More brilliant scientists admitting they really have no clue

[earendel]

Curious. So, how old do you think the earth is based on the Bible?

Curious. What's the point of this question?

Maybe to see if he's a "young earther" or an "old earther".

[TheCalvinator24]

Curious. So, how old do you think the earth is based on the Bible?

Curious. What's the point of this question?

Maybe to see if he's a "young earther" or an "old earther".

Okay, I got that, but why?

[silverscreenselect]

Do I KNOW God exists? No. However, if I'm wrong, in 1,000 years my chemical makeup will be absorbed into some other organism and my wrongness won't matter. If those who hold so tightly to the science side are wrong.....

I've never had a problem with people living their lives according to their own belief system. If you believe that by doing or refusing to do something, you will be in a better place 1000 years from now, I respect that, even though I may not believe so myself.

I do have a problem with people trying to force those beliefs on me, whether by attempting to "convert" me or by codifying their belief system to prevent me from exercising my freedoms.

Plus, the scientific method is used in all facets of our life to design and test the products we use. You may believe that the truly religious will not get food poisoning; I would rather have my food properly tested.

[Sir_Galahad]

Curious. So, how old do you think the earth is based on the Bible?

When I was back there in seminary school....

We were taught that the we were in the year 5,7xx. This year dated the earth from the time of Genesis, or the Creation of the earth. Years later, when attending high school and college we were taught that the earth was approximately 4 1/2 billion years old. Years later, while experimenting with some hallucinogenic drug, I came to the startling revelation that these were two diametrically opposed "theories" and that I had to select one to follow as I could not believe both. Being the pragmatic soul that I am, I decided that if there was actual proof that the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, then I could not believe the other. And, if I could not believe that the earth was only 5,7xx years old, then it would follow that I could not believe anything else that I was taught in seminary school. And, thus, my belief...

[minimetoo26]

Curious. So, how old do you think the earth is based on the Bible?

Curious. What's the point of this question?

Curious. Most people I know ask questions to get an answer...

[earendel]

When I was back there in seminary school....

We were taught that the we were in the year 5,7xx. This year dated the earth from the time of Genesis, or the Creation of the earth. Years later, when attending high school and college we were taught that the earth was approximately 4 1/2 billion years old. Years later, while experimenting with some hallucinogenic drug, I came to the startling revelation that these were two diametrically opposed "theories" and that I had to select one to follow as I could not believe both. Being the pragmatic soul that I am, I decided that if there was actual proof that the earth was 4 1/2 billion years old, then I could not believe the other. And, if I could not believe that the earth was only 5,7xx years old, then it would follow that I could not believe anything else that I was taught in seminary school. And, thus, my belief...

There are those who would say that there is no "proof" of the earth's antiquity - indeed there's a Creation Museum in northern Kentucky which "proves" that scientific evidence is in error. And just because one doesn't accept that the earth is 6000 years old doesn't mean that one can't believe in the One who created the earth, whether 6000 years ago, 4.5 billion years ago, or whatever.

[wbtravis007]

Curious. So, how old do you think the earth is based on the Bible?

Curious. What's the point of this question?

Curious. What is the point of this question?

[TheCalvinator24]

Curious. So, how old do you think the earth is based on the Bible?

Curious. What's the point of this question?

Curious. What is the point of this question?

The point of my question is to ascertain why Bixby injected this issue in this thread.

[minimetoo26]

It's a classic science/religion issue. Perfect for this thread.

[MarleysGh0st]

The point of my question is to ascertain why Bixby injected this issue in this thread.

Do you really not see BiT's point in ridiculing this report on astrophysics and how Bixby's question is related to that?

[traininvain]

When I was back there in seminary school....

Way back when I worked as a DJ, I did what was probably one of the first 'mashups', I mixed The Doors "The Soft Parade" & The Doobie Brothers (version) "Jesus is Just Alright".

It was always a crowd pleaser.

[TheCalvinator24]

The point of my question is to ascertain why Bixby injected this issue in this thread.

