Creationism vs. Evo...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Creationism vs. Evolution

151 Posts
23 Users
0 Reactions
5,219 Views
F807B5609Eae64257Bf4877652Ea49Fee40Ac2451C152C12Fa596Ffeda647157?S=80&D=Mm&R=G
Posts: 0
Guest
(@Anonymous)
Cabin Boy
Joined: 1 second ago

No, genius, it's based on the fact that if it's a billion light years away, it took that light a billion years to get here.

There is a difference between distance and age.

LOL, you seriously don't get how this works?  That what you see IS light? And light takes time to travel?

Reply
F807B5609Eae64257Bf4877652Ea49Fee40Ac2451C152C12Fa596Ffeda647157?S=80&D=Mm&R=G
Posts: 0
Guest
(@Anonymous)
Cabin Boy
Joined: 1 second ago

No, genius, it's based on the fact that if it's a billion light years away, it took that light a billion years to get here.

There is a difference between distance and age.

LOL, you seriously don't get how this works?  That what you see IS light? And light takes time to travel?

Still doesn't say how old the Earth is. I think you are missing the point being made. We don't know for 100% sure and probably never will. But once we are dead what good does it even do knowing that? No point in arguing over something that will probably never be 100% surely proven until it is. But by then obviously we know so there is no point in arguing about it. Which means these arguments are pointless as of now and forever will be until something is 100% proven.

Reply
F807B5609Eae64257Bf4877652Ea49Fee40Ac2451C152C12Fa596Ffeda647157?S=80&D=Mm&R=G
Posts: 0
Guest
(@Anonymous)
Cabin Boy
Joined: 1 second ago

So the point of your argument is that it's pointless to argue? Well I really feel **CENSORED**ing enlightened now.

Reply
F807B5609Eae64257Bf4877652Ea49Fee40Ac2451C152C12Fa596Ffeda647157?S=80&D=Mm&R=G
Posts: 0
Guest
(@Anonymous)
Cabin Boy
Joined: 1 second ago

No, genius, it's based on the fact that if it's a billion light years away, it took that light a billion years to get here.

There is a difference between distance and age.

LOL, you seriously don't get how this works?  That what you see IS light? And light takes time to travel?

Still doesn't say how old the Earth is. I think you are missing the point being made. We don't know for 100% sure and probably never will. But once we are dead what good does it even do knowing that? No point in arguing over something that will probably never be 100% surely proven until it is. But by then obviously we know so there is no point in arguing about it. Which means these arguments are pointless as of now and forever will be until something is 100% proven.

dude, I'm sorry but this type of view just exposes the extreme failure of our modern education system.Radiometric dating is a real thing.  You people have to get that through your heads.  It is not some fake construction of some propaganda machine; it is a real-world, world-wide accepted, peer reviewed, reproducible method for dating rocks on this planet.Its not some heretical practice that only yields once in a life-time results, this sh*t can be done by anybody on the planet, with the same method, and every result confirms the accuracy of such a methodWhere do you think they came up with the number 4.6 Billion years old???  "Ehhhh ya that's a good, old-sounding number" - sound like a man from the 21st century, or rather a man from the 1st century??  Who do you think is more likely making things up??How the F*ck can you possibly sit there at your COMPUTER, that is undoubtedly receiving WIRELESS INTERNET, and have that ignorant "pick and choose" attitude about which science you think is real or not??If you want to deny the validity of radiometric dating, and say that climatology is a farce, and go on further to say that the people who study things like the speed of light are wasting their time because they'll "never know 100%",then turn in your f*cking phone, turn in your f*cking computer, turn in your f*cking car, your lawn mower, your modern insulation to your house, your soap, your medicines, tear the roof off your housebecause all that sh*t came from science, and if you don't think science is real, then f*cking live like itand I'm saying this to all you willfully ignorant, bible-thumping, finger-in-the-ear jackasses that are the ones that stand in the way of OUR FUTURE getting a better education, doing things like teaching creationism and a 6,000 year old earth in the class room... f*cking travestyAND YA SOMEBODY PISSED IN MY CHEERIOS

Reply
F807B5609Eae64257Bf4877652Ea49Fee40Ac2451C152C12Fa596Ffeda647157?S=80&D=Mm&R=G
Posts: 0
Guest
(@Anonymous)
Cabin Boy
Joined: 1 second ago

No, genius, it's based on the fact that if it's a billion light years away, it took that light a billion years to get here.

There is a difference between distance and age.

LOL, you seriously don't get how this works?  That what you see IS light? And light takes time to travel?

Still doesn't say how old the Earth is. I think you are missing the point being made. We don't know for 100% sure and probably never will. But once we are dead what good does it even do knowing that? No point in arguing over something that will probably never be 100% surely proven until it is. But by then obviously we know so there is no point in arguing about it. Which means these arguments are pointless as of now and forever will be until something is 100% proven.

dude, I'm sorry but this type of view just exposes the extreme failure of our modern education system.Radiometric dating is a real thing.  You people have to get that through your heads.  It is not some fake construction of some propaganda machine; it is a real-world, world-wide accepted, peer reviewed, reproducible method for dating rocks on this planet.Its not some heretical practice that only yields once in a life-time results, this sh*t can be done by anybody on the planet, with the same method, and every result confirms the accuracy of such a methodWhere do you think they came up with the number 4.6 Billion years old???  "Ehhhh ya that's a good, old-sounding number" - sound like a man from the 21st century, or rather a man from the 1st century??  Who do you think is more likely making things up??How the F*ck can you possibly sit there at your COMPUTER, that is undoubtedly receiving WIRELESS INTERNET, and have that ignorant "pick and choose" attitude about which science you think is real or not??If you want to deny the validity of radiometric dating, and say that climatology is a farce, and go on further to say that the people who study things like the speed of light are wasting their time because they'll "never know 100%",then turn in your f*cking phone, turn in your f*cking computer, turn in your f*cking car, your lawn mower, your modern insulation to your house, your soap, your medicines, tear the roof off your housebecause all that sh*t came from science, and if you don't think science is real, then f*cking live like itand I'm saying this to all you willfully ignorant, bible-thumping, finger-in-the-ear jackasses that are the ones that stand in the way of OUR FUTURE getting a better education, doing things like teaching creationism and a 6,000 year old earth in the class room... f*cking travestyAND YA SOMEBODY PISSED IN MY CHEERIOS

Post-8766-Yeah-Science-Breaking-Bad-Gif-Og7N.gif

Reply
Page 9 / 31
Share: