| RockSmith372 said: the only way to truly argue is to know both sides of the argument. knowing just one side is useless. |
I know both sides. I examined the arguements for young earth creationism for a debate once and none of them seem logical or watertight. For example they say recorded human history started at ~4000BC and they see this as an arguement for for a young earth. But I'm sure man existed far before this and it is possible to see this from many of the relics left behind. Another arguement is people from history who claimed the earth was only a few generations old, but people back then did not have recorded lineage so how would they be able to even suggest this? Also the one about the speed of light and the decay of radioactive isotopes are always in their.
I mean none of these have enough evidence to back them up, but much more evidence exists to disprove them.
