There is not enough erosion of the continents for them to be many 10s of millions of years old.

[AdamjEdgar]

The only alarming thing here, is you pretending as if a theologian's biased religious opinions are at all relevant to matters of paleontology and evolutionary history.

If he has anything interesting and worthwhile to say, he may publish it in a paletontology paper in an appropriate academic journal.

I'm not interested in his commercial / popular religious propaganda.

none of what you have written above is anything more than sour grapes and timewasting. It proves that you are incapable of even reading other views to ensure that your own world view is actually valid.

All of the references cited in the book are from published authors, many of whom are not even Christian. So you statement about religious propaganda is irrelevant as the author cites numerous resources from your own world view who have problems with the accepted evoutionary claims regarding human ancestory.

I encountered examples of that kind of ignorant bias in a public high school about 3 years ago (one that i used to teach Design and Technology at many years ago)...a number of parents demanded scripture classes be removed from daily timetables claiming they are not a relevant part of education. Fortunately, the principle had other ideas and stomped on the attempt.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

Why would we listen to a theologian concerning matters of evolutionary history and paleontology?

Because you are on these forums reading writings from individuals whose world view you dont agree with.

If your above statement is valid, then perhaps you shouldnt be here. Are you a published scientist or a theologian? what academic credentials do you have that allows you to engage in such matters?

**mod edit**

 

[Subduction Zone]

none of what you have written above is anything more than sour grapes and timewasting. It proves that you are incapable of even reading other views to ensure that your own world view is actually valid.

All of the references cited in the book are from published authors, many of whom are not even Christian. So you statement about religious propaganda is irrelevant as the author cites numerous resources from your own world view who have problems with the accepted evoutionary claims regarding human ancestory.

It does not matter if a book was published. All sorts of garbage can be published. What matters is whether or not their arguments hold any water, and the book that you referred to does not. The arguments it uses are so bad that even AiG admitted that those are poor arguments.

I encountered examples of that kind of ignorant bias in a public high school about 3 years ago (one that i used to teach Design and Technology at many years ago)...a number of parents demanded scripture classes be removed from daily timetables claiming they are not a relevant part of education. Fortunately, the principle had other ideas and stomped on the attempt.

If it is a private school that is perfectly fine. But you said that was a public school. In the US he is asking for a lawsuit, unless he can show that he pulls verses from all sorts of religions and philosophers. You should know this.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because you are on these forums reading writings from individuals whose world view you dont agree with.

That does not answer the question. A religious reason to believe a fallacy is an abuse of one's religion.

If your above statement is valid, then you shouldnt be here. Are you either a scientist or a theoloogian...what academic credentials do you have that allows you to engage in such matterts?

You are making it personal again. That is a mistake. You should be discussing his evidence. If he has a valid argument it would be based upon the evidence and from what I have seen he does not even understand evolution. One cannot refute what one does not understand.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

You should be discussing his evidence.

that is a circular argument...you wont even read any of the evidence...you stated that yourself already. Not one of the references that i have already cited on this topic have you appropriately responded to with any evidence. Your usual response is exactly what you have done here...you want to discuss evidence that you wont even read! **mod edit**

 

[Subduction Zone]

that is a circular argument...you wont even read any of the evidence...you stated that yourself already. Not one of the references that i have already cited on this topic have you appropriately responderd to with any evidence. Your usual response is exactly what you have done here...you want to discuss evidence that you wont even read! **mod edit**

No, I politely explained to you what is and what is not evidence. One more time the concept is very well defined in the sciences. Don't get mad at me just because you are wrong. It does not help you. Once again here is the definition of scientific evidence:

Scientific evidence consists of observations that support or oppose a scientific theory or hypothesis.

I have repeatedly asked for your hypothesis, the tests that it makes, and how you could falsify it if wrong. You have not presented any. That means that by definition that you do not have any evidence.

How was my argument "circular"? I do not think that you understand that concept either.

 

[Pogo]

That does not answer the question. A religious reason to believe a fallacy is an abuse of one's religion.


You are making it personal again. That is a mistake. You should be discussing his evidence. If he has a valid argument it would be based upon the evidence and from what I have seen he does not even understand evolution. One cannot refute what one does not understand.

Sod off? Oh, maybe you are British. I do not know about the laws in Britain about abusing religion in a school. Perhaps that is allowed there.

Yes RE (religious education) is a required course in the UK which explains why only 46% are Christians whereas it is 75% in the US.
RE works well.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes RE (religious education) is a required course in the UK which explains why only 46% are Christians whereas it is 75% in the US.
RE works well.

A lot of US Christians are all gung ho on "comparative religion classes". That is until they learn that they do not consist of Christians showing how their religion is better than anyone else's. When all religions are treated equally all of sudden they are against them for some odd reason

 

[Pogo]

that is a circular argument...you wont even read any of the evidence...you stated that yourself already. Not one of the references that i have already cited on this topic have you appropriately responded to with any evidence. Your usual response is exactly what you have done here...you want to discuss evidence that you wont even read! **mod edit**

The problem is that it doesn't matter how many references to the geology of the moon you have in your book, if your premise and conclusion in the book you write is that the moon is made of green cheese, it is still wrong. Lubenow's premise is wrong, see the numerous refutations,

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well maybe you can help me with this discussion going on in another thread about the trinity. If a person does not believe what the Bible says about many things, including whether Moses or Jesus really existed as written, how can he believe if God is or is not a trinity? Do you have any thoughts about this, please..

