Creationists' theory in detail

[ding]

You are satisfied with the logic of a 12 year old?

Not at all, that's why I've always challenged my decisions. That's why I'm here. I've just never had reason to change my original decision.

It seems like you are challenging my beliefs, not yours.

 

[alang1216]

You are satisfied with the logic of a 12 year old?

Not at all, that's why I've always challenged my decisions. That's why I'm here. I've just never had reason to change my original decision.

It seems like you are challenging my beliefs, not yours.

To understand why you believe what I don't.

 

[ding]

I reasoned that if there were one God there would be one religion and since there was not, God was either evil or didn't exist.

That certainly sounds like the logic of a twelve year old.

 

[ding]

You are satisfied with the logic of a 12 year old?

Not at all, that's why I've always challenged my decisions. That's why I'm here. I've just never had reason to change my original decision.

It seems like you are challenging my beliefs, not yours.

To understand why you believe what I don't.

More like to validate your beliefs through confirmation bias.

Which is why you deny the science behind the creation of the universe but accept the science behind evolution.

 

[alang1216]

you do realize that science literally tells us the universe was created from nothing, right?

Incorrect. Science does not have an answer but that is not the same thing.

It’s pretty hard to be an agnostic and accept that the universe was created from nothing, isn’t it?

You say the universe was created from nothing. I don't know that and I don't believe you do either.

So you agree that If you knew that the universe was literally created from nothing and that the laws of nature predestined beings that know and create, it would be really hard for you to not wonder about the origin of existence.

So what's keeping you from considering it?

A total lack of evidence. I think it was Sagan who said "an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

 

[ding]

you do realize that science literally tells us the universe was created from nothing, right?

Incorrect. Science does not have an answer but that is not the same thing.

It’s pretty hard to be an agnostic and accept that the universe was created from nothing, isn’t it?

You say the universe was created from nothing. I don't know that and I don't believe you do either.

So you agree that If you knew that the universe was literally created from nothing and that the laws of nature predestined beings that know and create, it would be really hard for you to not wonder about the origin of existence.

So what's keeping you from considering it?

A total lack of evidence. I think it was Sagan who said "an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

I just gave you the evidence.

Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

 

[alang1216]

More like to validate your beliefs through confirmation bias.

Which is why you deny the science behind the creation of the universe but accept the science behind evolution.

I'm as biased as anyone I'm sure. I can see the science of evolution for myself. I don't see the science behind the creation of the universe.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

A nice definition "god is the unknown".

Haha...poor little god gets tinier every day....

 

[ding]

More like to validate your beliefs through confirmation bias.

Which is why you deny the science behind the creation of the universe but accept the science behind evolution.

I'm as biased as anyone I'm sure. I can see the science of evolution for myself. I don't see the science behind the creation of the universe.

So you can't understand for yourself that matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium? That seems like a really simple concept to understand.

 

[Hollie]

The rate of the moons recession tells us the universe is only thousands of years?

no. Just no.

Even if the moon was kissing the Earth and started receding it still wouldn't be millions of years. Just more thousands. I have the evidence, you have nothing.

Furthermore, it's common sense. We can look at this historically and it's difficult to explain what happened 2500 years ago. Can you explain what happened 5000 years ago? 10,000? You didn't even know what happened in 70 AD and that was of great importance. Thus, the timeline that the evolutionists have of millions and billions of years of their important events is just impossible events they want their religion of no God to fulfill.

Stop basing science on the Bible. There is no need. Stop reading the Bible literally. There is no need

You are speaking blasphemy to my ears. That qualifies you for the lowest levels of hell. 24/7 of constant burning pain.

Did you just condemn me to hell?

you aren’t God.

I just listed your qualifications.

If we were in S&T forum, one of the things a creation scientist cannot do is allow the opposition to throw out the Bible. It is like one's lifeline. It has become my lifeline. It truly is the basic instructions before leaving Earth. The way to read it is literally except for the prophecies. The latter is allegory and metaphor.

Hell is part created in the past and also a prophecy. The part created in the past was for Satan and his followers. A literal Lake of Fire of fire and sulfur. What we are to get after death is allegorical. Even the narrow gate and door of Jesus is metaphor. Yet, it is the way, the truth, and life and leads to the path. One may have to leave their backpack and belongings behind to enter (metaphor).

OTOH, you have no source. Nothing to back you up. What if the millions and billions of years was rendered pseudoscience? We know the steady state theory or eternal universe was. We know rocks and fossils won't last through weathering and such. You'll just change your theory again to fit evolution. Your lies can continue to evolve to fit whatever Satan and his Antibible has in store for you. Like I said, in your case I think you will be misled after death. We don't know the Tribulation holds for us. Jesus said to be ready, but we also know that it will come when we are not aware something like it could happen.

So-called supernatural creationism obviously cannot allow the Bibles to be thrown out because christian fundamentalism is the entirety of creationism. Nothing in nature depicts supernaturalism. Every discovery in science has had a natural explanation. As we've seen, you cannot identify a single instance of supernaturalism - something in the natural world that has supernatural underpinnings.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

As we've seen, you cannot identify a single instance of supernaturalism

Nor could you ever. That's the thing...there can never be evidence of the "supernatural", inherently and by definition. If no physical determinism, then cause and effect ceases to exist. If no cause and effect, then nothing could ever be evidence for or against.

Once someone introduces magic, the discussion is over. They could never produce evidence for the magic, nor could you ever produce evidence against it. This should be everyone's first clue what a useless idea magic is.

