Cryoakira said:
I read you. And I wonder what you do about those millions of scientific proofs about - the age of our planet and the formation processus (a slow one) that are observe across univers. - the dinosaurs bones spread all across the planet. Are they all fake ? - the human bones that spead over a 2,4 millions years era, showing various shapes and form of our body across time. Are they all fake ? - The physical changes of humanity during a period as small as 1 century.
If being a creationist is about ignoring all these FACTS to choose some obscur theories made by a religion that is barely 2k years old, then don't expect me to call it "sane" or "intelligent". It's not. |
Um... when did I deny any of this?? I didn't even discuss this. For one, if there is a god and he is of infinite power and ability, he could create the universe with the appearance of age. Second, we don't know for a fact that all these formations you talk about HAVE to take such a long period of time. Large geophysical events (such as Mt St Helens) can create large formations in a very short period of time. Third, carbon dating is the general way dates are decided upon, but carbon dating is notoriously unreliable. The same substance can return results that are wildly different during different tests, the most likely dates are kept, and the unlikely ones are disregarded. Problem is, the scientists preconcieved ideas of how old an item should be make this method flawed.
How in the world do dinosaur bones disprove creation? That makes no sense at all. The book of Job in the Bible describes what appears to be a dinosaur, and medieval drawings of dragons, chinese drawings of dragons, etc give the possibility that some dinosaurs were around at the same time as humans. Why could God not have created dinosaurs?
The 'missing link' fossils are in no way conclusive. Most are very incomplete (a skull, a few bones, etc) and are recreated by anthropoligists' best guesses. A long extinct ape could easily be mistaken for a humanoid animal. Without DNA testing, it's not possible to tell for sure whether or not they are really 'missing links'. As far as the 2.4 million year thing, refer back to carbon dating. I'm not claiming that these fossils don't exist, just that they're not conclusive.
When did I ever deny physical changes to the human species, and why is it assumed that a created species could not undergo physical changes? I think the ability for a species to adapt shows the absolute brilliance of the creator and how he designed an adaptive genetic code for changes in living conditions.
What?? A religion that's only 2k years old? The creation story goes back to the Jewish religion (WAAY older than 2k years) and even back to one of the first known civilizations in the fertile crescent. They had 'The Epic of Gilgamesh' as their creation story. Check your facts.