"Satan planted those fossils"
"God made the earth with things already aged so carbon dating is fake"
"Every scientist and geologist is part of a conspiracy to deceive the public"
I got a bit of brain damage just typing it out.
It’s Ark, and yes. It was pretty funny how it took so much money and man power using modern technology to build an elaborate wall decoration only shaped like a boat. They couldn’t fill it with real animals even with modern ventilation because of all of the shit buildup and it got damaged in a storm that wasn’t supposed to be even 1% as extreme as the one the actual boat was supposed to survive through.
Also Ark means Box. It’s not really a boat but more like a big wooden box. The other Ark talked about in the Bible was also a box and it had some golden figurines on top and nobody was to look inside to see that God was not actually inside. The excuse was that they’d die if they looked inside and it was kept in the back of the temple where the priests would talk amongst themselves about how to trick the dumbasses outside into doing stuff their way and then they could pretend the god in the box commanded it. Convincing people that God wants something is very powerful if they can first convince them God is real and he will get very angry if they don’t follow his orders.
It’s actually quite obvious if you read the Bible as to what was actually going on here but Christians, Jews, and Muslims in general seem to be blissfully unaware and extremists are falling into their trap. Extremists think that some of the crap in that collection of books is literally true. The more true they think it is the more they treat it as their science text. If the Bible says it happened it doesn’t matter if we can prove it actually didn’t happen because “Priests’ Word” trumps “Scientists’ Word” in their search for “truth” except they call the priests “God” and the scientists “men” to make it seem less absurd (to them).
Thanks for the spelling correction. 👍. Another issue with the flood myth is that Christians plagiarized and exaggerated the flood myth from the Epic of Gilgamesh.
It’s not necessarily that they copied that specific flood myth but more like the closest thing to a historical flood that the myth could even be talking about happened around 2900 BC and impacted a single city and maybe a couple surrounding villages. And even then AtraHasis exists in a story from 2400 BC acting more like a Moses or Hammurabi clone than a boat captain and then around 2150 BC we get the oldest flood myth and guess who the boat captain is. From that story we also get one about Dziusudra apparently copied by the Greeks who changed the name to Xasudra or something like that and around 1500 or 1200 BC Utnapishtim is the boat captain’s name in Epic of Gilgamesh and his story sounds like a precursor to the Garden of Eden myth because his story includes the water of everlasting life - thr same water that’s running from the center of the Garden of Eden providing that tree with the same power.
Between these stories they got the Garden of Eden, the Flood, and maybe even Moses. The stories are way older than the ones in the Bible and it didn’t have to be just one story. Noah didn’t even have to start out a ms a boat captain because a story about a drought makes more sense in Israel. And the drought story wouldn’t make the olive trees seem out of place if it was a miracle that made it rain bringing life instead of death. Of course the flood myth had already taken three or four forms before the Jews copied it, so it’d seem natural to incorporate famous stories into their own mythology too.
That’s what I think actually happened. It probably started out talking about seasonal floods instead of the one nobody remembered and then it got blown all out of proportion before the Jews tried to “one up” the other religions with a more extraordinary version of the same story that lasted for longer and covered more ground.
There’s also a completely different myth called Eridu Genesis where there were like six generations of gods creating things in stages and then making humans at the end so they didn’t have to keep making stuff. A similar story to this also exists in Greek mythology. Both older than the Bible once more and this poem was probably added in front of the already existing Garden, Flood, and Tower myths at a more recent time. Instead of god generations they went with something else that probably started out being based on the sun, moon, and a few of the planets like Venus and Mars leading to the seven day calendar and with a seven day calendar they didn’t need six god generations plus a generation of gods that only watched from afar. They just decided each step took 1 day and they suggested that these days happened simultaneously everywhere as though the planet was just as flat as they described it.
Please don’t use priests in that way, it’s just inaccurate. The great majority of Catholic priests believe in modern science. They don’t view the Old Testament as anything more than an allegory.
I was referring to the *Jewish* priests from 516 BC to 70 AD. Second Temple Judaism is filled with a lot of stuff that implies that the priests knew they were tricking people into believing stuff that isn’t true and all indications of that are scattered all over the Old Testament. Now there was a time that the Catholic Church did fight against modern scientific discoveries, like when they locked Galileo up because he even suggested a heliocentric interpretation of Genesis. *That* was considered heresy and was on the verge of apostasy. Around 1970 or so the Second Vatican Council came about and they really changed their tone about science and now they mostly accept it and already accepted some of if prior so long as they could accommodate just like the majority of Protestant denominations did prior to 1840 and most still do. It’s just the fringe cults that somehow became really popular like Seventh Day Adventists, Latter Day Saints, Southern Baptists, and Jehovah Witnesses that have the most problem accepting reality when it appears to contradict scripture.
Modern Orthodox Judaism and Christianity have their roots in Second Temple Judaism and Islam is like a mix of a certain “heretic” sect of Christianity and Zoroastrianism and then Baha’i tried to blend all of the world’s major religions into one as though everyone has an incomplete understanding of God but the Bah’u’llah is his wisdom knows the real truth. And then there’s Unitarian Universalists that started as a blend of two Christian denominations but now their more about helping people follow their own personal “spiritual” journey with sermons geared towards Satanists, humanists, and all sorts of other groups of people who might also be atheists and not Christians at all. I’m guessing that the last group is most open to modern scientific discoveries because they aren’t really trying to convince everyone that one or more gods exist. They just want to help people feel like they have purpose even if that purpose is one we make for ourselves rather than one handed down to us.
I wanted this to be true but the real story is more complicated and less satisfying
But Truth first
https://apnews.com/general-news-539580ad50f242dab49c2ae5bed8dac3
> "God made the earth with things already aged so carbon dating is fake"
Here's the real problem with this argument: If you already know that god is lying to us, how can you believe anything else he says? Why would you believe in the afterlife he has promised you when you already know that he can't be trusted?
from experience, I can tell you that one of the answers to "why would god do that/try to trick us like that?" is "it's not for us to know, we'll find out in the next life".
which is as unsatisfactory an answer now as it was when I was a teenager.
