Worlds most retarded state senator (of today)

the age of the earth is not a 100% fact, that is wrong, as ib1 even pointed out, the age of the earth has in fact been revised....numerous times

i don't care if it is by one year, that alone means it is not 100% fact
 
Yurt said:
the age of the earth is not a 100% fact, that is wrong, as ib1 even pointed out, the age of the earth has in fact been revised....numerous times

i don't care if it is by one year, that alone means it is not 100% fact
Click to expand...

No it isn't 100% fact.

What is 100% fact is that the Earth is not 6,000 years old.
 
Watermark said:
Light travels at a constant rate. The milky way is over 100,000 lightyears across. To see accross our own galaxy, the universe would have to be at least 100,000 years old. To see Andromeda, the nearest galaxy, the universe would have to be at least 2.5 million years old. There are much further objects in the sky, which we can detect the age of through their red-shift, but I think you get the general idea.

Anyone who says that the universe is 6.5k years old would have to propose the absurd notion that God put all that light in place right there just to trick us, which is an absurd special pleading that can't be taken seriously, and anyone who proposes it as a serious option, likewise, cannot be taken seriously. I don't care if it's your beliefs. Your beliefs are not something precious that is protected from critical review.
Click to expand...
Or they could argue that an all-powerful being could make time shift and pass more quickly making it seem as if billions of years passed in what for him was just 6 days.

But heck, let's just pretend that the only option is the one that you can easiest refute because it makes you feel better.
 
"Or they could argue that an all-powerful being could make time shift and pass more quickly making it seem as if billions of years passed in what for him was just 6 days."

Once you exit the realm of science, pretty much anything is possible.
 
Onceler said:
"Or they could argue that an all-powerful being could make time shift and pass more quickly making it seem as if billions of years passed in what for him was just 6 days."

Once you exit the realm of science, pretty much anything is possible.
Click to expand...
Yup. And God is always outside the "realm of science".

The reality is science is limited to what can be tested. God, being paranormal and outside testable influence would never be proved or disproved by science, He can't even really even be a Hypothesis.

Science is a method, and it isn't the only source of knowledge.
 
Damocles said:
Yup. And God is always outside the "realm of science".

The reality is science is limited to what can be tested. God, being paranormal and outside testable influence would never be proved or disproved by science, He can't even really even be a Hypothesis.

Science is a method, and it isn't the only source of knowledge.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily disagree with most of that.

However, it's a bit too convenient of a fallback on this one. If the scientific evidence is pretty well stacked for an earth that is billions of years old, it's nothing more than a debate-ender for someone to say "well, God probably wanted it to look that way."

You could end just about any debate that way...
 
Damocles said:
Yup. And God is always outside the "realm of science".

The reality is science is limited to what can be tested. God, being paranormal and outside testable influence would never be proved or disproved by science, He can't even really even be a Hypothesis.

Science is a method, and it isn't the only source of knowledge.
Click to expand...

I agree that science is not the only source of knowledge. But to claim the earth is 6,000 years old requires a suspension of belief in science. Yes, there have been adjustments in the numerical age of the earth. But that is not any help for the people who believe the earth is 6k years old.

The equivelent would be to have a discussion between biologists about how many separate species of finches there are. One would are there are 76 and another offered evidence that there are 70 separate species. And a third declares (with evidence) that there are 81 species. The person who has read a religious text then declares that there are only 9 separate species of finch.
 
Damocles said:
Yup. And God is always outside the "realm of science".

The reality is science is limited to what can be tested. God, being paranormal and outside testable influence would never be proved or disproved by science, He can't even really even be a Hypothesis.

Science is a method, and it isn't the only source of knowledge.
Click to expand...

"God" is always the fallback for stupid beliefs.

"God" is outside Mother Goose, let alone science.

There is no science, fact, or common sense that can be applied to "God."

You can make-believe anything.

Hardly an argument.
 
Yurt said:
uh, no....it is not. this argument though has been hashed out repeatedly on this board and it will go in circles again. it is not 100% fact....
Click to expand...

You missed this part ..

What is 100% fact is that the Earth is not 6,000 years old.

.. but you defend that bullshit.

.. amazing
 
Onceler said:
I don't necessarily disagree with most of that.

However, it's a bit too convenient of a fallback on this one. If the scientific evidence is pretty well stacked for an earth that is billions of years old, it's nothing more than a debate-ender for someone to say "well, God probably wanted it to look that way."

You could end just about any debate that way...
Click to expand...
Except that isn't what I said. IMO, one could take science as the way to see "how" God did it. Using that method one can see that it took Billions of years of evolution to cause the creation of humans. If one was to read their Bible literally one could still reconcile a 10,000 year old Earth, or even one that is only 6,000 years old simply by understanding that God could "age" anything. He wanted to create man, not bore himself to tears.. He just speeds it all up and viola!

Just because somebody believes that the Earth is only 6 to 10K years old does not necessarily mean they reject science or are "stupid" because of the belief, that they could never use a different area of science ever in a conversation again, or that they could never understand the complex workings of evolution, that they have lost all curiosity, that they could never stand in awe at "how" as much as any other human.

