[gondramB]

>>They wouldn’t have you anyway. They are far less tolerant of dissenting opinion than JR is. Here, they can support evolution. There, you can’t support creation.<<

Believing the first life was created doesn’t conflict with the evidence - rational scientists don’t argue otherwise. Its when someone claims that the earth is only 6,000 years old that people with science backgrounds tend to assume the person is not reasonable enough to bother with.

To clarify, the term “young earth creationist” is sometimes used.

[T'wit]

>> Its when someone claims that the earth is only 6,000 years old that people with science backgrounds tend to assume the person is not reasonable enough to bother with.

It is not widely known, but that dating was not done by the Bishop of Ussher. It was done by a scientist -- one who would be on anyone's list of the top twenty who ever lived, Johannes Kepler. Ussher merely redid and checked the calculation later, and arrived at a nearly identical figure (I think it differed by twelve years). If I recall, Kepler published his result in Mysterium Cosmographicum (1596).

The calculation was, of course, biblical exegesis, and we suppose we have better methods of dating now.