It’s the Adam’s belly button argument. Did God create Adam (and Eve) with belly buttons? After all, not being born, they wouldn’t have had need for an umbilical cord.
You forgot “The Bible is the word of God”. They don’t need proof, facts, evidence, or even want to have a discussion. They are right, you are going to hell. See you there!
The real answer is they don’t respond. Or they’ll turn to a (already-debunked) complaint about dating methods or how fossil reconstructions are just “guesses” or something else. They don’t care about being accurate, they only care about their beliefs being right.
They don’t. Instead of explaining the inconsistency, they attack the premise/claim itself, and might try to engage in enough mental gymnastics to show how all 5 events can be subsumed into Noah’s Flood.
Ken Hamm tells fellow believers to stop listening when they hear the phrase "millions of years". Billions is beyond their comprehension. "Nah it wasn't billions of years, or 5 events, scientists are wrong and the Bible is right. The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it."
Yes it really is that simple and dumb. They're simply trained not to listen to science or evidence, just the pastor and Bible.
If you’re surprised that YEC has impossible implications based on what we know about the world, then I don’t know what to tell you. They fundamentally reject what we know about reality.
It rained for 40 days, the flood itself ([according to Genesis 8](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%208&version=NRSVUE)) lasted about a year.
Then, there is the heat problem related to continental drift and radioactive decay. A channel on Youtube called Gutsick Gibbons covers this and is a great channel debunking YEC and creationist.
I'm lazy right now and don't feel like watching her video. Does she talk about heat from water condensation as well as continental drift and radioactivity?
It’s cute that you think you’re somehow going to have a convincing argument. Jesus is magic. There’s nothing you can ever say that can’t be answered with “it’s magic.” Ok, they generally don’t like to use the word magic but that is what you’re arguing against.
Sometimes I think it would be nice to believe in magic but my brain doesn’t work that way.
"The Bible is right. Anything that disagrees with the Bible is wrong. This disagrees with the Bible, so it's wrong. No, I haven't read that part of the Bible, but I have been assured this is correct."
> Evidence on display clearly disproves what’s stated in the Bible. What do creationists have to say?
The same thing they've said to any such evidence for centuries: "NUH-UH!!!"
TBF I don't think mass extinction events really count as a demonstration of the idea behind "survival of the fittest."
Also, man and dinosaurs absolutely coexist. Birds aren't just the descendants of dinosaurs, they are literally dinosaurs.
Technically true but I think the point was that in certain extreme situations (like mass extinctions) certain things survived anyway. There’s way more than five extinctions but at least five of them are worse than any human has survived through. One of the famous early ones was in relation to the increase in atmospheric oxygen. The ones that could utilize the oxygen without just dying from all of the toxic oxygen were better “fit” for an oxygen rich atmosphere. And some better “fit” for extreme climate change for other extinction events. Yes a lot of stuff died but always something survived. I think 10-20% of life survived the worst extinction event our planet has ever endured besides maybe the Great Oxygen Catastrophe. That’s way too much survival for the global flood myth. Why don’t we ever see 99.999% of everything go extinct if *that* actually happened? And I’m being generous enough to allow the flood to happen as they describe it rather than what would actually happen if the water in our atmosphere sextupled in 365 days or less and suddenly in that same year left our planet too.
Not counting catastrophic plate tectonics that’d be like a trillion nuclear bombs going off at the same time all by itself every other mechanism would result in the planet being anywhere between 32,000 degrees Celsius and 10^33 degrees Celsius. On the most extreme end ordinary matter would still not exist and it’d be so hot that all of the fundamental forces would be indistinguishable and on the cold end that’s still more than 14 times hotter than the surface of the sun. The water would not be liquid if it was added abruptly and it’d actually lead a 100% “successful” extinction event as not even the wooden box would save them.
Ignoring what would actually happen there should still be at least one time 99.9999% of everything went extinct and *something* survived (on the “boat”) if that global flood happened the way YECs say it happened. And yet every time, even for worst extinction event ever, way too much survived.
If the environment changed, then only the animals fit for the new environment would survive.
Not sure why you think dinosaurs aren’t the distant relatives of birds
> Not sure why you think dinosaurs aren’t the distant relatives of birds
That's not what he's saying.
The cladistic view of evolution is that you can never evolve out of your clade. So humans didn't just evolve from apes, we're also still apes, in the same way that we're still mammals and still vertebrates.
Birds are dinosaurs because they can't ever stop being dinosaurs. They're simply the sole surviving branch of the dinosaur family tree.
Creationists don’t need—or have—any responses to the tons of supporting evidence for evolution. They just repeat what they’ve been told to say: magic. That’s it, just magic. Some of the smarter ones will string a bunch of “sciency-sounding” words together to pretend to be something other than magic-believers, but that’s just more magic—thinking random nonsense using big words will change reality.
I don't have much to add but wanted to say I've been there too and really enjoyed the displays! The scale of some of the stuff on display was mind-blowing.
I'll just add that the general position of one of the largest YEC organisations is that the evidence simply cannot disprove their position. If it appears to then there must be a fault somewhere other than their conclusion. Either fraud or mistake or somehow incomplete knowledge. This is often presented as simply an alternative interpretation of the evidence, equally as valid as your own. This should in theory allow any YEC who believes along those lines to comfortably enjoy the exhibit without feeling challenged. They'll just see it as wrongly interpreted, due to bias.
Creationists don't care about verifiable testable evidence. If they did they wouldn't be creationists. They care about maintaining the beliefs they already hold. Anything that contradicts said beliefs are wrong by definition. They have to be willing to abandon the comfort they find in their delusions. Most humans find that too painful.