I'm not saying that is what this woman believes, and truthfully it doesn't matter to me what she believes, but the assumption that such a belief means a rejection of science in any person who believes it is a poor assumption.
 
Damocles said:
Except that isn't what I said. IMO, one could take science as the way to see "how" God did it. Using that method one can see that it took Billions of years of evolution to cause the creation of humans. If one was to read their Bible literally one could still reconcile a 10,000 year old Earth, or even one that is only 6,000 years old simply by understanding that God could "age" anything. He wanted to create man, not bore himself to tears.. He just speeds it all up and viola!

Just because somebody believes that the Earth is only 6 to 10K years old does not necessarily mean they reject science or are "stupid" because of the belief. I'm not saying that is what this woman believes, and truthfully it doesn't matter to me what she believes, but the assumption that such a belief means a rejection of science in any person who believes it is a poor assumption.
Click to expand...

Just because someone really believes in a place called the North Pole doesn't mean they're stupid or anything.

The bolded part of your statement is the dumbest thing I've ever read from you.
 
blackascoal said:
Just because someone really believes in a place called the North Pole doesn't mean they're stupid or anything.

The bolded part of your statement is the dumbest thing I've ever read from you.
Click to expand...
This is actually one of the "dumbest" things I have read from you.

If one believes that billions of years can pass in hours because God wants it, one does. It could very easily explain to them how Billions of years of evolution passed and reconcile science within that belief. It becomes silly to believe that every person who believes in God would necessarily reject all things that you believe are intelligent, nor even any of them. One could very easily believe that evolution took hundreds of Billions of Years to our perspective yet only 6 days in the perspective of "God"...

I know you want to dismiss every believer as unintelligent, but I'm sorry it is unrealistic.
 
Damo, using your logic, no claim is dumb. People could say anything that contradicts the science, and still back it up with, "Because that's the way God wanted it."
 
If a state legislator believes that the earth is 6,000 years old then they are ignoring the scientific evidence to the contrary.

If they are using the argument that God can make time go faster then they can use the "its God's will" for anything.
 
Damocles said:
This is actually one of the "dumbest" things I have read from you.

If one believes that billions of years can pass in hours because God wants it, one does. It could very easily explain to them how Billions of years of evolution passed and reconcile science within that belief. It becomes silly to believe that every person who believes in God would necessarily reject all things that you believe are intelligent, nor even any of them. One could very easily believe that evolution took hundreds of Billions of Years to our perspective yet only 6 days in the perspective of "God"...

I know you want to dismiss every believer as unintelligent, but I'm sorry it is unrealistic.
Click to expand...

That was incredibly dumb.

God is FOR BELIEVERS ONLY, but their belief has NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH FACT OR TRUTH. It is FAITH, a belief in something you do not know to be true, NOTHING MORE.

By your tortured logic, one can hide behind any and every dumbass thing ever imagined and claim "God" was the source.

Dude, save that bullshit for the ignorant.

This buffoon is the laughing stock of the galaxy .. and you defend her ignorant belief.

Sometimes your aim at defending "the other side" slides into the realm of the goofy.
 
damo, its patently obvious that this lady and millions of her fellow young earthers think the planet is actually 6,000 years old in real years.

Not in magically speeded-up God years.

Who uses magically speeded up God years, when using plain english language? The lady said 6000 years on the video. The young earthers are very explicit in believing in a young earth. I don't understand why you feel compelled to spin this
 
Onceler said:
Damo, using your logic, no claim is dumb. People could say anything that contradicts the science, and still back it up with, "Because that's the way God wanted it."
Click to expand...
That would be untrue. The process still stands. One could not claim, for instance, that evolution did not happen and still remain within such a belief, the very reason for what I state is that it fits within the framework of science while at the same time allowing their belief to coexist with what has been shown to true.

You continue to reject that anybody who believes in God in such a way can have any form of intelligence, I reject such a proposition wholeheartedly.
 
Cypress said:
damo, its patently obvious that this lady and millions of her fellow young earthers think the planet is actually 6,000 years old in real years.

Not in magically speeded-up God years.

Who uses magically speeded up God years, when using plain english language? The lady said 6000 years on the video. The young earthers are very explicit in believing in a young earth. I don't understand why you feel compelled to spin this
Click to expand...
Again, please read what I said.

I don't know if that is what this lady believes, nor do I care. I am not defending this lady, I don't know her from Adam. My point is that the belief that all people who believe in such an age thinks of it the same way or suddenly rejects the scientific method is a fallacious belief based on assumption rather than knowledge.
 
Damocles said:
That would be untrue. The process still stands. One could not claim, for instance, that evolution did not happen and still remain within such a belief, the very reason for what I state is that it fits within the framework of science while at the same time allowing their belief to coexist with what has been shown to true.

You continue to reject that anybody who believes in God in such a way can have any form of intelligence, I reject such a proposition wholeheartedly.
Click to expand...

To start with, I don't continue to do that.

Second, the 1st paragraph above tops any BS essay I wrote in high school when I hadn't studied the topic. It basically says nothing.

You either believe the earth is 6,000 years old & reject science, or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top