Young Earth Creationists

[PedroPonyLikesCrisps]

I know Young Earth Creationists exist, I've seen them on telly, but never met one in real life, so I'm just wondering if anyone here is one or knows one or whether they are actually just incredibly rare and reserved for extreme tv debating!

I'll just point this out to you, BestValue......hopefully it'll make you stop and think.

You said: And Harvard University has slowed and even stopped light in the laboratory 13 years ago. So maybe the speed of light is not a constant

I can't even describe this as a school boy error - I have a school boy living with me revising for his physics GCSE, and even HE wouldn't make an error this basic.

No one has ever, ever suggested that light is always at the same speed in every circumstance - this applies ONLY in a vacuum. Light can be bent, stopped, slowed down, absorbed into other things. Only when there's nothing to impede it will it remain constant as proven by Special Relativity.

I have to ask you - do you think, given that you made such a really fundamental error, is it possible that you're persuaded by creationist arguments because you don't really understand the science involved?

You're wrong about the difference between detectable and measurable C-14, throwing a large chunk of your "proof" out of the window - you're also wrong about the C-14 equilibrium issue. Just flat out wrong.

Does this not start to tell you something? You started this thread saying that you respect science and evidence and would be willing to change your mind. Is that actually true?

Looks like the entire Creation Answers book is online for free. It's one of the most informative books I own on this subject with lots of peer-reviewed science. Here's a handy link to a page with all the chapters:

creation.com/the-creation-answers-book-index

Questions answered are:

Chapter 1: Does God Exist?

Does God exist?
Is there objective evidence that God exists?
What are the consequences of atheism?
Where did God come from? Can we know God personally?
See Study Guide, Lesson 1

Chapter 2: Six days? Really?

Six days? Really?
Are the days of creation ordinary days? Could they be long periods
of time?
Why six days? Is Genesis Poetry?
Does the length of the days really affect the Gospel?
How can there be ?days? without the sun on the first three days?
Does Genesis 2 contradict Genesis 1?
What about the framework hypothesis?
See Study Guide, Lesson 2

Chapter 3: What about gap theories?

What about gap theories?
What is the ruin-reconstruction theory?
Is the ?soft gap? idea better?
See Study Guide, Lesson 3

Chapter 4: What about carbon dating?

What about carbon dating?
How does the carbon ?clock? work? Is it reliable?
What does carbon dating really show?
What about other radiometric dating methods?
Is there evidence that the earth is young?
See Study Guide, Lesson 4

Chapter 5: How can we see stars in a young universe?

How can we see distant stars in a young universe?
If the universe is young and it takes millions of years for light to
get to us from many stars, how can we see them?
Did God create light in transit?
Was the speed of light faster in the past?
Does this have anything to do with the ?big bang??
See Study Guide, Lesson 5

Chapter 6: How did ?bad things? come about?

How did ?bad things? come about?
If God?s original creation was ?very good?, why is ?nature red in
tooth and claw? now?
Did God create animals with defence-attack structures?
Or were they re-designed after the Fall?
Wouldn?t there be a population explosion if animals did not eat
each other?
See Study Guide, Lesson 6

Chapter 7: What about arguments for evolution?

What about arguments for evolution?
Do similarities between creatures prove that they had a common
ancestor (evolved)?
Is human and chimp DNA very similar?
Do human embryos go through animal stages as they develop?
Do we have useless left-over bits of animals in us? What about
?ape-men??
See Study Guide, Lesson 7

Chapter 8: Who was Cain?s wife?

Who was Cain?s wife?
It is now not lawful to marry your sister?
So if Adam and Eve were the only two people God created, how
could their son Cain find a wife?
How is this important to the Gospel?
See Study Guide, Lesson 8

Chapter 9: Were the 'Sons of God' and/or nephilim extra-terrestrials?

Were the ?sons of God? and/or nephilim extra-terrestrials?
Has Earth been visited by extra-terrestrials? Could life exist ?out
there??
What about UFOs and government cover-ups?
See Study Guide, Lesson 9

Chapter 10: Was the Flood global?