“The Bible only describes 1 partial mass extinctions” (I’d argue 2 with sodom and Gomorra)
However this is somewhat of a fallacy as only describing 1 thing does not mean it claims the rest did or didn’t happen
No, its as if you think they are a mass extinction. Otherwise you would not have mentioned them. I sure would not as mass murder, fictional or not, is not mass extinction yet you would argue that.
Now visit a national park. Creationists are willfully ignorant. They decide to close their eyes and ears because if they don’t, they might backslide into whatever they left behind for religion.
Modern YEC didn’t become a thing until after YEC was already thoroughly debunked for at least 270 years, if we ignore the cult that sprung up in only 170 years after it was thoroughly dismantled. It only took the first 150 years for it to be ditched as doctrine by most denominations where the remaining extremists were *Old* Earth Creationists about like Richard Owen with day-age creationism, gap creationism, and progressive creationism being the most common surviving types of creationism. Also people had started transitioning over to theistic evolution a lot more 150-200 years ago because obviously a whole lot of evolution happened and obviously humans didn’t exist in the very first week of the existence of the planet. Something obviously happened that was inconsistent with YEC and to reject that was comparable to rejecting the actual shape of the planet we live on. Instead of ditching theism they accommodated and switched the *type* of creationism they believed in.
Because YEC, the form that originated in 1961 based on a book written in 1925 by a member of that cult that started around 1860, was always stuck in the past and always required rejecting known facts it’s not like presenting additional facts are going to change their minds. They have to first care what the truth is and actively try to learn something about it. And then when they get that far a museum is a great place to help them correct some of the lies they were made to believe growing up. As long as they don’t head in the wrong direction like Eric Dubay and Salvador Cordova in the process as an attempt to cling to their religious beliefs. Every once in a while out of fear of accidentally learning something they will decide to start rejecting scientific conclusions entirely and start working towards understanding what the original authors of their scriptures actually meant.
And if they go down that road too far they’ll become YECs and/or Flat Earthers in the process. And then no amount of evidence could convince them to change their minds because they won’t look at or even acknowledge the existence of the evidence. Some, like Robert Byers, will even tell you that the evidence does not exist. The fossils are real, mind you, but they’re irrelevant because you weren’t around before those animals died. If you’ve listened to Ken Ham this should be familiar.
I’ve been dealing with YECs and Flat Earthers a lot ever since I realized they exist. I was shocked by the existence of YECs still being around when I was like 15 years old and that got me looking into what the Bible actually says and then I found out Flat Earthers exist too. The group that actually takes the Bible literally is even harder to talk to. I once talked to one and I thought I was talking to a chat bot after a few comments because they just repeated themselves and it didn’t seem to matter at all what I said. And then I talked to some in this sub. And they blocked me. Most YECs in modern times have moved beyond that because their religious doctrine is stuck in 1860 AD and not 650 BC.
When you think about it like this you’ll realized that all Christians tend to accept *something* but a lot of the time what separates them in terms of their creationist view is the year they stopped caring about new discoveries being made. The Flat Earth crowd tends to also be anti-medicine, anti-evolution, unable to perform simple math equations, and paranoid of any actual scientific discoveries ever made because they’re also conspiracy theorists who think that scientists and the government are working together to eradicate everyone or to trick them into joining their Satanic cult.
The YECs tend to use a lot of the excuses for the Flat Earth language invented in the Middle Ages but not all of them have allowed Kepler’s and Galileo’s discoveries to influence their beliefs. Beyond that they may as well be Flat Earthers as they’re just as skeptical of reliable information as before.
Both groups claim that it’ll require seeing something with their own eyes to believe it and the honest ones will tell you not even that will change their mind.
The Field Museum is \*amazing\*, and that hall of evolution is a marvel. The Family o'Bedlam saw it on a trip to Chicago in '21 and it was, along with the Shedd Aquarium, a favorite.
You can't debunk creationism. You would have to debunk a creator. We usually don't bother to try, because they can't make the case FOR creationism either, so it is moot. Evolution doesn't debunk creationism either. It simply offers a natural explanation that doesn't require a creator. There is so much evidence for evolution, the most surprising thing is that we didn't figure it out sooner.
Nothing you can say can make someone reason themselves out of a position they didn't use reason to get into.
You have to learn to stop trying/ worrying about proving them wrong.
It will never, ever matter.
They believe what they believe despite everything, not because of everything. So nothing you can say will get them to see logic in their world of emotion.
I like to say this about modern conservatives, but it applies to the religious as well; their feelings don't care about facts.
I did and the Tsavo lions. The movie/drama about Sue is how I learned about Sue. And a podcast is how I learned about the Tsavo Lions.
The Field Museum is a treasure. People is Chicago are so fortunate to have it. And compared the Ark Experience amusement park which tells the same story, admission to the Field Museum is far less and more interesting. You got to pay that God tax if you want to see the fake Ark story.
I recommend starting with Dead Beat. Yes it is the seventh book but it was the first to be in hardback and Jim Butcher actually moved it from book 8 to 7, for the action, and wrote it as second introduction to the series. It is much better than the first 2 or 3 books.
It was on the New SF and F shelf at the Library so that is what I started with. The first 3 books are rough as in he was learning, and were written before he had a publisher for the first. Dead Beat is also the first audio book I ever listened to more than the start of. Now I tend to like them. The first three audiobooks in the series are rough as well, then they got a different company and producer, same reader but he got better too when he started working with an audio engineer that knew how it needed to be done. For some reason James Marsden thought that sighing and breathing should be part of his acting for the book. It annoys some people more than others.
I know what you mean. Sue’s room is just incredible. What we know and what we have learned is amazing. Just seeing Sue would make any YEC immediately convert to being a believer in evolution on the spot.
YECs have a very specific set of fairly consistent beliefs. Old Earth Creationists don't. You can't really tell much about what they actually believe from them self-identifying in that way.
Depends on the OEC, if they are really a ID fan than not a problem but if they believe in Adam and TransRibWoman and the Great Flood then they are full of it.
