[fishtank]

ICR article image.

[PIF]

Only proves that the idea of Genisis preceeded that in the Christian Bible, nothing else.

[dmz]

Archaeology clearly confirms Genesis.

<><><><><

Disingenuous.

Archaeology confirms some of what is found in Genesis, but clearly not all of it.

[Ancesthntr]

Before I comment, I want to make it clear that I am a believer - I am Jewish and I believe in the account of the Creation in Genesis (though I also understand that some of it is allegory that cannot make much sense from a sheer textual analysis, or at least certainly not in any language other than Hebrew).

HOWEVER, I find the fact that an account of the Creation on a tablet dating back about 4,000 years to be interesting - and that is all. It is NOT proof of the creation, ONLY that some other culture believed the same as was in the Book of Genesis. A story or a tablet PROVES nothing by its mere existence - there needs to be a WHOLE lot more evidence to prove Genesis.

OTOH, DISproving Genesis is pretty much impossible. In fact, if you read “Genesis and the Big Bang” by Gerald Schroeder (a Torah-observant Jew and an astro-physicist), it will confirm that the order of the Creation in Genesis matches EXACTLY the order as science knows it today - and how would a bunch of guys, no matter how brilliant, be able to make that up over 3,000 years ago?

Again, there’s no doubt in my mind that Genesis is true, but this tablet is NOT proof thereof. Let’s not leave logic at the door just because we’re believers - remember that G-d gave our minds the capacity to THINK in a logical manner, so we do Him dishonor by not using what He gave us.

[mjp]

"Lord of heaven and earth: / The earth was not, you created it; / The light of day was not, you created it

The 2 most dangerous numbers in the Universe could signal the end of physics

If CERN is unable to discover any new particles in the next 2-3 years, science may be unable to explain why

1) the weight of the higgs boson
2) the strength of the higgs field
3) the strength of dark energy
4) the value of the cosmological constant

don't agree with the standard model or the multiverse model, which means that physics may not be able to explain the origin of the universe

[ctdonath2]

Alas, just looking up at night strains the viability of the “young Earth” theory.
I don’t think Genesis is wrong per se, just that it was the creation story as tellable to someone not having the understanding needed to make sense of it being told any other way.
You can’t say the Earth is 10,000 years old _and_ say that anything we see is more than 10,000 light years away. ...and there’s a lot up there that’s obviously more than 10,000 light years away.