Does anyone belive in the bible literally?

Originally posted by mikelom
Sometimes I feel like reading the yellow pages. Believe you me, the adverts are a lot more interesting than the numbers.

-m. 😉

Yes, I do that myself after looking at the pictures and drawings. 😀

Originally posted by RJHinds
I did not say you were already indoctrinated. I meant I wanted you to
read the Bible and determine what it says yourself before taking the
word of someone else who would indoctrinate you into a certain way
of thinking before you had a chance to make your own decision on
what it says. If you consider youself already indoctrinated then that
is too bad. ...[text shortened]... volution and still being a
good Christian, it would only be my opinion. Is that what you want?

You are still offensive. I can turn the word towards you and you will find it offensive (Thanks sonhouse for your correction of word). You think that I cannot think for myself, I think you are the one not being able to think for yourself.

This kind of retorics usually starts when the other one lacks arguments, then it's the time when insults begin.

I've tried to give you respect for your opinions, don't you think I want the same respect in return? Don't you like to answer my questions, then just say so. Or is this disrespect towards me just your way of telling me so?

Now, this conversation is over, unless you start giving me and others respect they deserve. I label you as any other creationist.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Isn't that what the Holy Bible says? In six days God created the heavens
and the earth and rested on the seventh day. (Exodus 20:11) The day of
rest for the people of Israel was and still is a 24 hour day.

of course. not bad for a bronze age book copying the knowledge of preceding civilizations. that information is just a few thousand years out of date. humanity discovered a few things since then.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
of course. not bad for a bronze age book copying the knowledge of preceding civilizations. that information is just a few thousand years out of date. humanity discovered a few things since then.

Humanity still needs to discover a few things to approach the knowledge
of the Holy Bible, IMO. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
Humanity still needs to discover a few things to approach the knowledge
of the Holy Bible, IMO. 😏

And you need to discover more than a few things to get your head out of your religious sand and learn reality, like the Earth is a lot more than 8000 odd years old. That has to be the dumbest idea yet to come out of biblical study, and how it has captured the so-called minds of its adherents.

Originally posted by sonhouse
And you need to discover more than a few things to get your head out of your religious sand and learn reality, like the Earth is a lot more than 8000 odd years old. That has to be the dumbest idea yet to come out of biblical study, and how it has captured the so-called minds of its adherents.

I think the dumbest thing I have ever heard is that some people believe
someone can date the age of the earth as 4.54 billion years of age. If
anyone halfway understands the present laws of Physics, they would
know that is impossible.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I think the dumbest thing I have ever heard is that some people believe
someone can date the age of the earth as 4.54 billion years of age. If
anyone halfway understands the present laws of Physics, they would
know that is impossible.

After you don't respect me anymore, and therefore I don't respect you anymore...

Since when does a creationists know science?
Which Law of Physics forbids Earth to be over 4 billion years of age?
Who indoctrinated you to believe there is such a Law?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
After you don't respect me anymore, and therefore I don't respect you anymore...

Since when does a creationists know science?
Which Law of Physics forbids Earth to be over 4 billion years of age?
Who indoctrinated you to believe there is such a Law?

Before I became a creationist I was in college studying to be an
Electrical Engineer and I had to take Physics for Students of Science
and Engineering and not this Mickey Mouse Physics that the general
majors take. Since you think you know so much can you give
just one, just one example of any law of Physics that supports this
idea that the earth is 4.54 billion years old?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Before I became a creationist I was in college studying to be an
Electrical Engineer and I had to take Physics for Students of Science
and Engineering and not this Mickey Mouse Physics that the general
majors take. Since you think you know so much can you give
just one, just one example of any law of Physics that supports this
idea that the earth is 4.54 billion years old?

Apparently you didn't finish the course, science does not work that way. You need to go back to the books old boy. The idea of the Earth being billions of years old does not stem from laws of physics, but EVIDENCE leading to solid conclusions.

For instance, we can see the bottom of the Atlantic ocean in the center is spreading apart, and we see for instance it is spreading apart at a rate of about 3 inches per year. When the upwelling magma freezes out, it retains a small magnetic field that shows a certain polarity.

That field allows measurements to be taken further away from the present rift and we can time with pretty good accuracy, that say, South America and Africa were closer together in the far past and we see exactly the same kinds of rocks in Brazil as in the place in Africa that bends inwards on their west coast.

This shows those two places were in fact tied together millions of years in the past.

That is establish 6 ways from sunday and the fact it does not agree with your fantasy about the age of the Earth is irrelevant. People with ideas like yours are bound for the dust heap of history, getting more and more irrelevant as time goes on, so enjoy your fantasies as long as you can, you will find yourself further and further isolated from the mainstream of humanity.