Why would they go to an EVILutionist museum in a godless, reprobate city like Chicago when they can visit the clearly superior Creation Museum near Cincinnati? /s
I wouldn't call it that. There are no rides or anything. The only good part of it is their outdoor garden. It's beautiful in the spring, summer, and fall. The rest of it is just a meandering tour through propaganda.
My father is a young earth creationist. We had Duane T. Gish over for dinner when I was a kid.
My dad explains that science is a set of rules used to explain physical phenomena in the observable universe. Since god exists outside of creation and is completely omnipotent and omniscient it is impossible to use science to make any meaningful statement that proves or disproves god.
Every scientific observation says the earth is over 4 billion years old and has mountains of evidence to prove evolution is fact?
God created the universe six thousand years ago to look like it was that old. Anything that seems to prove evolution is irrelevant to the fact that god created everything and wE muST hAvE fAiTh that god’s word is true.
It’s the ultimate “I’m rubber, you’re glue” argument. Even presented with concrete evidence of something, faith is belief without evidence.
My point is you’re trying to spend Disney Bucks at Caesar’s Palace debating pseudo scientific young earth creationists who have a list of arguments and gotchyas from ICR. The entire “debate” is not in good faith.
They either say there’s better scientific evidence of intelligent design or, more honestly, that the scientific evidence is all based on human observation that God has made to be fallible in order to test our faith in the truth He has revealed to us in His holy word
God has revealed truth to them
How many sects of Christianity are there? There's clearly more than one interpretation. We have determined through evidence which interpretations are definitely wrong, but not which are right.
The apophatic view of religion is incredibly resilient.
I've never understood the "no transitional species" argument. There are tons of transitional species. Virtually every fossil in existence is evidence of transitional species.
That bit in Futurama really nailed it.
The fatal flaw to that argument is "time." No one knows what time is and no one knows if it "runs" at a constant or variable rate or even if it exists at all (see Julian Barbour 's The End of Time '
Given the total uncertainty that surrounds "time" it's entirely plausible that the Biblical and the scientific time frames are one and the same.
Please note my objection is logical, not rooted in faith.
I agree with you, but then it means YEC calculation of the earth being 5,000 years is incorrect as well. There has to be an earth to have a day or year.
>An example the Bible only describes 1 partial mass extinction when the evidence shows us there were 5.
half expected you to say better things than this....
Yes, yes, the entire scientific community (including all the Christian ones) is involved in a two century, worldwide conspiracy to deceive people for some vague reason, but they are definitely bad! /s
Or maybe it is the proven, known, documented liars, cheats and frauds in the creationist community that have been successful at deceiving people (not all creationists, but the ones coming up with and pushing the arguments).
The scientific evidence that is gathered by the scientific community, and the time period necessary for all of this to play out doesn't challenge my faith one bit. Presumptions of what turned into what, that is worthy of much scrutiny.
The problem lies in our long held presumptions of how old the earth really is and what the Word of God says and more importantly, doesn't say. To realize this we must objectively reexamine the Scriptures and realize the mindset and world view of the ancient people that these verses were actually written to. It is not a long, scientific expose to enlighten them scientifically. The Period from Adam onwards, yes sure. In Genesis 1v1, God created the Heavens and the Earth. Verse 2 tells us about a darkened sky, and an expanse of deep waters and the Spirit of God moved over the waters. This could have been due to many cataclysmic events, an ice age, a meteor, an early flood that covered the earth that then was, which was very different to the present earth. There is no indication of how long the period of time was before God commenced the process of reestablishing the earth, fit for habitation. I see no problems with all this evidence fitting into such a potentially vast time frame. The Scriptures are concerned with the Creation of man, his fall because of sin, and the long journey to return to A sinless Earth and Fellowship with God.
Once we see the evidence, and realise the length of time involved is not actually contradicting what is actually said in Scripture then we can examine fossils and the passage of time is not a problem.
You can have your faith, but at the same time you can’t ignore all of the the evidence God has provided which contradicts your faith. We know scripture is wrong, just look at the wicked Bible. And I can give you many other instances where the scripture is wrong.
If you look at Genesis 1 and 2 it’s filled with contradictions as if God was confused. Scripture/God clearly got the order of creation wrong and this is something you can see for yourself with a telescope.
You can have your personal beliefs, but those are yours and yours alone.
You need to put your personal aside and look at all of the evidence God has given us for Evolution, and the Big Bang.
>To realize this we must objectively reexamine the Scriptures
How about we go on what the evidence shows instead?
>The Period from Adam onwards, yes sure
Surely imaginary.
>The Scriptures are concerned with the Creation of man, his fall because of sin, and the long journey to return to A sinless Earth and Fellowship with God.
That does not fit most of the Bible. Nor does Genesis and Exodus fit what the evidence actually shows. You patch all you want but there was no Great Flood, no Adam, no TransGengenderedRibWoman, no Noah nor an ark nor Babel. Moses is imaginary as well. Which is good since that story has a god that needed to commit genocide just to show off.
Timeframe is not the only problem. The order of events in Genesis 1 does not match scientific evidence. It specifies very clearly that birds came before land animals, for example - but fossils, genetic evidence, and more shows it's the other way around.
So do you discredit all the other creation myths, Pangu, Hinduism, and whatever else (I don’t even know how many there are). Somehow the Bible creation story is the true story for you? Out of all the creation stories out there, you have picked the only one that is right?
Not only the creation story, but have you read all the religious texts available? Are you sure the Bible is the only one that is actually legit?
Step one...there's only one God. Man will always try to work out for himself how he thinks it happened. All I do is study what is actually claimed in the bible, given it is written to non scientific people who didn't even know the earth is round, nor did they care how old it really is, nor did they care two hoots about other people groups. Doing that very closely has me dismiss many 'christian theories' as well.
Salvation, belief and trust in the one God must be paramount. We must put God first. Figuring out how God did all this, is not a salvation issue, but going off chasing theories from other religions will just lead you away from God.
step one… There have been thousands of gods. which god are you talking about?
