- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How do Creationists reconcile discoveries that date back hundreds of millions of years
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:52 am to CoyoteSong
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:52 am to CoyoteSong
quote:
No he did that on earth.
How do you resolve that there are several religions that predate Christianity with several that don't reference a magic man in their texts?
Or have you succumbed to the sunken cost fallacy and are so narcissistic and self-centered that you 'believe' you are right and everyone else on the opposite side planet is wrong?
0
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:52 am to Gaggle
quote:
it makes it more real when you realize that Jesus Christ is the logical choice.
Why doesn’t Jesus Christ cure all the little babies that have cancer? Why does he let little children starve to death?
quote:
We will see for you. Keep looking.
I see. I see the heavens. There is no god there. If there were, he would show himself and smite me.
But he won’t. Because he doesn’t exist. By the way, did you know the earth is round and not flat?
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:52 am to Turf Taint
You are speaking of young earth creationists. Old earth creationists realize that Genesis is a rebuttal to the Sumerian Creation Ideas. It’s not a science book, it’s not a history book.
I
I
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:54 am to XenScott
quote:
It’s not a science book, it’s not a history book.
It’s a make believe book.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:54 am to NATidefan
quote:
As I already said, evolution doesn't say one "kind" changes to another, period
Yes it does. Evolution says all felines have a common ancestor. It says all canine’s have a common ancestor. Humans came from monkeys. Etc..
This post was edited on 7/19/22 at 9:56 am
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:54 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
What? Are you saying a house cat, a tiger, a lion, a mountain lion suggest a 'change of kind' but New Zealand wrens, African broadbills, reed warblers, mockingbirds, and cardinals don't? Or do you want the delineation of an entire clade?
No, what he wants is for whatever layman he is sealioning to have one gap in knowledge or some sort of identifiable trip up in their evidentiary presentation that he can latch onto to disingenuously use as blanket invalidation of one of the most well established biological processes(that he could easily google or go to any library and study up on extensively).
Claiming he cares about evidence for this thing he wants to invalidate while giving frick all about the lack of evidence for creationsim.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:55 am to Gaggle
quote:
What a great coincidence that the "science" that "disproves" God can never be tested, experimented, proven.
Disproves? I disagree.
Challenges the thinking around interpretation of creationism (6 days + 1 day rest) and perhaps multiple Adams & Eves (whew, cause incestuous design kept me up at night when grappling with this in how I was taught in my earlier days)
Does not disprove.
Makes me question certain aspects of religions and how and what I was taught and, most importantly, when in my life I was taught it. Always good to question things.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:55 am to CoyoteSong
quote:
Yeah, that is not a change of kind.
Those are, but you don't care given that you will use the clade definition but not the subfamily differentiation. For you, a clade is a clade and thus all species under that clade, regardless of whether they can reproduce between one another, are just one big species, despite morphological, genetic, and phenotypic changes. And again, 'change of kind' is such a weird phrase that you can ultimately deny anything. You oddly enough are more that willing to co-opt the language of evolution, but aren't willing to consider that a 'passerine' did not always exist, which makes your insistence on circular logic even more odd.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:55 am to CoyoteSong
quote:
So your ancestors came from fish. Do you agree?
Does this mean I can eat human on Fridays during Lent?
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:56 am to CoyoteSong
quote:
Yes it does. Evolution says all felines have a common ancestor. It says all canine’s have a common ancestor. Humans came from monkeys. Etc..
I literally gave you a common ancestor for two different species. Then you denied it, despite knowing nothing about any of those clades.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:58 am to CoyoteSong
quote:That doesn't mean one animal changes into another. That animal begins and ends as the same animal. The traits change over time.
Yes it does. Evolution says all felines have a common ancestor. It says all canine’s have a common ancestor. Humans came from monkeys. Etc..
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:58 am to beerJeep
quote:
Absolutely. All religion does is try to teach people to live a moral life and be good to others. That is a good message. Saying there is some omnipresent being that controls everything is just silly.
quote:
Well, nothing does matter. We are here for a finite time. Live your life, be good, and live like it’s your only life. Because it is.