No. No thoughts on any straw men that you create.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I'm not sure what you mean by "only true believers." What do you think they believe?

I know what I observe.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What information? About prokaryotes? Can you please say at least if ancient (supposedly) prokaryotes are different from current prokaryotes, and how?

Why don't you look this up and then report back to us. This isn't a semester class on biology.

I'm not wasting time only to have you wave it all away using your own understanding as the standard for rejection.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Why don't you look this up and then report back to us. This isn't a semester class on biology.

I'm not wasting time only to have you wave it all away using your own understanding as the standard for rejection.

So why not answer the question. Can you please say at least if ancient (supposedly) prokaryotes are different from current prokaryotes, and how?What are the differences in their codes and can you document all the changes throughout history?

 

[Bthoth]

So why not answer the question. Can you please say at least if ancient (supposedly) prokaryotes are different from current prokaryotes, and how?What are the differences in their codes and can you document all the changes throughout history?

Can't find those words and terms in bible.

Are you focused on science to prove your questions on the evolution of living species? Are you trying to erode the religious beliefs with knowledge?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So why not answer the question. Can you please say at least if ancient (supposedly) prokaryotes are different from current prokaryotes, and how?What are the differences in their codes and can you document all the changes throughout history?

Oh my! Knowing that they would be different does not tell us how they would be different. Your reasoning skills still need a bit of work.

You could have asked him how he knew that they would be different. That would have been a valid question.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So why not answer the question. Can you please say at least if ancient (supposedly) prokaryotes are different from current prokaryotes, and how?What are the differences in their codes and can you document all the changes throughout history?

There's no evidence you have a clue or are open to a reasonable discussion.

Answering some people serves no purpose. You know how it is. I see no useful purpose in responding to you or some particular others for instance. It is a dead end in my opinion.

This is the about the only response to you that I see as worthy of any effort.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

There is not enough erosion of the continents for them to be many 10s of millions of years old.

Here are some links that show this.

Five Global Evidences for a Young Earth

Eroding ages

Four Geological Evidences for a Young Earth

https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1135&context=icc_proceedings

Evidences of a Recent Creation

https://genesisapologetics.com/pangea/

You apparently don't understand the basics of plate tectonics. The surface of the continents is under constant revision, no just by erosion, but also mountain making, Areas that were once under the ocean are now 6000 miles up, and areas where there were once mountains, now have mere hills.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

none of what you have written above is anything more than sour grapes and timewasting

No, it's right on point.
It's no different from a car mechanic writing a blog post on how he can cure cancer.

If this car mechanics would actually be able to do so, he'ld take it to academic medical science. Or actual academics would pick up on his blog post and work it out properly.

The fact that none of that is occurring, tells us all we need to know.
Same with your religious propaganda. If there were actually anything to it, he'ld take it to the academics. Or academics would pick up on it and do it properly.
The fact that this isn't occurring, shows that there's nothing there.

It proves that you are incapable of even reading other views to ensure that your own world view is actually valid.

No. It proves that I check my sources and don't simply believe any quack that comes along with wild assertions.
The only reason you do, is because of your confirmation bias.

All of the references cited in the book are from published authors, many of whom are not even Christian. So you statement about religious propaganda is irrelevant as the author cites numerous resources from your own world view who have problems with the accepted evoutionary claims regarding human ancestory.

So what? His "conclusions" are his own.

I encountered examples of that kind of ignorant bias in a public high school about 3 years ago (one that i used to teach Design and Technology at many years ago)...a number of parents demanded scripture classes be removed from daily timetables claiming they are not a relevant part of education. Fortunately, the principle had other ideas and stomped on the attempt.

I feel sorry for the kids that were in your class.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Because you are on these forums reading writings from individuals whose world view you dont agree with.

How does that matter to the question I actually asked?

If your above statement is valid, then perhaps you shouldnt be here.

That makes no sense either.
So because I post on this forum, I have to toss out all of academics and scientific methodology and instead just believe whatever people say over any actual expert's findings? Seriously?

Are you a published scientist or a theologian?

No. So I don't pretend to know better then them.

what academic credentials do you have that allows you to engage in such matters?

I'm not the one here who's pretending to know better then experts in their field....

 

[McBell]

There's no evidence you have a clue or are open to a reasonable discussion.

Answering some people serves no purpose. You know how it is. I see no useful purpose in responding to you or some particular others for instance. It is a dead end in my opinion.

The exact reason I have bowed out of replying to them.

I understand that they will likely take my bowing out as a win.
But it seems to me that that particular win is less satisfying to them than the "suffering for the lord" they relish in.