Creation's age of the universe is based on no objective evidence, just a count of ages in a book of mythology. It can be dismissed out of hand. Science's estimate is based on clearly observable evidence, tested and conformed from a dozen different disciplines and methods.The way I approach this is to combine science with religion to see where they overlap. Creation places the age of the universe at about 6000 years. I asked myself, what science proven discoveries occurred in that carbon dated time scale? The answer is the invention of written language and the rise of stable civilization.
Carbon dated time scale? What about the many other, independent dating scales, using different methods, which all agree on the numbers -- except, of course, with Usshers' chronology.
That's not necessarily due to an 'update'. There are other, documented factors at play.I can see evolution by natural selection for humans, happening up to the rise of civilization and written language. Once civilization forms and persists, man made environments appear, and man made selections start to add a wild card to natural selection for humans.
There must have been was an update in the human brain's operating system about 6000 years ago, since human behavior changes very drastically.
Huh? Not following. Culture vs natural selection??In a sense, a new type of human appears who was no longer fully a part of nature; paradise. This new human became more civilized and willful. It is like a clock starts anew.
For example, natural selection would pick the most fit under various circumstances. How did the idea of blood lines ever form, where the selected people, are already selected ahead of time, detached from environmental circumstances?
But people always lived in the present. Many still do.This is not natural selection, but appears to be a unique man made selection process, or some other form of modern human selection process; needs of collectivism. It also reflects a more open vision of the future, instead of living in the present like a natural animal. It was a remarkable update.
Human culture did not change because of a brain update -- though we could seriously use one, IMHO.
The Pleistocene ice-age ended. New lifestyle possibilities arose. New species of hominins began migrating, interacting and competing.
The bible to me is like an ancient diary of those new human early days, which were often explained using the thinking of that time; lacks 20/20 insight back then. But this is still valuable, since it gives us clues as to how we got here and how the modern brain's operating system is layered; science from religion.
Yes. Folklore gives valuable, anthropological, sociological and psychological insight into human culture. Not for biology, though.
Science and religion are opposites, not just in conclusions, but in methodology.