth as we know it reletivly new, 6,000-10,000 yrs new

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

we know we are remotely related to apes because<br />of enourmous similarities in DNA.<br />can you please explain to me your thoughts about<br />why the earth has to be only 6-10K yrs. old based<br />on scripture? is it the 6 days in genisis plus<br />the excerpt that a day can be 1,000 years aspek<br />mentioned? couldn't you still believe in creation<br />if it was 6 million or billion years?

 

[Carphunter]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

I would sure like to see the formulas for calculating how old the universe is. <br />Sure they know how fast the speed of light is, but their "theories" on the age of the universe is just that, a theory. I have not seen one scientific document that says "The universe is EXACTLY this old", so the scientists are basing the age of the universe on the best scientific data that they have, which is an educated guess at best. So, as I said, it can't be proven, so its another theory.

 

[Carphunter]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

I went to the Zoo this weekend, and frankly, I think I evolved from pot-bellied pigs.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Well the reason for the 6,000-10,000 years(bible experts are not sure if its 6000 or 10000)is because that is how long the bible states the earth is through the linage sp? from adam and eve all the way to Jesus + 2004 years. I know it can be incredably hard to grasp that there are writen records from adam to jesus, and I was one who had an incredably hard time buying into it but I spent 3 hours going through the linage with a pastor and it is entirly possable acording to the bible for it to be true.

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

carp, hate to give you a hard time here, but you<br />are incorrect. try this: how long does it take <br />for the light from a very distant star to reach <br />the earth?

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

by tracking the lineage from adam and eve?<br />sorry, not to be rude, but that is really a<br />stretch! could you still have creation, but over<br />millions/billions of years in your mind?<br /><br />borrowed from SW:<br />(Is 55:8-9) "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, <br />neither are your ways My ways, saith the Lord"

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

MY its all right there in the bible and your right it is a stretch because it is not tuaght in public schools that the bible is an accurate history book. If the Bible was used in public schools maybe this wouldnt be true. The bible tells us.....so and so begotton so and so and so and so begotten so and so. Genesis 5:1-32 shows adam to noah. And then noah had a son named shem.......Genesis 11:10 thru 26 shows shem to abram to issac then Jacob and then Joeseph and it is not only possable but probable for joseph and moses to be in the same city at the same time.(forgive me for forgeting which city)Moses wrote Genesis so it is very believable for this recorded history to be true. The bible is one of the most accurate accounts of history and much of what is writen by the hebrew is often paralelled by other nations from that same time. History was handed down from generation to generation and I believe this is a plausable idea of the truth of how old the earth is. Definetly no less then evolution.

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

ok, I understand M&R where u are coming from.<br />can you answer MY question please???<br />could you still have creation, but over<br />millions/billions of years in your mind?

 

[Carphunter]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

Give me a hard time all you want Mellow. <br /><br />All i'm saying is they can estimate how far these stars are by knowing the speed of light, but it is still an estimation. <br /><br />I have asked for someone to show me the formulas for calculating the age of the universe, but nobody has provided that yet. I would like to see where they come up with their "theories". It would be interesting to read.<br /><br />Supposedly they can calculate the age of the universe by how fast everything is moving away from a central hub, or something like that. They can speculate that the "Big Bang" theory caused the formation of the universe, and everything is constantly moving away from where the "Big Bang" occured. The "Big Bang" is a theory. Cannot be proved. I just don't see with our limited knowledge that we can accurately predict the age of the universe, thats all i'm saying.<br /><br />On a different note, I believe that you CAN believe in creation, and believe that the Earth is millions of years old. It does not say in the Bible that the Earth is exactly a certain age. I believe that some interpretations of the Bible could be incorrect, or not perfectly accurate. Because much of the Bible has been translated, it is possible that some things were lost during the translation. <br /><br />Let me say that I believe, and practice the majority of what I have been taught about the Bible, and I will continue to do so.

 

[mikeandronda]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

MY I think if God took billons of yrs to create the earth it would be there in the Bible. But it says days, so I personally think thats what it is. Im not belittling you for your beliefs, especially because it is exzactly how I believed it to be 3-4 yrs ago untill I spent some long hard hours doing a very in depth study on Genesis at our church. We also covered the Myth of evolution but Im not a teacher or expert on this so I am unable to communicate the same way and as well as the Individual who I learned much from on this subject.

 

[NMplayer]

Re: creation science vs. evolution

I hate to argue about the age of the universe because there are so many variables involved and I'm not sure ir matters all that much but let me take a shot at the 6-10 thousand year old theory.<br /><br />Lets say that I am the creator and today I have decided to create a rock. So.. presto here is the rock I just created.<br /><br />Now if you were to carbon or radio date my rock you would find that it is roughly 6 million years old. But wait.... I just told you I created it just now.<br /><br />The point is that by the genesis account God created a mature earth. In that scenario dating anything would be meaningless.<br /><br />btw irreducibly complex means that if you take one part or system out of the simplest one cell organism it ceases to live. It cannot have waited for even one part to "evolve" because it needs them all to survive