Do you really not see BiT's point in ridiculing this report on astrophysics and how Bixby's question is related to that?

Oh, I think I do, but I don't want to assume anything. I think that many people believe that anyone who believes in a Young Earth is an idiot and can be discounted out of hand. If that's the point Bix was trying to make, then if anything, she was proving BiT's point.

[Appa23]

When I was back there in seminary school....

We were taught that the we were in the year 5,7xx. This year dated the earth from the time of Genesis, or the Creation of the earth. Years later, when attending high school and college we were taught that the earth was approximately 4 1/2 billion years old.

Never meet someone who went to seminary years prior to high school.

Was this a Pre-K seminary?

[minimetoo26]

The point of my question is to ascertain why Bixby injected this issue in this thread.

Do you really not see BiT's point in ridiculing this report on astrophysics and how Bixby's question is related to that?

Oh, I think I do, but I don't want to assume anything. I think that many people believe that anyone who believes in a Young Earth is an idiot and can be discounted out of hand. If that's the point Bix was trying to make, then if anything, she was proving BiT's point.

Then your questioning was an assumption that she was out to ridicule?

[Sir_Galahad]

When I was back there in seminary school....

Never meet someone who went to seminary years prior to high school.

Was this a Pre-K seminary?

I see you're not a Doors fan.

[minimetoo26]

When I was back there in seminary school....

Never meet someone who went to seminary years prior to high school.

Was this a Pre-K seminary?

I see you're not a Doors fan.

I believed Eyegor once when he said that. Once. Then I had that "D'oh!" moment....

[Appa23]

I see you're not a Doors fan.

Not really. Do you want to explain the reference?

[mrkelley23]

The point of my question is to ascertain why Bixby injected this issue in this thread.

Do you really not see BiT's point in ridiculing this report on astrophysics and how Bixby's question is related to that?

Oh, I think I do, but I don't want to assume anything. I think that many people believe that anyone who believes in a Young Earth is an idiot and can be discounted out of hand. If that's the point Bix was trying to make, then if anything, she was proving BiT's point.

I feel exactly the same way about "young Earth" creationists as I do about people who believe the Earth is flat. Maybe I'm validating your point, or BiT's. But the two notions are comparable.

There are mountains of evidence (quite literally, as well as figuratively) to set the age of the Earth as far older than the begat list. There are mountains (again, literally as well as figuratively) of evidence against a 6000 year old Earth. There is no evidence, other than a translation through 4 or 5 languages, and a whole bunch of authoritarian figures who say "because I said so," for a 6000 year-old Earth.

In short, I don't believe that "young-Earthers" are idiots. I do believe they are engaging in wishful and magical thinking, and my experience has been that, because of this insistence on magical thinking, they cannot be reasoned with, on this or any other issue. Que sera, sera.

[TheCalvinator24]

Do you really not see BiT's point in ridiculing this report on astrophysics and how Bixby's question is related to that?

Oh, I think I do, but I don't want to assume anything. I think that many people believe that anyone who believes in a Young Earth is an idiot and can be discounted out of hand. If that's the point Bix was trying to make, then if anything, she was proving BiT's point.

Then your questioning was an assumption that she was out to ridicule?

No, my question was an attempt to ascertain her reason for injecting this issue in this thread. I just said I don't want to assume anything.

[TheCalvinator24]

Do you really not see BiT's point in ridiculing this report on astrophysics and how Bixby's question is related to that?

Oh, I think I do, but I don't want to assume anything. I think that many people believe that anyone who believes in a Young Earth is an idiot and can be discounted out of hand. If that's the point Bix was trying to make, then if anything, she was proving BiT's point.

I feel exactly the same way about "young Earth" creationists as I do about people who believe the Earth is flat. Maybe I'm validating your point, or BiT's. But the two notions are comparable.