Was the Flood global?
Does it matter?
Does the Bible say that Noah?s Flood covered the whole earth?
Is there any evidence outside the Bible for such a Flood?
See Study Guide, Lesson 10

Chapter 11: What about continental drift?

What about continental drift?
Have the continents really moved apart?
How could this relate to the Bible?s account of history?
Could it have had something to do with the Flood?
See Study Guide, Lesson 11

Chapter 12: Noah?s Flood?what about all that water?

Noah?s Flood?what about all that water?
Where did all the water come from for the Flood?
Was there a water vapour canopy?
How was Mt Everest covered with water?
Where did the water go after the Flood?
How could this have happened?
See Study Guide, Lesson 12

Chapter 13: How did the animals fit on Noah?s Ark?

How did the animals fit on Noah?s Ark?
What animals went onto the Ark?
Where did they store all the food?
How could the Ark be big enough?
What about all the animal wastes?
See Study Guide, Lesson 13

Chapter 14: How did fresh and saltwater fish survive the flood?

How did freshwater and saltwater fish
survive the Flood?
How did saltwater fish survive dilution of the seawater with
freshwater, or how did freshwater types survive in saltwater?
And how did plants survive?
See Study Guide, Lesson 13 (continued)

Chapter 15: Where are all the human fossils?

Where are all the human fossils?
Why are human fossils not found with trilobites, for example?
If humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time, why aren?t their
fossils found together?
How could the Flood produce the order in the fossil record?
See Study Guide, Lesson 14

Chapter 16: What about the Ice Age?
What about the Ice Age?
How many ice ages were there?
Where does an ice age fit into the biblical account?
How much of the earth was covered by ice?
How long did it last?
What about the frozen mammoths?
How were people affected?
See Study Guide, Lesson 15

Chapter 17: How did the animals get to Australia?

How did animals get to Australia?
How did the animals get from remote countries to the Ark?
After the Flood, did kangaroos hop all the way to Australia?
What did koalas eat on the way?
See Study Guide, Lesson 16

Chapter 18: How did all the different ?races? arise?

How did all the different ?races? arise?
What is a ?race?? How did different skin colours come about?
What are the consequences of false beliefs about ?race??
Are black people the result of a curse on Ham?
See Study Guide, Lesson 17

Chapter 19: What about dinosaurs?

What about dinosaurs?
Was there an ?age of dinosaurs? long before people came on the
scene?
What does the Bible say about dinosaurs?
What do dinosaur fossils tell us?
How could so many huge dinosaurs fit on Noah?s Ark
What happened to the dinosaurs?
See Study Guide, Lesson 18

Chapter 20: What can I do?

What can I do?

"Do we really have to keep going over and over this? Light Speed. You got it wrong."

No, I didn't. I gave strong evidence that it has changed over time. But, yes, let's forget that one.

"Unless of course what you are really getting at is that nothing can truly be 'fact' . . ."

Uh no, I wouldn't do that. That is an atheist's tactic. Christians believe in absolute truth. Many atheists do not. I'm the one who gave a definition of "fact," remember?

"The problem is that they are usually qualified in a completely unrelated field of science."

Sometimes, but not always. The same can be said of all fields of science. The cosmologist believes in evolution because the biologist says so. The biologist believes in the big bang because the cosmologist says so. There is very little that we know from experience. We all believe most things we believe based on the claims of someone else. I just have a Higher Authority than you do. You believe the words of men while I believe the Word of God.

No, I didn't. I gave strong evidence that it has changed over time. But, yes, let's forget that one.

You gave no evidence, let alone strong evidence. If you had strong evidence you wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the topic and not discuss it anymore. You know, like all the other drivel you you keep on with.

"Also you are factually incorrect when you use that list of scientists. The list is formed of creationist...... Yes. The list is formed entirely of Young Earth Creationists.... No."

