[Aric2000]

Yes indeed, and ALL of them were from the 1800's before evolution was really understood and accepted.

Before Darwin ALL scientists were creationists, because that's all there was.

NOT literalists, but creationists, because there was NO scientific theory for the origins of the species, as Darwin wrote.

God created the heavens and the earth, was pretty much a given, it was HOW did he create the heavens and the earth that was question, and we have been answering it ever since.

Your problem with evolution, big bang etc, is that you feel that it takes god out of the equation.

Science CANNOT use god as a causation, because the natural laws do not apply to god, therefore to use god as a causation is pretty much destroying the whole point of the exercise.

Science started because someone asked, "how did god do this" and we have been going like gangbusters ever since.

You may not like it, it may make you uncomfortable, but the only reason it does is because you are a literalist, on the fringe of the christian religion.

A very high percentage of scientists are christians, they believe in god, but they know that science cannot use god as a causation, therefore they do not.

They separate their religious faith, from their scientific evidence and theories, but I assure you, ALL scientists look in awe at the universe and want to know how it works, that is why they are scientists. Some have their faith strengthened by doing what they do, and others are weakened, but ALL are fascinated with the world around them.

God cannot be used as acausation in science, you are just going to have to learn to live with that.

Religion is for god, science is for natural phenomona and trying to explain how he did it.

And you call us arrogant.

We don't write off 90% of scientific findings because it might hurt our worldview.

No, that is the ULTIMATE in arrogance, writing off 90% of science because it disagrees with your literal interpretation of the bible.

[Light Speed]

Great reply Aric..this penchant for "Absolutism"..when it is known..that construct forms for dating..and theory foundation are everything from innacurate..to stubborn Ostrich posturing against the obvious.
In one aspect..the "Electric Universe" model is upsetting all forms and norms flung upon us for the past decades.
The ..[accretion planet formation]...this and that is Billions of yrs old..is being overturned.

same for c-14 dating..here is a brief excerpt from a chat site.

Past, present and future together Consider then. Radiometric dating methods (those measuring geologic time by rate of radioactive decay) have been used to date formations that could be associated with Noah’s Flood. These dates supposedly prove these formations are millions of years old rather than thousands. Yet we find that different methods can yield radically different results. As The Science of Evolution explains: “Several methods have been devised for estimating the age of the earth and its layers of rocks. These methods rely heavily on the assumption of uniformitarianism, i.e., natural processes have proceeded at relatively constant rates throughout the earth’s history . . . It is obvious that radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be. Age estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often quite different (sometimes by hundreds of millions of years). There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological ‘clock’” (William Stansfield, 1977, pp. 80, 84). The potassium-argon [K-Ar] dating method, used to date lava flows, also has problems—as shown by studies of Mount St. Helens. “The conventional K-Ar dating method was applied to the 1986 dacite flow from the new lava dome at Mount St. Helens, Washington. Porphyritic dacite which solidified on the surface of the lava dome in 1986 gives a whole rock K-Ar ‘age’ of 0.35 + OR - 0.05 million years (Ma). Mineral concentrates from this same dacite give K-Ar ‘ages’ from 0.35 + OR - .06 Ma to 2.8 + OR - 0.6 Ma. These ‘ages’ are, of course, preposterous [since we know the rock formed recently]. The fundamental dating assumption (‘no radiogenic argon was present when the rock formed’) is questioned by these data. “Instead, data from this Mount St. Helens dacite argue that significant ‘excess argon’ was present when the lava solidified in 1986 . . . This study of Mount St. Helens dacite causes the more fundamental question to be asked—how accurate are K-Ar ‘ages’ from the many other phenocryst-containing lava flows worldwide?” (Stephen Austin, “Excess Argon within Mineral Concentrates from the New Dacite Lava Dome at Mount St. Helens Volcano,” Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, Vol. 10, No. 3, 1996, pp. 335-344). In layman’s terms, these volcanic rocks that we know were formed in 1986—less than 20 years ago—were “scientifically” dated to between 290,000 and 3.4 million years old! Such examples serve to illustrate the fallibility of the dating methods on which many modern scientists rely so heavily.

I beleive our perception of how things were formed is being undone by the Electric Universe model....our attempt to date our Earth is way off...so too our dating of Homonids.
Science however is right in its assay persuit...here the Churchy crowd should "Shut -up"!..their moronic claims are not even on par with the data..even if it is out vast time spans..the claims do not match the facts.

The Pure Hebrew of Genesis..or Beresheit..does not say 6 24 Hour days for Creation..nor does it say..1 day =1000 yrs.
This is the re-dactl B.S. of the Gnostic handlers post 200 A.D.

Science has found protocals at work whereby our DNA is re-written like a program..continuously to keep our form intact in a universe of corruptive eenrgy and chem realities...this strongly hints at Intelligent design.
Our Earth ..the Solar System...it may not be the accretion model..and 4.5 billion yrs..but it certainly is not some goofy claim of 6000 or less.

Dinosaurs..like "Staurikosaurus"...from the Triassic period...a Velociraptor...periods of time before the group was so named in the Cretaeceous.

Kinda throws conformity..evolution..to the wind.
Science is awesome...but Intelligent design remains.
constantly new models arrise to challenge the old..with the enevitable tantraums.
Both crowds...science and creation should just chill..they both are being undone by the new discoveries...
both groups looking the ASS right off.
better to just oogle and marvel at the wonder of it all...
carry another binder of looseleaf for all the data changes sure to come : )