For you, there is no such thing as good. It's just a made up term by meat bags. You have no basis to say, it's objectively better to be good to other humans. When you remove an objective source, IE God. Hitler's ideas of what's good, become just as valid as Mother Teresa. They both ultimately amount to the same thing. Nothing. Nihilistic universal death of everything and everyone. In a trillion years nothing will matter, so therefore currently nothing matters. For you Hitler and Mother Teresa can only be logical equivalents ultimately. A meaningless meatbag with different ideas on how to treat other meaningless meatbags.
Therefore when you say God cannot exist, because a good God would not let X tragedy happen. You are speaking nonsense.
You are saying XYZ tragedies are evil or bad(which doesn't truly exist for you) therefore a good (which doesn't exist for you) God doesn't exist.
Yet, you are condemning God as immoral to your standard because xyz happens (rape, cancer, etc). Because you find him immoral you write him off as nonexistent, because you think a Good God wouldn't let those things happen.
But by confessing you don't think a Good God would let these things happen. You are implicitly confessing that a standard of Good exists, that is objective, that you are measuring God against. All the while not having a single epistemological nor ontological basis for this objective good. Your entire rational argument of God not existing is a nonsensical disaster of logic.
Edit: only for grammar and spelling.
This post was edited on 7/19/22 at 10:03 am
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:58 am to Bronc
quote:
No, what he wants is for whatever layman he is sealioning to have one gap in knowledge or some sort of identifiable trip up in their evidentiary presentation that he can latch onto to disingenuously use as blanket invalidation of one of the most well established biological processes(that he could easily google or go to any library and study up on extensively).
Claiming he cares about evidence for this thing he wants to invalidate while giving frick all about the lack of evidence for creationsim.
Yeah, it's always bad-faith with these assholes, just like the other day in the flat-earth thread where a guy didn't understand the math at all. It was an impressive show of bad-faith too.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:58 am to CoyoteSong
Man, as a geologist, this thread is just depressing.
Please do some research and don’t procreate.
Please do some research and don’t procreate.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:59 am to Turf Taint
quote:
perhaps multiple Adams & Eves (whew, cause incestuous design kept me up at night when grappling with this in how I was taught in my earlier days)
There would have HAD to been multiple Adam and eves. How else could humanity have so many different colors/shapes/sizes?
Did…. Did…. Did humanity evolve?!?
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:59 am to beerJeep
quote:You're basically asking why does earth exist. Because earth is not heaven. There is a already perfect place without suffering, why create another one? Earth has a different purpose.
Why doesn’t Jesus Christ cure all the little babies that have cancer? Why does he let little children starve to death?
quote:You live on the battleground. His entire concept of good was disputed, and you can reject it. This is your choice. This is your journey.
I see. I see the heavens. There is no god there. If there were, he would show himself and smite me.
quote:I can say the earth is flat and it doesn't smite me. Prove it's round.
By the way, did you know the earth is round and not flat?
Posted on 7/19/22 at 9:59 am to Turf Taint
Imagine believing our oil comes from dinosaurs lmao
Posted on 7/19/22 at 10:02 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Those are,
An antelope becoming an antelope is your answer.
quote:
And again, 'change of kind' is such a weird phrase that you can ultimately deny anything.
Show me where a mountain lion evolved into a Jaguar. Is that specific enough for you. Evolution says we all evolved from fish. I am not asking you to show me a fish becoming an elephant. Just a change of kind which should be easy but has proven to be very difficult for the evolution believers here.
Posted on 7/19/22 at 10:04 am to CoyoteSong
quote:
Show me
Gonna assume you are not an Ancestry.com customer?
Posted on 7/19/22 at 10:05 am to Turf Taint
Creation and evolution coexist. Time has no meaning to God. In 2nd Peter chapter 3 verse 8 - "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing: that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."
Those that believe in the literal interpretation of time related to the bible ignore this statement. It is possible to believe in creation and evolution at the same time.
Those that believe in the literal interpretation of time related to the bible ignore this statement. It is possible to believe in creation and evolution at the same time.
Page 15 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News