Serious question for Creationists:?

Question

Enough "You're stupid" from both sides. I want an honest interpretation of this:

-We've found bacterial colonies that are over 3 billion years old.

- We've found simple organisms 2 billion years old

- We've found multi-cellular organisms 1 billion years old

- We've found simple animal life that is 600 million years old

- We've found land plants and fish that are 500 million years old

- We've found anphibians that are 350 million years old

- We've found reptiles that are 300 million years old

- We've found mammels that are 200 million years old

- We've found birds that are 150 million years old

- We've found ape-like species that are 5 million years old

- We've found ape-like w/ human features species that are 4 million years old

- We've found half ape/half human species that are 3 million years old

- We've found mostly human w/ some ape features that are 2 million years old...

HONESTLY - WHAT IS YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THIS EVIDENCE?

Add to that we see mutations happen before our eyes, and enough mutations = a new species.

I'm not even talking about Carbon dating...that's not how they date fossils this old!

Deputy - 1: Variety of techniques, most often Radiometric for the older fossils

2: Virus develop permanent resistences to medication to humans on average are almost 2 feet taller than 3000 years ago.

3: Really? Examining evidence isn't science???

I couldn't help but notice you dodged my entire question.

Amy R - I wish you made sense. What are you talking about!?!?!

Kenny - That's a funny study, because Carbon dating doesn't measure that far back.

Rob - At least that explanation makes sense. I may not agree, but it shows thought and possibility instead of pretending evolutionary evidence doesn't exist.

Answer 1

I don't exactly believe this is the correct interpretation, but it fully accounts for your agumentative points:

I'm a writer. When I create a character for a story, I don't imagine his initial conception, his childhood, his adolescence and all that jazz...when I create him, he is a 32 year old Doug....ready to be the dynamic protagonist in my story. Unfortunately, in order for Doug to have any sort of internal conflict(and thus become an interesting character), he needs a backstory.

Now just parallel that with creation theory. When God made the trees, he didn't necessarily just plant a bunch of seeds...he'd have created forrests with saplings as well as enormous redwoods....and so, given this interpretation, we can see that there needn't be any conflict between the Big Bang and Creation theory, as all the stuff which atheists tout as the dawn of existence could really just be the backstory for Creation.
While creation may have happened 10 thousand years ago, its backstory could extend many billions of years longer than that.


God is not within the province of provability(or disprovability).

-Rob

Answer 2

Let's stick with carbon dating for the moment. I know of instances where LIVING trees have been carbon dating to be 100,000's of thousands of years old ( this coming from a Science Journal that we used in school years ago) so I am guessing the other technics you are suggesting would be just as accurate.

Also, yes, there are mutations and changes WITHIN species due to enviromental factors. These changes are inspecies and do not constitute the beginning of a new species.

You arguements are flawed

Heck, even the best evolutionary scientist admit there are many flaws to that theory, the biggest being NO TRANSITIONAL fossils......

That speak volumes to me........

Answer 3

I'm definite there are tons of intelligent creationists, that being a situation. As a Christian, I consider such a lot in evolution, but nonetheless keep Genesis to be one hundred% True, simply no longer all reality.

Answer 4

I am a Christian Preacher, writer and Evangelist and my remarks concerning this are as follows.
I don't recall anyone ever stating that the Holy Bible was a recorded history of the world.
I also don't recall there being a sufficient time line in the Bible to establish any date as DAY ONE.
I don't deny the FACT that dinosaurs were in fact on this earth. I don't deny the FACT of cavemen. I don't deny the concept of evolution.
All man has to do to see evolution, in it's most basic form, is to look at himself and see how how has evolved over his lifetime.

Answer 5

The age of things by using a dating process known to work for a small period of time does not indicate scientific proof it works for long periods of time. Also things like pressure and heat have been shown to alter the results as when they studied things around Mt St Helen's. Then you must take into account that God created the earth in a working condition. Things may have "dated old" on the first day as He created them that way.

Answer 6

To those who wonder how these datings are possible: Uranium-lead isotope decay. C-14 cannot date anything older than about 50,000 years. U-Pb can date things older than the Earth (4.6 billion years).

To answer your question: I don't qualify as I'm not a Creationist.

Answer 7

This is easy to explain.
Try this one: Can you imagine a pair of Anacondas, Kangaroos, Bisons, Polar Bears, Jaguars, penguins, etc; playing on a a boat?

Answer 8

A creationist family buried thier cat. Five years later they dug that area up to put a garage or something and they found the cat where they buried it. They sent it off to the state university which told them it was a five million year old ancestor to the modern cat. Refer to Creation Research Institute ( more phds in geology and thelike than your average liberal arts college - they were sued by a lawsuit set up by Isaac Asimov and when the group found out how many Phdtheyactually had, theytried to back out. But ICR persued it and won!

People don't want creation to be true. It makes them accountable to God for thier behavior.

Answer 9

I would not bother. They will focus on C14 dating and are oblivious to all the other methods of dating through geological time.

Answer 10

They don't believe in carbon dating. It's against their religion.