I watched two old BBC Horizon reruns last night about Atlantis. The first one focused on this 'scientist' that reminds me of Ken Ham. One of a very few actual scientists that forwarded a crackpot idea that 10,500 years ago Atlanteans went around the world and instilled some sort of memory of Atlantis. Fast forward 7-8,000 years and all these monuments pop up that are reminiscent of star constellations. He had an answer, however ridiculous, for any refutation of his claims.
Now why do I bring this up? Because accepted science is that carbon dating works. Next you'll be telling us that Einstein's theory which helps astronomers measure the explosion of stars and their distance from earth (and therefore distance in time) is somehow flawed because it shows we're picking up gamma rays from 13 billion years in the past. Nowhere in the Bible does it state the earth is 6,000 years old. Nowhere. And to continually argue a point that in no way should shape a person's faith is sort of ridiculous
I watched two old BBC Horizon reruns last night about Atlantis. The first one focused on this 'scientist' that reminds me of Ken Ham. One of a very few actual scientists that forwarded a crackpot idea that 10,500 years ago Atlanteans went around the world and instilled some sort of memory of Atlantis. Fast forward 7-8,000 years and all these monuments pop up that are reminiscent of star constellations. He had an answer, however ridiculous, for any refutation of his claims.
You want to talk about the frauds and liars in the evolution movement?
I asked for evidence, not more empty evolutinist rhetoric.
The most ridiculous scientific claim ever made is evolution, something came from nothing, life came from non-life.
How?
Well, you can't expect us to answer that, the evolutionist protests, we just know that it did because we think it did.
Now why do I bring this up? Because accepted science is that carbon dating works. Next you'll be telling us that Einstein's theory which helps astronomers measure the explosion of stars and their distance from earth (and therefore distance in time) is somehow flawed because it shows we're picking up gamma rays from 13 billion years in the past. Nowhere in the Bible does it state the earth is 6,000 years old. Nowhere. And to continually argue a point that in no way should shape a person's faith is sort of ridiculous
First, now you are shifting the argument to the star issue.
The issue of light can be addressed from the Creationist view.
Moreover, it is not a necessity that the Universe to be only 6,000 years old for the Creation account to be correct.
So, we are back to where we started, with Evolutionists making assertions they cannot prove, on an assumption that is based on utter nonsense, that something can come from nothing and life from non-life and then evolve into man.
All you guys have to do to show how idiotic your view is to say it straight forward, without all the scientific jargon and you know it sounds like the myth that it is.