Oolon Colluphid

Now now, you two (Principia and searchlight), let's play nice .

Principia, thanks for alerting us to some history of searchlight, but as it happens I don't know him / her from H heidelbergensis. So far, searchlight seems nice enough.

Searchlight: here's a question for you, arising from P's post: are you actually interested in our replies? Will you read them (please!)?

Cheers, Oolon

searchlight

Principia, what next? A background check?

After reading Thomas Paine's "The Age of Reason" pt. 1 and 2 online, I had to question holding Scripture as a reliable authority. That's why there may be some inconsistency in my earlier posts.

Principia, your reasoning doesn't make sense. There are totally different people at ARN, providing totally different answers.

Paine was a deist. He argued against Genesis, the scriptures, and Christianity. He made very good arguments. He also made very good arguments for a Creator as well as for design. Paine, Jefferson, and Franklin were all brilliant, and all deists. In short, I'm 17, I'm looking for answers. A person's world view really shapes their actions and beliefs. I just think it's really important.

sensate

No.

NearNihil Experience

"In short, I'm 17, I'm looking for answers. A person's world view really shapes their actions and beliefs. I just think it's really important."

Awsome. Most honest thing I've heard anyone say in awhile. Commendable too. Most folks your age could give a shit less about their world...history or present.

No good evidence for the YE, except maybe every rock dated 4004 BCE - present. But then there's all those other pesky rocks that seem much, much older...But they only seem that way cause that's the way God made it...too fool all those prideful enough to look for answers to worldly questions outside of church...and the Devil plants dinosaur bones to fool archeologists.

And don't ask about how old the layers in a core sample from a mountain could be and what they can tell us about prior states of the environment and global and local occurrences...just believe it will move for you if you have faith that God can and will do it for you.



Anyway, keep looking...even after you've found answers. If you think you know an answer to something keep looking...worse that can happen is you find a new answer and a clearer understanding of your questions...presto...self improvement.
Cause it is important.

SLD

For a good review of "evidence" for a young earth check this site out:

Evidence for a Young Earth (AIG)

Not that you should believe any of it, but as you are 17 years old, you should have plenty of time before college finding out what is wrong with each of these. It will definitely help your scientific and critical thinking skills. Have Fun.

SLD

lpetrich

Searchlight, I think that what you are asking for is what features of the Earth are more consistent with it being 6000 years old than 4.5 billion years old.

The trouble is that there is no such evidence to be found. Young-earth creationists have offered several arguments, but there are holes in all of them.

Judging from radioisotope dates, the Earth is at least 4 billion years old, with rocks being found to have ages scattered from then to the present.

However, meteorites have ages of about 4.55 billion years, and since these are clearly leftovers from the Solar System's formation, that means that the Earth has approximately the same age.

scigirl

Well then, I think the earth is young! Woo hoo vacation to Britain!

searchlight - I'm not sure why you are looking for evidence for a young earth here at infidels.org - a bunch of non-theists who accept scientific theories, and who have about as much use for scripture as we do pop-up ads. But I hope you find what you are looking for...

scigirl

Kosh

Let's keep their writings in perspective. Although Paine was clearly brilliant, as evidenced by his logical reasoning in AoR, he was operating on a comparatively limited amount of scientific information,particularly in the fields of geology, biology, and genetics.

Paines arguments against Xianity were based on simple logic. The things that are obviously wrong with that mythology from a consistency, common sense, and historical point of view. He didn't have the mountains of scientific evidence which would later prove quite contradictory to YEC, and therefore he was still searching for, and willing to concede to, the existance of some supernatural being as a causual model for the universe. Keep in mind, Paine lived in 1700s. Darwin didn't publish his evolutionary theories until almost 100 years later.

Had he been alive today, with that great mind, I'm sure he wouldn't have even called himself a deist.

ex-xian

This isn't relevent to the thread but, since after reading
may I suggest that you read The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan. This book has the most profound impact on my life of any that I have read.

Sagan deals with critical thinking, pseudo- and anti-science, and a myriad of other topics. He described the book as a description of his love affair with science. For a person seeking truths and answers, I can think of no other book to have as a guide.

cjack

Questioning Scripture as a reliable authority is a very, very good idea.



I'd also suggest that you visit the most obvious (and beautiful) evidence for an old Earth here in Arizona: The Grand Canyon.

The pictures just don't do justice to the firsthand experience. In fact, I had to see the thing twice before I "got it."

It is really quite difficult to imagine a "young" Earth while you're looking out from the South Rim.


Another good one is Waimea Canyon on Kauai, Hawaii.


Okay, I've got a canyon fixation...so sue me!