Your kind may find themselves living in a cave on the coast of Spain, the last of your breed like the end of the Neanderthals.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Before I became a creationist I was in college studying to be an
Electrical Engineer and I had to take Physics for Students of Science
and Engineering and not this Mickey Mouse Physics that the general
majors take. Since you think you know so much can you give
just one, just one example of any law of Physics that supports this
idea that the earth is 4.54 billion years old?

So instead of answering my question, thus showing you don't know zilch about the subject, you bounce back the question to me? How creationist of you.

By the way, how many weeks did you study science before you were thrown out of the school?

If you know science, you know the answer. If you don't, then you have much study to do.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
So instead of answering my question, thus showing you don't know zilch about the subject, you bounce back the question to me? How creationist of you.

By the way, how many weeks did you study science before you were thrown out of the school?

If you know science, you know the answer. If you don't, then you have much study to do.

From the Laws on Magnetism and Thermodynamics:

The Decay of the Earth's Magnetic Field as Evidence of a Young Earth

The known decay in the earth's magnetic field and the inexorable depletion
of its energy clearly point to an imminent and inevitable end of the earth's
magnetic field. A Department of Commerce publication lists evaluations of
the strength of the earth's dipole magnet (its main magnet) since Karl Gauss
made the first evaluation in the 1830's. It states that the rate of decrease
is about 5% per hundred years. It then states that if the decay continues
the magnetic field will "vanish in A.D. 3391."
(McDonald, Keith L. and Robert H. Gunst, An Analysis of the Earth's
Magnetic Field from 1835 to 1965, July 1967, Essa Technical Rept. IER 1. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,Table3, p. 15.)

This decay has some harmful environmental effects. The earth's magnetic field
extends into the space around the earth. This provides a protective shield
against cosmic rays and solar wind. The half-life of this decaying magnetic
field is 1400 years (meaning that every 1400 years its strength is cut in
half). The field strength is now only about one third as strong as it was at
the time of Christ. More harmful radiation is penetrating down to the surface
of the earth. This is an irreversible degradation of our environment.

Horace Lamb predicted this decay in an 1883 theoretical paper on the source
of the earth's magnetic field. Looking backward in time, in the light of his
theory and the present known decay rate, and assuming the maximum plausible
initial strength, puts an age limit on the earth's magnet of only a few
thousand years.
(Barnes, Thomas G., Origin and Destiny of the Earth's Magnetic Field,
Technical Monograph, Institute for Creation Research, 1973.)

Evolutionary geologists assume that there is some type of dynamo mechanism
sustaining the earth's magnet. No one has yet come up with an acceptable
theory for such a dynamo. That mechanism is supposed to be able to reverse
the direction of the earth's magnet. They assume that this magnet has not
been decaying continually but has reversed back and forth many times for
billions of years. They must hold to a long age or it is the death knell
for the whole theory of evolution. Reversal phenomena are "read" into the
magnetization of accessible rocks in the crust of the earth. The literature
shows real problems and some self-contradictions with those interpretations.
(Barnes, Thomas G., Depletion of the Earth's Magnetic Field, Impact No. 100
Institute for Creation Research, 1981.)

Originally posted by RJHinds
From the Laws on Magnetism and Thermodynamics:

The Decay of the Earth's Magnetic Field as Evidence of a Young Earth

The known decay in the earth's magnetic field and the inexorable depletion
of its energy clearly point to an imminent and inevitable end of the earth's
magnetic field. A Department of Commerce publication lists evaluations of
the stre Earth's Magnetic Field, Impact No. 100
Institute for Creation Research, 1981.)

This post is nothing but a spam bomb.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Horace Lamb predicted this decay in an 1883 theoretical paper on the source
of the earth's magnetic field.

And from then on no further progress has been achieved in this field? A paper from 1883? 😀 Sorry, I couldn't avoid to laugh!!!

Have you heard about radiological cronometries? Based upon the atomic theory. Do you deny the existance of atoms, sir creationist?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Apparently you didn't finish the course, science does not work that way. You need to go back to the books old boy. The idea of the Earth being billions of years old does not stem from laws of physics, but EVIDENCE leading to solid conclusions.

For instance, we can see the bottom of the Atlantic ocean in the center is spreading apart, and we see for inst ...[text shortened]... iving in a cave on the coast of Spain, the last of your breed like the end of the Neanderthals.

The Holy Bible says that the land was all gathered together in one place
in Genesis and then after the world-wide flood the land was divided. So
there was only one continent in the beginning, according to the Holy Bible
and your scientist are just discovering this truth. You ASSUME that the
the spreading apart has always been at the same rate. It is more logical
to believe the initial force that started the spreading was stronger at first
causing a more rapid spreading and then becoming weaker over time to
reach the present rate in accordance with the laws of Physics.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
And from then on no further progress has been achieved in this field? A paper from 1883? 😀 Sorry, I couldn't avoid to laugh!!!

Have you heard about radiological cronometries? Based upon the atomic theory. Do you deny the existance of atoms, sir creationist?

Another THEORY by evolutionists. Unbiased too, I bet!