[dmz]

I can’t imagine that GGG would post a creationist article that disagrees with him on this incredibly important point.
<><><><><><><<>

GGG routinely posts articles in which explicit statements about an old earth are made.

They are also, at least in his eyes, critical of some element of evolutionary theory (do I have that about right, GGG?), so much so that, again in GGG’s eyes, they invalidate evolutionary theory, thereby contributing to the foundering and sinking of the HMS Darwin (to use GGG’s colorful language).

Add to that, the belief espoused by some (I think you have given this one the thumbs up, GGG) on the various crevo threads, that a multi billion year old universe and a 6000 year old earth owe their existence to the same creation event.

Therefore, any article critical of any element of evolutionary theory can be used, because with the notion of above, the age of the universe is no longer an obstacle.

I confess I’m not nearly smart enough (’cuz I’m an evo-atheist, Nazi communist Christ denying monkey lover - who kicks small dogs as I can have no moral underpinnings given my secular humanism) to grasp the idea behind the multi billion year old universe and the 6000 year old earth emanating from the same creation event.

[going hot]

(’cuz I’m an evo-atheist, Nazi communist Christ denying monkey lover - who kicks small dogs as I can have no moral underpinnings given my secular humanism

Hey, I resemble that remark...except need to add uncooth, void of civility, and of course, plain stupid.

[whattajoke]

Therefore, any article critical of any element of evolutionary theory can be used, because with the notion of above, the age of the universe is no longer an obstacle.

Yeah, I "understand" his point in doing that. But to me, it still makes no sense. To post articles which accept the true age of the Earth and the Universe requires such an enormous amount of cognitive dissonance. It disregards GGG's beliefs on geology, astronomy, biology, paleontology, so on and so forth. Only to hurl another vapid critique of evolutionary theory?

Then again, thinking more broadly, GGG is an HIV-AIDS denier as well. I've often wondered what one gains from HIV-AIDS denial... I think when one refuses to accept one major tenet of science (evolution), one therefore has free will to pick and choose which areas of science one chooses to accept. Denying evolution sort of "allows" GGG to deny HIV-AIDS and feel okay about it.

This same weird disconnect also allows one creationist here to believe that Saturn and Earth were nearby neighbors and gold will be created through z pinches and all his other nuttery. It allows other creationists here to be geocentrists and another to believe humans can regrow limbs through prayer.

Once you disconnect from reality in one realm, you are free to disconnect in others as it fits your paradigm. It goes without saying that religion often plays a part in this type of thinking, but that's a whole other discussion.

Interesting stuff.

[GodGunsGuts]

You’r part right. Biblical YECs for the most part merely point to Dr. Humphreys’ white hole cosmology that utilizes Einstein’s GR to show that it is possible to have a young earth, and distant stars that are millions or billions of years old, and yet both owe their existence to the exact same creation event. It has to do with gravitational time dilation, a bounded Universe with a center of mass, and our galaxy being at or near said center of mass. And, as it turns out, the cosmic evos are starting to admit (even if they are loath to admit it!), that it appears that we are at the center of something, such as a cosmic void, or even (Darwin forbid!) the center of the Universe. Of course, Dr. Humphreys has been writing books and papers making this very point for close to two decades.

As for posting ID articles, I disagree with (and try to avoid), ID articles that accept or push an old Earth. However, sometimes I will post an ID article or paper, even if it contains old Earth assumptions, if the paper has something profound to say about the argument from design, or otherwise falsifies some important aspect of materialist evolution.