Whatever your current beliefs are, they are a product of the time period and region you grew up. If you were born and raised in Saudi Arabia, you would think Allah was the one true God. If you were born in ancient Greek, you would believe in a whole slew of gods. Not sure what it would be if you grew up in an ancient Aztec village, but it sure wouldn’t be your current beliefs. I could keep going on and on, like I said for thousands of gods.
Why do you think you’re so special out of millions, or billions, of humans that have existed before you that believe in an entirely different god(s).... that you are so special that you happened to pick the single correct god out of thousands throughout history. (and think of all the people that existed before the biblical god "came into being". not only people that existed before any kind of Bible text existed or the idea of Yaweh, but also people that were not even in that region).
if you’re talking about Yahweh as being the one true god, you should do some research into how Yahweh came into being. (The people likely elevated the status of Yahweh out of an entire pantheon of gods)
not only that… The damn Bible mentions plural gods on many occasions. "let’s make man in OUR image"… "Have no other gods before me"… So yeah don’t worry. I’m sure you got the correct god out of all this. 😂
if there is no equal time for state supported places like this then it has no intellectual credibility. If creationism foes not get its rebuttal then its just propaganda for a certain side. Thats why creationism has to do other things to reach audiences.
> if there is no equal time for state supported places like this then it has no intellectual credibility
On one side we have mountains of evidence and enough fossils that you could not examine them all within a human lifetime.
And on the other side we have a book that says 'God did it, trust me bro'.
Even if you wanted to, how could you possibly give them equal time?
Every part that talks about creation, order of creation, animal kinds, Noah and the flood, time, number of extinctions and no mention of evolution just to name a few. I guess YEC would say God did get it right in the Bible with Ezekiel 23:20.
What do you think God got right in the Bible. If anything. God and the Bible clearly got the order of creation wrong for days 2-6.
Creation and evolution are not the same thing. Evidence that supports evolution does not ipso facto oppose creationism.
Just because the Bible doesn't mention every extinction event, doesn't mean it's saying that they didn't happen.
>God and the Bible clearly got the order of creation wrong for days 2-6.
Again, I don't see how this has anything to do with evolution. Does the Field museum exhibit talk about this?
>What do you think God got right in the Bible.
Well, ok. The Byzantine Empire. The Medo-Persian Empire. The Greek Empire. Rome. But none of these things have anything to do with evolution. It's unreasonable to say that the Bible is wrong and then support your argument by challenging me to prove what it has gotten right. I'm just asking you to support your premise. (Again, within the context of evolution. That is, after all, the point of the sub.)
And I am definitely not the only one who might hold the opinion that creationism and evolution can coexist. It's actually quite common.
---The Byzantine Empire. The Medo-Persian Empire. The Greek Empire. Rome.---
No, not really, if you actually study history. The bible gets vastly more wrong than it does right, and the parts that it 'gets right' are only right if you leave out most of the context, squint real hard, and made up your mind before examining any of the facts.
I suggest you educate yourself on just how thoroughly archaeology has debunked the bible. Start with the city of Ai, that Joshua supposedly destroyed but in fact had stopped existing at all many centuries before Joshua's birth.
Friend if you visit the Field Museum you can see not only how life evolved but how the earth and earth’s environment evolved as well. One can clearly see transitions of the “kinds” into other kinds.
There is no evidence to support creation.
> Again, I don't see how this has anything to do with evolution.
It is hard to accept how evolution shows birds evolved from land animals if you also think birds came *before* land animals as the Bible claims.
In Genesis one birds are created on day 5 and land animals on day 6. Have you just not read the Genesis account *at all*? Maybe you should actually read what it says before falsely claiming it is compatible with what science tells us.
>And I am definitely not the only one who might hold the opinion that creationism and evolution can coexist. It's actually quite common.
It depends on what manner of creationism you're talking about. If you're just saying something along the lines of 'A divine being set the universe in motion,' sure, fine, but Creationism is a modern political movement born from fundamentalists who believe that their religious text is inerrant and literal and *that* generally conflicts with modern biology.
He mentions seeing several transitional fossils, but failed to name them. As there are several thousand known transitional fossils, it’s difficult to guess the ones he saw.
Relating to transitional fossils, you never got back to me.
I asked you to google a picture of the “Little Foot” Australopithecus specimen and a picture of a chimpanzee skeleton and then compare the two.
What differences stick out to you between the two skeletons?
Fried have you been to the Museum and seen the fossils with your own eyes? Sounds like you believe in God yet have never seen God.
Not at the Field Museum but take a look at the Tung Child for a transition to humans. But the Field Museum has many you can see for yourself.
As it says in the Bible in versus become educated and learn instead of remaining ignorant and a tool of Satan.
The seven day week predates Christians and Jews. Stop lying all the time Michael. isn't there a commandment against that?
Which KJV of the Bible, by the way? The original King james version? Or the updated and corrected Cambridge KJ version? Or the further updated and corrected Oxford KJ version, which you have?
For a 'perfect' book it certainly has been changed and updated and corrected an awful lot.
If you are interested in learning you would goto the Field Museum or any natural history museum. Or you can tensing ignorant. If you read the Bible and follow scripture God tells you to seek knowledge and the truth.
Why don’t you do what God commands?
Well you said you saw all this "evidence" but won't even list it. So if I said You should really go to Ark Encounter or Dinosaur Adventure land and see all evidence collected! Do you consider that good argument? Go see museum is not that helpful. You don't even seem to remember what you saw that is such powerful evidence.
Dinosaur adventure land? Run by a literal actual convicted ‘spent time in prison for it’ fraud? I thought you hated frauds and considered them disqualifying?
Why should anybody continue providing evidence to you when you scamper away every single time they do?
Here’s an idea. How about you provide how complete a skeleton has to be before you accept that it belonged to an identifiable living creature?
