h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Since you were always complaining about the moderation policy on the science boards and since here there are no such restrictions regarding topic remit, thought this could be a perfect place for you to shine...

So, can you give evidence IN FAVOUR of literal bbilical young Earth creationism?

Argument that will not be accepted include those beginning;

"Evolution is wrong because..." or "carbon dating is wrong because" etc etc etc...

Doesn't matter if you prove evolution wrong, you will not have shown creationism correct in any way, it will still by competing equally with the creation account of every other religion in the world and the great pink invisible unicorn...

So, can we have some argument please that say something to the effect:

"Genesis says A, B and C, this is supported by the observation that D, E and F. These observations support YECism rather than any other explanation because X, Y and Z"

Little extracurricula holiday project for you....

If my experience of talking to YEC people is anything to go by you might have a long wait Paul.

Dear Paul,

I am having a wonderful summer so far thank you! I am heading off to my villa in Italy on Monday with some friends to enjoy a couple of weeks of sunshine, beautiful scenery and fine wine.

There is no point in me posting any further evidence here. I have posted it all before on the Origins board - the lack of any transitional fossils and the second law of thermodynamics are two of the most potent arguments, although the size of the human population, the fact that there are no old trees, the saltiness of the oceans, the decrease in the earth's rotation speed plus the fact that the sun is shrinking are all very persuasive arguments in favour of a young earth.

Of course, the most cogent argument of all, which is banned from the science board, is the Bible itself, which says very clearly that God created the world in seven days around six thousand years ago. That is a truth that cannot be measured or ascertained using scientific instruments, but it is still a very real spiritual truth.

Sam.

"I am having a wonderful summer so far thank you! I am heading off to my villa in Italy on Monday with some friends to enjoy a couple of weeks of sunshine, beautiful scenery and fine wine."

Make the most of it; once Italy suffers a terrorist attack they might implement your security procedures and ban you from entering. After all, you're only a glorified immigrant.

I'm off to your favourite city tomorrow - Darwin. Sunshine, scenery, wine and aboriginal rock art. Fantastic.

"There is no point in me posting any further evidence here"

Sorry, when have you ever posted any?

"I have posted it all before on the Origins board"

No, you havan't posted any evidence IN FAVOUR of creationism, you've made a few attempts to rubbish science but in ecah and every case your mistakes (or the ones of those you've got them from) have been thoroughly exposed and the flaws or lies explained to you... As I statedc above, statements against evolution are NOT statements FOR creationism. I know you being an arts student might not fully appreciate the philosophy on which science works however but do try...

"the lack of any transitional fossils"

All fossils are transitional and there are a great many example of what YOU would call transitional available, you've been given a long list of examples before

"and the second law of thermodynamics are two of the most potent arguments"

The second law does not prohbit evolution in any way, this is YOUR misunderstanding if you have any of it

If the 2nd law prohibited evolution, it would prohibit you having grown from a feotus... you being an alove aduilt is a potent argument against your statement...

"although the size of the human population"

There's nothing wrong with the size of the human population... why do you wrongly assume that population growth rates were the same throughout history, why do you ignore greater longevity we have these days. Population growth only became significant in the last 200 years, before that it was pretty damned slow...

"the fact that there are no old trees"

There are some very old trees but trees die, you did know that didn't you, further there are petrified and fossilised trees and objects made of wood dating to well before the 6000 years you advocate, and if you going to bang on about carbon dating now, perhaps you'd like the tell me why it does work for things that you disgree are older than 6000 years but hits the nail on the head for historical artifacts we know for a fact the age of...

"the saltiness of the oceans"

Why are wrong assuming that there is no oceanic sink for salt? Salt gets added to oceans, it also gets removed, it is at a steady state. This is not evidence for a young earth.

"the decrease in the earth's rotation speed"

Oh this old one, you do realise don't you that the creationists who first proposed this cocked up their maths... they got the slowing rate several orders of magnitude out so the Earth's rotation several hundred million years ago would have been a few hours less but not the few seconds or whatever they calculated. Show you've got better maths skills than they have and do the calculation yourself from the published data on slowing if you don't believe me...

"plus the fact that the sun is shrinking"

Is it, what makes you think it always has been?

"Of course, the most cogent argument of all, which is banned from the science board, is the Bible itself, which says very clearly that God created the world in seven days around six thousand years ago"

But that is JUST A BOOK...

when will you learn that just because something is written down, it doesn't mean it's true...

Okay, so the bible says that the Earth was created in six days and Usher said it was 6000 years ago... What is the evidence that shows this to be the case

You have failed to answer the question thus far I am afraid. Have a nice holiday...

Ferretbadger

I fully expect, nay, know, that Sam won't be able to give any evidence for a Young Earth, he's never managed to yet and niether has any other creationist and as you can see from his post, all he's got is the usual statements based on wrong assumptions, fallacies and incompetence on the part of past creationists... as always however, we can't let the lurkers think these creationist have a point. In reality, there is no creationist evolution debate, it was settled before evolutionary theory was even proposed and creationism lost...

>There is no point in me posting any further evidence here. I have posted it all before on the Origins board

And you get constantly shown how much you do not understand anything you claim.

Also I find it quite funny that someone like you would post anything here on H2G2.

Paul Elliott,

God does not lie. I believe His Word because I my sins have been washed away in the blood of the Lamb and my eyes have been opened.

Of course you will say scripture is 'just a book', because it suits you as a scientist to say this. But God has given His Word to His people. He does not lie, and does not expect his people to listen to the theories of scientists when they flatly contradict the Bible.

The Bible is a form of truth. You may not accept it as truth, but you ignore it at your peril.

"I'm off to your favourite city tomorrow - Darwin. Sunshine, scenery, wine and aboriginal rock art. Fantastic."

Now I sense here that a certain person is trying to play a game of one up-manship. Am I correct?

Well I have news for you "Kaptain"...

First, CAPTAIN is spelt with a C and not a K.

Second, I have been to Australia myself countless times before. I could jet off there tomorrow if I wanted (first class, too, I might add). I simply fancied a holiday somewhere where I won't be attacked by mosquitoes and risk picking up tropical diseases.

"The Bible is a form of truth. You may not accept it as truth, but you ignore it at your peril."

Yes, a FORM of truth, maybe, but not LITERAL truth. If you go along the lines of taking it at face value, you risk as many have succeeded in doing of completely missing the point of Christianity. Genesis at best can only be a metaphor, the fact is that the Earth and universe are not 6000 years old by about 2million times older than that.

Think Sam, who was Genesis intended for? A bunch of illeducated guys in the destert! You are God, you created the universe as science says it was created and a majestical thing it is too... are they really going to understand you if you tell them how you really did it? NO, of course not. So you tell them a metaphorical story that they can appreciate and relate to whilst adding in some moral truths... that isn't lying.

Most christians can see this OBVIOUS conclusion, why can't you? Just a suggestion.

"Well I have news for you "Kaptain"...

First, CAPTAIN is spelt with a C and not a K."

I think Alan knows that and that it was deliberate...

>Second, I have been to Australia myself countless times before. I could jet off there tomorrow if I wanted (first class, too, I might add).

I take it you have managed to find a working system for getting a camel through an eye of a needle?