09 Jun 06
Originally posted by 7ate9There are a few ways.
6000 yr creationists
1. The time needed for the Earth's shape as we see it today isn't nearly as long as believed by mainstream science.
2. God created the Earth to seem older than it actually is, including continents which appear to have drifted over millions of years.
3. Tectonics is a myth.
4. "6,000 years" is not the same to us today as it is within the context of scripture.
-JC
09 Jun 06
Originally posted by ChurlantEr... you forgot the opposite of uniformitarianism -- catastophism and more specifically the global flood -- meteor impacts that could have accelerated continental drift to have occurred over a matter of days/months.
There are a few ways.
1. The time needed for the Earth's shape as we see it today isn't nearly as long as believed by mainstream science.
2. God created the Earth to seem older than it actually is, including continents which appear to have drifted over millions of years.
3. Tectonics is a myth.
4. "6,000 years" is not the same to us today as it is within the context of scripture.
-JC
09 Jun 06
Originally posted by 7ate94. You aren't paying attention. Review my previous comment on relative meanings of "6,000 years".
4. no good, not 6000 yrs.
3. science should prove this wrong with ease.
2. & 1. could have a little meaning.
3. Science that is wrong, obviously.
2. & 1. Have an answer. You didn't ask for something that makes sense to you alone, now did you?
-JC
09 Jun 06
Originally posted by 7ate9In that case you should have re-phrased your question. I understood your original inquiry to be a straight-forward request.
4. i'm not concerned about those people.
3. like i said science should prove this with ease, if it wanted.
1&2. you answered where i'm looking at, yes.
What you actually wish is to have someone explain young-Earth creationism in a way which makes sense to you, which we both know is not going to happen.
-JC