Any young earth creationists out there?

  • Thread starter Thread starter semper_catholicus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yep. Evolution, HIV, global warming, even relativity. All these “conspiracies” are in his sack.
 
buffalo said:
More of this:
Peer-Reviewed Articles Supporting Intelligent Design | Center for Science and Culture
Click to expand...
Thats a bit vague, I’m afraid. I looked through the list looking for the word design, and the first paper with the word in was about the evolution, or not, of avian feathers and lungs. I have to say it is an excellent paper, and puts its case clearly and without exaggeration. The essence of the paper is that no satisfactory ‘precursors’ of pennaceous have been found, and they may be correct, although several newer papers have been published since then.
But if you wanted funding for “more of this”, you would presumably continue the search for precursors of pennaceous feathers, as indeed, are numerous evolutionists. and if you, or they, succeed, then instead of supporting the ID of such feathers, they would weaken it. I can’t feel that that is what you want.
buffalo said:
Artificial Intelligence + Origin of Life Prize, $5 Million USD
Click to expand...
Thank you. As I understand it, these people are offering millions of dollars to anybody who can reliably, repeatably, and presumably non-miraculously, produce biological abiogenesis. Are you sure that’s what you want?
 
“Gorgias said:
Wow. That’s a pretty interesting interpretation for the word “when” in Gen 1:1…!
Click to expand...

Sorry, I have no idea what you’re talking about - in my Bible, Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and earth” - it doesn’t contain a “when”. The first “when” I can find in is Genesis 2:4.
 
Last edited:
Well said. The irony is, their new ideas and theories can never be tested, so they are, in effect, just useless stories. But they are so deluded and proud as to insist that their empty talk is “science”. It’s a charlatan’s paradise.
 
buffalo said:
. “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution”. Science must divest itself from this way of thinking.
Click to expand...
It depends on what is meant by “Evolution”. If it refers to the theory that all life evolved from microbes, then NOTHING in biology depends on it. It’s as useless to science as a fairy tale.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
The non-overlapping magisteria is nonsense.
Click to expand...
The enemies of the Church succeeded in separating Church from State - now they want to separate the Church from science.

But God cannot be separated from His creation. For example, it is impossible to explain how something as ridiculously complex as a living cell could come into existence without resorting to a Divine Cause.
 
Last edited:
I agree. This site ought to devote its energies to figuring out how I can get my hands on a new Porsche 911 (a white one, please).
 
I challenge you name one practical use that has come from 150 years of believing that life evolved from microbes. Darwin’s “tree of life” is the Great White Elephant of science. Never has there been so much ado over something so useless.
 
Someone who believes that the earth and the universe were created between 6000-10,000 years ago.
 
Glark said:
But God cannot be separated from His creation.
Click to expand...
I love what you said here. It is completely true and a proof of that is Laminin. It is so awesome and it just shows that we as His creations cannot be separated from Him and He hold us together (physically and spiritualy.)

Here’s a video I loved that explained what Laminin is and why it’s so amazing (yes it is a protestant video but I’m catholic and completely loved it.)

 
Many Protestants pastors are doing very fine and admirable and holy work when it comes to presenting evidence of divine design in nature. They are way ahead of most Catholic clergy in this respect, who seem to be spiritually allergic to the concept of intelligence design.
 
Last edited:
Hugh_Farey said:
Biblical literalism demands that belief is paramount, and that where science and belief appear to conflict, it is the science that must be discarded.
Click to expand...
It is impossible to be Catholic and not put “biblical literalism” before science. Should a Catholic reject belief in the Resurrection because science doesn’t support it? Should a Catholic reject the dogma of the Virgin Birth because science says it’s impossible? What about the “biblical literalism” of Transubstantiation?
Poor things.
Click to expand...
Please pray for us! ( … although I can believe the moon is made of ice-cream and still make it to Heaven).

If we find out in Heaven that evolution is true, I will give you $1.35 (earth dollars).
 
Last edited:
This is definitely an interesting topic. I personally find that, the closer I draw to God, and the more I study the Bible, the more I’ve come to accept that the Bible is very literal in how it describes much of creation and the events that happen in Genesis. I also get more evidence supporting the fact that the Earth really is quite young.

One theory that I’ve found plausible is the hydroplate theory, which, at the very least, opens up the idea that the Earth before the cataclysmic extinction event (which even secular authorities acknowledge) was very different in its land mass and air content. That theory uses pure mechanics, and although it doesn’t seem completely correct, it opened my eyes up more to the idea that the Earth really is young. A Catholic woman with a PHD in physics is the one who suggested that theory to me.

Then there are the abundant Church revelations, both public and private, which consistently support Genesis’s account of creation. Also they support that the “Flood” was much more than a flood - it really was an Earth shaking event, and the flooding waters was just one of the side-effects (and the one that was key in wiping out all life).

One very interesting idea was that, before the flood, the rotation of the Earth was slower, so that there were exactly 360 days in a year (and a 30 day moon orbit), and after the cataclysm, the Earth was so changed that it spun faster, resulting in our odd 365ish days in a year. It would explain why every ancient culture had a 360 day calendar.

I think that most of humanity will look foolish on the day of judgment, for we will see how little we actually know about anything about this universe (which we admit is 95% dark matter, aka, matter we will never be able to interact with nor understand).
 
Glark said:
Sorry, I have no idea what you’re talking about - in my Bible, Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and earth” - it doesn’t contain a “when”.
Click to expand...
That makes it even worse!

You’re not taking a single adverb and building a non-Scriptural narrative out of it – you’re making eisegetical claims of your own design from scratch! 😮
Glark said:
The enemies of the Church succeeded in separating Church from State - now they want to separate the Church from science.
Click to expand...
Yes. Clearly, Augustine and Bellarmine were “enemies of the Church” who wished to tear away the Church’s authority… :roll_eyes:
Glark said:
I challenge you name one practical use that has come from 150 years of believing that life evolved from microbes. Never has there been so much ado over something so useless.
Click to expand...
Sadly, you’re in error here, too: Applications of evolution.
 
There is no functional application for evolution. There is no evolution guide book. Drug discovery is very expensive and evolution offers no guidance.
 
Gorgias said:
Sadly, you’re in error here, too: Applications of evolution.
Click to expand...
None of those are true applications of evolutionary theories that claim we arose from microbes. There is no scientific use for evolution other than as a standard by which other theories are assessed as to their validity. This is not a good thing. Those that are listed in the link have to do with the scientific evidence, which for the most part no one is arguing about. There are better ways to understand how it has all come together to bring about the individuality, multiplicity and diversity of living organisms. These stories about our creation are useful outside of science in helping us finding meaning to our existence and direction to our actions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top