There are mountains of evidence (quite literally, as well as figuratively) to set the age of the Earth as far older than the begat list. There are mountains (again, literally as well as figuratively) of evidence against a 6000 year old Earth. There is no evidence, other than a translation through 4 or 5 languages, and a whole bunch of authoritarian figures who say "because I said so," for a 6000 year-old Earth.

In short, I don't believe that "young-Earthers" are idiots. I do believe they are engaging in wishful and magical thinking, and my experience has been that, because of this insistence on magical thinking, they cannot be reasoned with, on this or any other issue. Que sera, sera.

There is a fairly easy response to the mountains of evidence. But, in my experience, those who support science-based beliefs aren't willing even to consider the possibility.

that fairly easy response is "appearance of age." If one accepts the possibility of a Creator (whether an all-powerful being or not), then it should not be that hard to accept that said Creator could (and did) create an earth that appears to be older than it really is. When Adam and Eve were created on the 6th day, the other animals and plants that were already in existence would have appeared to be much older than 1 or two days old. I fully concede that this is a belief based on faith, but if I have to choose whether to put my faith in the Bible or in science, I have no qualms making that choice.

[TheCalvinator24]

I feel exactly the same way about "young Earth" creationists as I do about people who believe the Earth is flat. Maybe I'm validating your point, or BiT's. But the two notions are comparable.

I think the fact that you consider these two issues comparable is telling. We know the earth is not flat because we sail around it, or fly around it. Some believe the earth is old because scientists have said that certain rocks, fossils, layers, etc. are of certain ages, but there is no way to verify that contention.

IOW, the two issues are completely different.

[christie1111]

And now back to the age-old belief that scientists can not possibly believe in a power greater than those on earth.

Deep Sigh!

[earendel]

that fairly easy response is "appearance of age." If one accepts the possibility of a Creator (whether an all-powerful being or not), then it should not be that hard to accept that said Creator could (and did) create an earth that appears to be older than it really is. When Adam and Eve were created on the 6th day, the other animals and plants that were already in existence would have appeared to be much older than 1 or two days old. I fully concede that this is a belief based on faith, but if I have to choose whether to put my faith in the Bible or in science, I have no qualms making that choice.

Two points:

1. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, it's probably a duck. With respect to the age of the earth, whether it is 6000 years old, 4.5 billion years old, or just created a nanosecond ago is really irrelevant. The "appearance" is what counts, and that's all the scientific evidence can deal with. If one chooses to believe that God created the world to appear old (so that we might have faith) or that Satan corrupted the world to make it appear old (so as to deceive the faithful) is not something that science can address.

2. You are creating a false dichotomy when you say that one has to believe "either" in science or the Bible.

[mrkelley23]

There is a fairly easy response to the mountains of evidence. But, in my experience, those who support science-based beliefs aren't willing even to consider the possibility.

that fairly easy response is "appearance of age." If one accepts the possibility of a Creator (whether an all-powerful being or not), then it should not be that hard to accept that said Creator could (and did) create an earth that appears to be older than it really is. When Adam and Eve were created on the 6th day, the other animals and plants that were already in existence would have appeared to be much older than 1 or two days old. I fully concede that this is a belief based on faith, but if I have to choose whether to put my faith in the Bible or in science, I have no qualms making that choice.

Qui potest capere capiat

[BackInTex]

And now back to the age-old belief that scientists can not possibly believe in a power greater than those on earth.

Deep Sigh!

No, just some, including some here who 'teach' our (collective) kids. And they are dangerous to the free thought of scientists and creationists (so pretty much everyone) alike.

Because of their

they cannot be reasoned with, on this or any other issue.

attitudes. They just shake their heads and roll their eyes in false intellectual superiority. But that's O.K. Their choice. Just wish they had chosen another profession.

Many scientists believe in God, and many though admittedly fewer than those that believe in God, believe in a young earth.

Folks, if Kroger can bake a loaf of bread that feels and tastes 10 days old after 3 hours, no doubt an all powerful God could create a rock that seems 2 billion years old after 6,000 years.

But if you don't believe in God, then I can understand how you couldn't believe this.

[/quote]