My Favorite (to date) take down of Creationism.

[_LittleNipper]

And well possibly regard the following..... : https://lewayotte.com/2013/09/16/why-ar ... dishonest/

[_jo1952]

Peace to you also, Jo! I'm glad that you feel you are benefiting from this discussion! I know that I have benefited from it and what I have learned from several of the participants here. I hope you understand why I am so upset with what is clearly the dishonest and irrational claims of Young Earth Creationism, and especially their penchant for threatening hellfire and damnation for anyone who rejects them. I also feel sorry for those YEC's who are genuinely deceived into believing the narrow, limited world view presented by YEC. The actual reality of biological evolution and fantastic diversity and beauty made possible by it, and the awesome grandiosity of the universe that we observe is so much broader than that, much more interesting, and even more inspiring than the narrow YEC worldview in my honest opinion, whether or not there is actually a God or gods behind it all.

Though we disagree with many things, I am amazed and in wonder that even though we don't agree, we are able to appreciate each other anyway. This type of discussion also helps me to recognize that I do have ability to love others whose beliefs I have abandoned....something which wasn't easy when I first began to abandon religion. My emotions and entire life style had been wrapped up in what religion had taught me my entire life. It was hard not to confuse the anger I held against myself for being so easily deceived, with anger toward them. My anger toward others was misplaced....they were only teaching me what they thought was the truth...and they were following the same examples of teaching the same traditions they had been taught. It's nice to be able to present a very different belief and find some posters who don't attack me personally for believing something different. Instead, the belief itself is being questioned. Thanks go out to you and Huckleberry and Jersey Girl (and Ceeboo and more who have participated here and on other threads)...and others who have questioned the belief without resorting to personally attacking the believer.

To those who run this site...thank you for providing a venue where people who hold all types of beliefs can come and share. However, I am seriously reconsidering my penchant to still offer my opinions (which includes presenting my different beliefs) without having first been asked. Though I would love to be able to have friendly discussions about it, it can be misconstrued as an effort to try to convert others to my way of thinking. This is not my intent (at least I don't want it to be---adjusting to my new perspective has been no picnic). I don't think my beliefs are any better (or any worse) than others...they are just different. I think I still do it because if I had not been involved with apologetics in the first place while searching, I would not have gotten to the point of allowing myself to give up what I had been taught. I only got there because I was having discussions with hundreds of different people; and they presented many, many different beliefs. I suppose it is in my mind that others might get to that same point...so I share my story and my new paradigm perchance they come across it and they recognize similarities with their own journey. We all like to be able to find like-minded believers; it's human nature to do so.

[_Franktalk]

There is a problem with YEC and scientist. They both are looking at the trace evidence left behind by history and forming a story around their view of that evidence. In my opinion science is probably closer to the actual past than the YEC group. But I feel there is an actual history that may be vastly different than both camps. Myself I hold to a belief that the earth has expanded since it formed some 4.5 billion years ago. It is just a theory but one I feel matches the trace evidence way better than either current science or the YEC group.

Myself I always look to anomalies in data to find the real story. Like if you study the erosion of North America and the discharge to the sea you find that projections backward make little sense. It seems that this place would have eroded flat a long time ago. Even when you consider mountain building as currently understood. So something in our current models is wrong. But YEC does not fit because trace evidence goes way back even with erosion. But science does not show a dynamic North America with enough recycled material to keep the continent intact going back past a million years or so.

Bottom line is I pretty much reject both the YEC camp and current geology to explain the past. I do not know exactly what happened in the past but I know that it does match what we are taught in school.

[_The CCC]

The expanding earth construct was debunked long ago. Plate tectonics "fits" much better.

Along with erosion there is uplift.

[_Franktalk]

The expanding earth construct was debunked long ago. Plate tectonics "fits" much better.

Along with erosion there is uplift.

Not really. Plate tectonics works for a few places on the earth. But it is a working theory for most people. But in my opinion it falls apart in too many places. But if it makes you happy then I am happy for you.

Funny how you did not ask one question about why I hold this opinion. But that is the way of this world. You join a group and hold to their belief system. Ask no questions just believe.

I don't trust any group. And I know that what I hold as opinions may be far off. Actual truth and actually history may be way different than anything we have imagined so far. As a species we overreach all of the time. I am no different.

[_Res Ipsa]

<snip>

Myself I always look to anomalies in data to find the real story.

<snip>

This explains Franktalk's views completely and is the reason that arguing with him is pointless.

[_Franktalk]

<snip>

Myself I always look to anomalies in data to find the real story.

<snip>

This explains Franktalk's views completely and is the reason that arguing with him is pointless.

Whereas it seems you ignore anomalies in order to keep your current paradigm. I wonder of the two of us which one has an open mind willing to at least look at explanations outside of the orthodox position.

[_Res Ipsa]

Whereas it seems you ignore anomalies in order to keep your current paradigm. I wonder of the two of us which one has an open mind willing to at least look at explanations outside of the orthodox position.

No, I don't throw out anomalies at all. I just don't discount the data and claim that the "real story" is in the anomalies.

[_Franktalk]

No, I don't throw out anomalies at all. I just don't discount the data and claim that the "real story" is in the anomalies.

So you don't throw out anomalies, instead you toss anomalies. I see, I guess you explained your position to the point where I have nothing less to say.

[_spotlight]

There is no complete geological scale (as understood by evolutionists) found anywhere on the planet.

Not only is the whole column piled up in one place where one oil well can drill through it in North Dakota, the entire geologic column is found in 25 other basins around the world, piled up in proper order. These basins are: ...

Please view the following and ponder a bit more: http://creation.com/does-geologic-column-exist

From your link:

although there are places where lithologies referable to all ten of the Phanerozoic systems can actually be seen superposed...

And again from your link:

the number of different locations on earth with the ‘complete’ column is completely irrelevant.

The author you cite may consider it to be irrelevant but our exchange was on this specific point and you give me a reference supporting the validity of my position?? Am I missing something?