 

[james bond]

No it didn't. The rate of moon's recession tells us it's thousands of years.

Moreover, you can't adequately explain 95% of the universe so my theory is better.

Yes. I can actually.

No you can't with a straight face. We all know much of what you write is baloney. You know it. I know it. We all know it. Some people just like to pontificate.

Admit it, you can make up any story, make it sound credible, and none of use could explain what the 95% is since no one knows. I can't think of his name right now, but I met an Asian theoretical physicist who can explain the 95%. It's that he can't nor anyone can state for certain what it is. He certainly makes it sound credible.

Yes. I can.

You didn't get it. The Asian theoretical physicist makes money explaining it and explains a complex subject in ways we can understand.. With you, we'd all be bored with a page of gobbledy gook that you love.

Then let me simplify it. 14 billion years ago, space and time were created from nothing. Since that time the laws of nature which existed before space and time predestined beings that know and create would arise according to the Creator.

At least, you put it into your own words. From what I learned of evolution, it was 13.7 billion years ago. Space and time were created from nothing violates SLOT. Anyway, this is the religion forum, so these fantasy things can happen to fit the evolution mythology. Notice, evolution always begins with something really important as a given. There are no detailed explanations how those things occurred. Then we have more of the same with laws of nature just happen to be existing before space and time. Don't they need space and time? Anyway, this is your personal myth so what else can I say?

Contrast this to God, a supernatural being beyond space and time created the world in seven days from a void. With it started space and time and light. He could be a being from the fourth dimension and satisfy this.

 

[ding]

A nice definition "god is the unknown".

Haha...poor little god gets tinier every day....

In your mind, not mine.

 

[ding]

Yes. I can actually.

No you can't with a straight face. We all know much of what you write is baloney. You know it. I know it. We all know it. Some people just like to pontificate.

Admit it, you can make up any story, make it sound credible, and none of use could explain what the 95% is since no one knows. I can't think of his name right now, but I met an Asian theoretical physicist who can explain the 95%. It's that he can't nor anyone can state for certain what it is. He certainly makes it sound credible.

Yes. I can.

You didn't get it. The Asian theoretical physicist makes money explaining it and explains a complex subject in ways we can understand.. With you, we'd all be bored with a page of gobbledy gook that you love.

Then let me simplify it. 14 billion years ago, space and time were created from nothing. Since that time the laws of nature which existed before space and time predestined beings that know and create would arise according to the Creator.

At least, you put it into your own words. From what I learned of evolution, it was 13.7 billion years ago. Space and time were created from nothing violates SLOT. Anyway, this is the religion forum, so these fantasy things can happen to fit the evolution mythology. Notice, evolution always begins with something really important as a given. There are no detailed explanations how those things occurred. Then we have more of the same with laws of nature just happen to be existing before space and time. Don't they need space and time? Anyway, this is your personal myth so what else can I say?

Contrast this to God, a supernatural being beyond space and time created the world in seven days from a void. With it started space and time and light. He could be a being from the fourth dimension and satisfy this.

I put everything in my own words.

evolution is anything which moved from a less advanced state to a more advanced state. Such as cosmic evolution, stellar evolution, chemical evolution, biological evolution and the evolution of consciousness.

Your understanding of the SLoT is flawed. It is the SLoT which tells us the universe has never existed forever. Not that it never had a beginning. Actually for you to believe otherwise must mean you don’t believe God created the universe. That the universe existed forever with God which is really odd. Or maybe you believe the universe is God which is even more odd.

It’s not my personal myth. It’s science and reason.

 

[james bond]

So-called supernatural creationism obviously cannot allow the Bibles to be thrown out because christian fundamentalism is the entirety of creationism. Nothing in nature depicts supernaturalism. Every discovery in science has had a natural explanation. As we've seen, you cannot identify a single instance of supernaturalism - something in the natural world that has supernatural underpinnings.

Why can't you address what I said instead of just going off on your immoralistic tirades?

 

[alang1216]

I reasoned that if there were one God there would be one religion and since there was not, God was either evil or didn't exist.

That certainly sounds like the logic of a twelve year old.

And the flaw in that logic is?

 

[ding]

I reasoned that if there were one God there would be one religion and since there was not, God was either evil or didn't exist.

That certainly sounds like the logic of a twelve year old.

And the flaw in that logic is?

That religion is not God. Religion is people’s perception of God. So there can be many perceptions without having any bearing on the existence of God.

 

[alang1216]

I just gave you the evidence.

Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

All your evidence points back to a single event, a doorway though which our universe came into existence. Nothing in it provides any evidence of what existed before. Maybe it was nothing, maybe it was something. I don't know, I don't believe science knows, and I'm certain you don't either.

 

[alang1216]

More like to validate your beliefs through confirmation bias.

Which is why you deny the science behind the creation of the universe but accept the science behind evolution.

I'm as biased as anyone I'm sure. I can see the science of evolution for myself. I don't see the science behind the creation of the universe.

So you can't understand for yourself that matter and energy cannot exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium? That seems like a really simple concept to understand.

What you say is true but only for a closed system. Do we live in a closed system? We don't know.

 

[ding]

I just gave you the evidence.

Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

All your evidence points back to a single event, a doorway though which our universe came into existence. Nothing in it provides any evidence of what existed before. Maybe it was nothing, maybe it was something. I don't know, I don't believe science knows, and I'm certain you don't either.

Apparently you don’t understand the role that the SLoT plays.

I find it odd that a guy who purportedly claims to be seeking the truth does nothing but argue against why he shouldn’t be examining the evidence.