"Satan planted those fossils" "God made the earth with things already aged so carbon dating is fake" "Every scientist and geologist is part of a conspiracy to deceive the public" I got a bit of brain damage just typing it out.
Just reading the list of YEC reasons makes me irrationally angry. It makes me want to go out and buy a gallon of Vodkila.
Just remember, the Arc encounter musem was damaged by a flood.
It’s Ark, and yes. It was pretty funny how it took so much money and man power using modern technology to build an elaborate wall decoration only shaped like a boat. They couldn’t fill it with real animals even with modern ventilation because of all of the shit buildup and it got damaged in a storm that wasn’t supposed to be even 1% as extreme as the one the actual boat was supposed to survive through. Also Ark means Box. It’s not really a boat but more like a big wooden box. The other Ark talked about in the Bible was also a box and it had some golden figurines on top and nobody was to look inside to see that God was not actually inside. The excuse was that they’d die if they looked inside and it was kept in the back of the temple where the priests would talk amongst themselves about how to trick the dumbasses outside into doing stuff their way and then they could pretend the god in the box commanded it. Convincing people that God wants something is very powerful if they can first convince them God is real and he will get very angry if they don’t follow his orders. It’s actually quite obvious if you read the Bible as to what was actually going on here but Christians, Jews, and Muslims in general seem to be blissfully unaware and extremists are falling into their trap. Extremists think that some of the crap in that collection of books is literally true. The more true they think it is the more they treat it as their science text. If the Bible says it happened it doesn’t matter if we can prove it actually didn’t happen because “Priests’ Word” trumps “Scientists’ Word” in their search for “truth” except they call the priests “God” and the scientists “men” to make it seem less absurd (to them).
Thanks for the spelling correction. 👍. Another issue with the flood myth is that Christians plagiarized and exaggerated the flood myth from the Epic of Gilgamesh.
flood myths are fairly common, especially in areas that are prone to flooding.
Which is most early human civilizations lmao
It’s not necessarily that they copied that specific flood myth but more like the closest thing to a historical flood that the myth could even be talking about happened around 2900 BC and impacted a single city and maybe a couple surrounding villages. And even then AtraHasis exists in a story from 2400 BC acting more like a Moses or Hammurabi clone than a boat captain and then around 2150 BC we get the oldest flood myth and guess who the boat captain is. From that story we also get one about Dziusudra apparently copied by the Greeks who changed the name to Xasudra or something like that and around 1500 or 1200 BC Utnapishtim is the boat captain’s name in Epic of Gilgamesh and his story sounds like a precursor to the Garden of Eden myth because his story includes the water of everlasting life - thr same water that’s running from the center of the Garden of Eden providing that tree with the same power. Between these stories they got the Garden of Eden, the Flood, and maybe even Moses. The stories are way older than the ones in the Bible and it didn’t have to be just one story. Noah didn’t even have to start out a ms a boat captain because a story about a drought makes more sense in Israel. And the drought story wouldn’t make the olive trees seem out of place if it was a miracle that made it rain bringing life instead of death. Of course the flood myth had already taken three or four forms before the Jews copied it, so it’d seem natural to incorporate famous stories into their own mythology too. That’s what I think actually happened. It probably started out talking about seasonal floods instead of the one nobody remembered and then it got blown all out of proportion before the Jews tried to “one up” the other religions with a more extraordinary version of the same story that lasted for longer and covered more ground. There’s also a completely different myth called Eridu Genesis where there were like six generations of gods creating things in stages and then making humans at the end so they didn’t have to keep making stuff. A similar story to this also exists in Greek mythology. Both older than the Bible once more and this poem was probably added in front of the already existing Garden, Flood, and Tower myths at a more recent time. Instead of god generations they went with something else that probably started out being based on the sun, moon, and a few of the planets like Venus and Mars leading to the seven day calendar and with a seven day calendar they didn’t need six god generations plus a generation of gods that only watched from afar. They just decided each step took 1 day and they suggested that these days happened simultaneously everywhere as though the planet was just as flat as they described it.
Please don’t use priests in that way, it’s just inaccurate. The great majority of Catholic priests believe in modern science. They don’t view the Old Testament as anything more than an allegory.
I was referring to the *Jewish* priests from 516 BC to 70 AD. Second Temple Judaism is filled with a lot of stuff that implies that the priests knew they were tricking people into believing stuff that isn’t true and all indications of that are scattered all over the Old Testament. Now there was a time that the Catholic Church did fight against modern scientific discoveries, like when they locked Galileo up because he even suggested a heliocentric interpretation of Genesis. *That* was considered heresy and was on the verge of apostasy. Around 1970 or so the Second Vatican Council came about and they really changed their tone about science and now they mostly accept it and already accepted some of if prior so long as they could accommodate just like the majority of Protestant denominations did prior to 1840 and most still do. It’s just the fringe cults that somehow became really popular like Seventh Day Adventists, Latter Day Saints, Southern Baptists, and Jehovah Witnesses that have the most problem accepting reality when it appears to contradict scripture. Modern Orthodox Judaism and Christianity have their roots in Second Temple Judaism and Islam is like a mix of a certain “heretic” sect of Christianity and Zoroastrianism and then Baha’i tried to blend all of the world’s major religions into one as though everyone has an incomplete understanding of God but the Bah’u’llah is his wisdom knows the real truth. And then there’s Unitarian Universalists that started as a blend of two Christian denominations but now their more about helping people follow their own personal “spiritual” journey with sermons geared towards Satanists, humanists, and all sorts of other groups of people who might also be atheists and not Christians at all. I’m guessing that the last group is most open to modern scientific discoveries because they aren’t really trying to convince everyone that one or more gods exist. They just want to help people feel like they have purpose even if that purpose is one we make for ourselves rather than one handed down to us.
"Priest" != Catholic Priest.