I don't know about that. You might be right. It's a red herring any way. All the major branches of science were started by Christians who were mostly young-earth creationists until materialism took over and held science hostage to this day. But a new paradigm is on the horizon. As one scientist put it, "Paradigm shifts come one funeral at a time." One hundred years from now, intelligent design will be a routine part of science (as it is already in archaeology, forensics and the SETI program) and then scientists will say, "Of course. That's one of the strengths of science. It makes progress."

"You in 1 post quote an article by a woman who has gone on to discredit ift herself. You present the article as fact but then go on to say she must be wrong in her later work because that doesnt fit in with your theories. You cant pick and choose like that and present it as evidence."

I have no idea what you're talking about here. I can't change facts. But I can certainly pick and choose how to interpret those facts. That's how all science is done. And just because I choose to accept one piece of evidence someone presents, it doesn't mean I have to accept everything they present. That's a non sequitur.

"I think Pedro and January summed up nicely. You also contradicted yourself completely in your attitude towards the Torah when asked to prove your translation skills and explain both the untranslatable hebrew, the contradictions and the aramaic words that appear randomly in the text. First claiming it wasn't relevant to the 'science' of your argument then claiming your entire creationist view was based on taking the Torah literally. Well, if you cannot read something properly to even grasp it, then how can you dismiss most scientists based on it?"

Just as you rely on experts for things you don't know, I rely on Hebrew scholars who are in agreement that Genesis teaches 6 literal 24-hour days. They don't believe it but they admit that's what it teaches - which is valuable because, as hostile witnesses, they are more reliable in my opinion.

"We'll make an atheist out of you yet."

I would have to give up logic and reason (as well as free will and absolute morality) to be an atheist and that's not a trade off I'm willing to make.

"I'm sure you already are an atheist when it comes to the 1000s of other gods. Just one more to go."

Oh, puhleeze . . . allow me to debunk that silly, tired statement right now and if you're intellectually honest you will never use it again.

Atheism is defined as a lack of belief in any gods, deities or the supernatural. It is not a positive belief. But as a Christian, I am a mono-theist. That means I believe there is only one God. So I don't merely have a lack of belief in other gods, I have a positive belief that they do not exist. Thus, in no way shape or form can I be described as an atheist. You now have to equivocate on your definition of atheism - which is irrational - or be honest and take back your statement. Which will it be?

"Much better to start with Science."

And yet science starts with philosophy - philosophy that is based on the Christian worldview. And so we've come full circle.

"moved onto more solid ground by claiming that all the science was true"

I DO believe all science is true. Don't confuse what scientists say with science itself. That's called the fallacy of reification.

So I don't merely have a lack of belief in other gods, I have a positive belief that they do not exist.

That is exactly what was suggested. You do not believe in the other gods. That is atheistic. Non belief, regardless of whether you treat it as positive or passive is still non belief. You have a lot of learning to do my friend.

"There's another thread on here where Christians are distancing themselves from Hell too for the same sort of reasons. Gradually retreating."

I changed my mind about hell a few years ago when I studied the Hebrew and Greek texts and discovered the Bible doesn't teach hell. I've changed my mind on several long-held beliefs in the past 6 years - always based on the evidence.

1. I used to believe in evolution. Now I don't.
2. I used to believe the earth was old. Now I don't.
3. I used to believe in aliens. (Even thought I saw a UFO as a kid.) Now I don't.
4. I used to believe in the immortal soul. Now I don't.
5. I used to believe in life after death. Now I don't.
6. I used to believe in an eternal-burning hell. Now I don't.

"YEC is about being true to the original belief so it's probably unfair for Christians to laugh at it. Though Atheists have no reason not to."

And God is laughing at atheists.

Atheism is defined as a lack of belief in any gods, deities or the supernatural Not really. It is defined as "One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods".

See - there's two possibilities there....God or gods. This means that an atheist is either someone who rejects a particular God, or gods in general.

I do both - but not everyone does. You do the former with every other god proposed except your own.

Like it or not, you are an atheist.

And philosophy was born thousands of years before Christianity.