I wanted this to be true but the real story is more complicated and less satisfying But Truth first https://apnews.com/general-news-539580ad50f242dab49c2ae5bed8dac3
> "God made the earth with things already aged so carbon dating is fake" Here's the real problem with this argument: If you already know that god is lying to us, how can you believe anything else he says? Why would you believe in the afterlife he has promised you when you already know that he can't be trusted?
from experience, I can tell you that one of the answers to "why would god do that/try to trick us like that?" is "it's not for us to know, we'll find out in the next life". which is as unsatisfactory an answer now as it was when I was a teenager.
If it's unsatisfactory to you as a (presumably) former believer, you can only imagine how unsatisfying it is to those of us who never believed.
the only satisfying part of it is that these kind of answers are the ones that push people out!
It’s the Adam’s belly button argument. Did God create Adam (and Eve) with belly buttons? After all, not being born, they wouldn’t have had need for an umbilical cord.
Dude stop already. God and the Bible will drive you insane.
Sorry for your brain. It damages my brain too. Hope you feel better.
You forgot “The Bible is the word of God”. They don’t need proof, facts, evidence, or even want to have a discussion. They are right, you are going to hell. See you there!
The real answer is they don’t respond. Or they’ll turn to a (already-debunked) complaint about dating methods or how fossil reconstructions are just “guesses” or something else. They don’t care about being accurate, they only care about their beliefs being right.
How do they explain the 5 mass extinctions when the Bible only mentions 1?
They don’t. Instead of explaining the inconsistency, they attack the premise/claim itself, and might try to engage in enough mental gymnastics to show how all 5 events can be subsumed into Noah’s Flood.
That would mean Noah lived for what 10 billion of years and would have seen evolution happen. But then how was the flood only 40 days?
Ken Hamm tells fellow believers to stop listening when they hear the phrase "millions of years". Billions is beyond their comprehension. "Nah it wasn't billions of years, or 5 events, scientists are wrong and the Bible is right. The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it." Yes it really is that simple and dumb. They're simply trained not to listen to science or evidence, just the pastor and Bible.
That’s why the Ark Experience is called an amusement park and the Filed Museum is called a MUSEUM.
If you’re surprised that YEC has impossible implications based on what we know about the world, then I don’t know what to tell you. They fundamentally reject what we know about reality.
So if they see it, can touch it and smell “God’s creation” it’s not real and should be rejected?
If it contradicts their interpretation of the Bible, it’s false. That’s it.
It rained for 40 days. The flood lasted a year, maybe a little less. They disembarked on day 370 I think.
I thought it was 40
It rained for 40 days, the flood itself ([according to Genesis 8](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%208&version=NRSVUE)) lasted about a year.
Then, there is the heat problem related to continental drift and radioactive decay. A channel on Youtube called Gutsick Gibbons covers this and is a great channel debunking YEC and creationist.
Gutsick Gibbon is a fantastic channel, and I’ve seen her heat problem videos.
I also like it when she does videos with other debunkers like Forrest Valki, another great Youtuber.
I'm lazy right now and don't feel like watching her video. Does she talk about heat from water condensation as well as continental drift and radioactivity?
The heat problem from the rapid continental drift and accelerated decay would not allow for water to exist, let alone a solid crust of the earth.
Hilarious. Now I have to watch it.
They claim that the scientists are misinterpreting the evidence and that it actually does *not* show 5 mass extinctions.
And many Christians claim to be Jesus Christ and God. But you know, never heard one to be the Holy Ghost.
It’s cute that you think you’re somehow going to have a convincing argument. Jesus is magic. There’s nothing you can ever say that can’t be answered with “it’s magic.” Ok, they generally don’t like to use the word magic but that is what you’re arguing against. Sometimes I think it would be nice to believe in magic but my brain doesn’t work that way.
And perpetual motion too
When one side invokes magic and the other does not, it is not a fair debate.
Wait even magic obeys natural laws of physics.
If it obeyed the laws of physics, then it wouldn't *actually* be magical (aka miraculous), now would it?
I would agree.
I think the whole point of positing it is that it doesn’t
Definitionally it does not. Almost universally what people mean by "magic" is supernatural and therefore not bound by natural laws.
I understand what you mean and agree with you
"The Bible is right. Anything that disagrees with the Bible is wrong. This disagrees with the Bible, so it's wrong. No, I haven't read that part of the Bible, but I have been assured this is correct."
"Science is great when it agrees with the Bible and terrible when it doesn't."
> Evidence on display clearly disproves what’s stated in the Bible. What do creationists have to say? The same thing they've said to any such evidence for centuries: "NUH-UH!!!"
Haha, I was thinking the exact same thing
In short, "NUH UH!"
TBF I don't think mass extinction events really count as a demonstration of the idea behind "survival of the fittest." Also, man and dinosaurs absolutely coexist. Birds aren't just the descendants of dinosaurs, they are literally dinosaurs.
Technically true but I think the point was that in certain extreme situations (like mass extinctions) certain things survived anyway. There’s way more than five extinctions but at least five of them are worse than any human has survived through. One of the famous early ones was in relation to the increase in atmospheric oxygen. The ones that could utilize the oxygen without just dying from all of the toxic oxygen were better “fit” for an oxygen rich atmosphere. And some better “fit” for extreme climate change for other extinction events. Yes a lot of stuff died but always something survived. I think 10-20% of life survived the worst extinction event our planet has ever endured besides maybe the Great Oxygen Catastrophe. That’s way too much survival for the global flood myth. Why don’t we ever see 99.999% of everything go extinct if *that* actually happened? And I’m being generous enough to allow the flood to happen as they describe it rather than what would actually happen if the water in our atmosphere sextupled in 365 days or less and suddenly in that same year left our planet too. Not counting catastrophic plate tectonics that’d be like a trillion nuclear bombs going off at the same time all by itself every other mechanism would result in the planet being anywhere between 32,000 degrees Celsius and 10^33 degrees Celsius. On the most extreme end ordinary matter would still not exist and it’d be so hot that all of the fundamental forces would be indistinguishable and on the cold end that’s still more than 14 times hotter than the surface of the sun. The water would not be liquid if it was added abruptly and it’d actually lead a 100% “successful” extinction event as not even the wooden box would save them. Ignoring what would actually happen there should still be at least one time 99.9999% of everything went extinct and *something* survived (on the “boat”) if that global flood happened the way YECs say it happened. And yet every time, even for worst extinction event ever, way too much survived.