How sad you have to be so dishonest to make your case. Not much of a case is it?

lol at calling jews 'hostile witnesses'. Really, young earth Christians can be very amusing to watch.

"Although science has provided good evidence that literal interpretation of religious books is a bad idea it has shown no evidence that God or Gods dont exist."

Science cannot show evidence that God does not exist and no scientist would claim it can. Science can only appear to make Him unnecessary and superfluous. This is what materialist scientists think they have done but in reality science has provided more evidence for the existence of God in the last century than in all the centuries that have come before put together.

"That, at least at the moment is down to personal belief."

Only if you want to have BLIND faith. But my trust in God rests on a solid foundation of scientific evidence.

'science has provided more evidence for the existence of God in the last century than in all the centuries that have come before put together.'

Where?

"I get your point but the terminology is wrong. Atheism is without the belief in any God and Theism is the belief in one or many Gods. Those terms exist outside of religion so someone who believes in any God cannot be Atheist."

Thank you, January. I invented that rebuttal recently and never heard anyone else use it. It's simple and brilliant if I do say so myself.

"If you start with the Bible you get YEC, true, but you get all sorts of other nonsense too. Do you subscribe to it all?"

It is not nonsense to me, NG, and I subscribe to all of it.

It's simple and brilliant if I do say so myself

Does it not matter to you that it's wrong?

"If you believe the bible is an accurate version of events, and base the 6-10 thousand year old earth on this, where do dinosaurs come in to the equation?"

Thanks for the question, TDD. Dinosaurs were created on Day 6 with the other land animals and man They are mentioned frequently in the Bible as co-existing with humans. The word 'dinosaur' was only invented in 1841 by Richard Owen and the King James translation was completed in 1611 so we would not expect to find that word used.

Instead, they used behemoth, leviathan and the word dinosaurs have been called throughout most of human history: dragons. By the way, there is plenty of evidence of dragons co-existing with humans (Napoleon even mentions seeing one). And the numerous findings of soft tissue red blood cells (and as of January 2013, possibly even DNA) inside dinosaur bones indicates they did not live millions of years ago.

"You (meaning Best here) have mentioned dinosaurs in relation to C-14, "fresh" bones being discovered etc., yet there is no mention of dinosaurs in the bible?"

See above.

"Were they an accidental creation that no-one talked about? Was the ark too small to fit them on?"

Nope. They were on the Ark. Most dinosaurs, even full grown, were about the size of a chicken. But Noah was smart enough to take young animals. They are smaller, they eat less, they sleep more, they produce less waste and they live longer after the Flood to produce more offspring - which is the reason Noah was bringing them in the first place.

All the animals in the world, averaged out, are about the size of a sheep. There was plenty of room on the Ark for all of the "kinds" (not species) of land animals and plenty left over for food storage and Noah's family. There's a great book called Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study which explains it all in detail. And the link I provided above to a free book would answer all the questions everyone on here had - if they would only take the time to read it. Seems they would rather argue than learn.

Are you getting your science from the Flintstones now? Did they mix cement in a Pelican too?

If you knew how wrong you are about everything, I think even you'd be a bit embarrassed.

"What's more telling, however, is that no religious book has ever proved the existence of a god. And frankly, that's their job, so they haven't done very well."

Pedro, as you've seen I like to avoid the word proof because science cannot provide proof, only evidence. But just how would a Holy Book prove the existence of God?

What my Holy Book, the Bible, did is form a hypothesis about God that has been tested and vindicated by modern science again and again. That is strong evidence that the Bible is true and inspired by Someone with foreknowledge.

You're rather strange statement that "no religious book has ever proved the existence of a god" is backwards and seems to demonstrate your lack of understanding of the scientific method. It's a little like saying Plato's writings should prove the existence of Socrates. (Incidentally, there's actually scant evidence that Socrates existed.)

Best So you think that the moon is a light made to rule over night?

Even though it's not a light and is sometimes around during the day too?

Really, the Bible isn't that hot on science. Rather primitive, in fact, as one might expect from the primitive societies that wrote it.