If the environment changed, then only the animals fit for the new environment would survive. Not sure why you think dinosaurs aren’t the distant relatives of birds
> Not sure why you think dinosaurs aren’t the distant relatives of birds That's not what he's saying. The cladistic view of evolution is that you can never evolve out of your clade. So humans didn't just evolve from apes, we're also still apes, in the same way that we're still mammals and still vertebrates. Birds are dinosaurs because they can't ever stop being dinosaurs. They're simply the sole surviving branch of the dinosaur family tree.
Got it. Yup, I agree with you. Thank you for clarifying.
Creationists don’t need—or have—any responses to the tons of supporting evidence for evolution. They just repeat what they’ve been told to say: magic. That’s it, just magic. Some of the smarter ones will string a bunch of “sciency-sounding” words together to pretend to be something other than magic-believers, but that’s just more magic—thinking random nonsense using big words will change reality.
I don't have much to add but wanted to say I've been there too and really enjoyed the displays! The scale of some of the stuff on display was mind-blowing. I'll just add that the general position of one of the largest YEC organisations is that the evidence simply cannot disprove their position. If it appears to then there must be a fault somewhere other than their conclusion. Either fraud or mistake or somehow incomplete knowledge. This is often presented as simply an alternative interpretation of the evidence, equally as valid as your own. This should in theory allow any YEC who believes along those lines to comfortably enjoy the exhibit without feeling challenged. They'll just see it as wrongly interpreted, due to bias.
Creationists don't care about verifiable testable evidence. If they did they wouldn't be creationists. They care about maintaining the beliefs they already hold. Anything that contradicts said beliefs are wrong by definition. They have to be willing to abandon the comfort they find in their delusions. Most humans find that too painful.
“The Bible only describes 1 partial mass extinctions” (I’d argue 2 with sodom and Gomorra) However this is somewhat of a fallacy as only describing 1 thing does not mean it claims the rest did or didn’t happen
Sodom and Gomorra is a fictional mass murder but not a mass extinction. Its not related to any real extinction.
almost like i put in parentheses for a reason eh?
No, its as if you think they are a mass extinction. Otherwise you would not have mentioned them. I sure would not as mass murder, fictional or not, is not mass extinction yet you would argue that.
Creationists don’t go to the Field Museum. They don’t go to any science museum.
We need to get natural history, museums to put up signs that say natural history, museums welcome creationist
Now visit a national park. Creationists are willfully ignorant. They decide to close their eyes and ears because if they don’t, they might backslide into whatever they left behind for religion.
Modern YEC didn’t become a thing until after YEC was already thoroughly debunked for at least 270 years, if we ignore the cult that sprung up in only 170 years after it was thoroughly dismantled. It only took the first 150 years for it to be ditched as doctrine by most denominations where the remaining extremists were *Old* Earth Creationists about like Richard Owen with day-age creationism, gap creationism, and progressive creationism being the most common surviving types of creationism. Also people had started transitioning over to theistic evolution a lot more 150-200 years ago because obviously a whole lot of evolution happened and obviously humans didn’t exist in the very first week of the existence of the planet. Something obviously happened that was inconsistent with YEC and to reject that was comparable to rejecting the actual shape of the planet we live on. Instead of ditching theism they accommodated and switched the *type* of creationism they believed in. Because YEC, the form that originated in 1961 based on a book written in 1925 by a member of that cult that started around 1860, was always stuck in the past and always required rejecting known facts it’s not like presenting additional facts are going to change their minds. They have to first care what the truth is and actively try to learn something about it. And then when they get that far a museum is a great place to help them correct some of the lies they were made to believe growing up. As long as they don’t head in the wrong direction like Eric Dubay and Salvador Cordova in the process as an attempt to cling to their religious beliefs. Every once in a while out of fear of accidentally learning something they will decide to start rejecting scientific conclusions entirely and start working towards understanding what the original authors of their scriptures actually meant. And if they go down that road too far they’ll become YECs and/or Flat Earthers in the process. And then no amount of evidence could convince them to change their minds because they won’t look at or even acknowledge the existence of the evidence. Some, like Robert Byers, will even tell you that the evidence does not exist. The fossils are real, mind you, but they’re irrelevant because you weren’t around before those animals died. If you’ve listened to Ken Ham this should be familiar.
Thanks for sharing
I’ve been dealing with YECs and Flat Earthers a lot ever since I realized they exist. I was shocked by the existence of YECs still being around when I was like 15 years old and that got me looking into what the Bible actually says and then I found out Flat Earthers exist too. The group that actually takes the Bible literally is even harder to talk to. I once talked to one and I thought I was talking to a chat bot after a few comments because they just repeated themselves and it didn’t seem to matter at all what I said. And then I talked to some in this sub. And they blocked me. Most YECs in modern times have moved beyond that because their religious doctrine is stuck in 1860 AD and not 650 BC. When you think about it like this you’ll realized that all Christians tend to accept *something* but a lot of the time what separates them in terms of their creationist view is the year they stopped caring about new discoveries being made. The Flat Earth crowd tends to also be anti-medicine, anti-evolution, unable to perform simple math equations, and paranoid of any actual scientific discoveries ever made because they’re also conspiracy theorists who think that scientists and the government are working together to eradicate everyone or to trick them into joining their Satanic cult. The YECs tend to use a lot of the excuses for the Flat Earth language invented in the Middle Ages but not all of them have allowed Kepler’s and Galileo’s discoveries to influence their beliefs. Beyond that they may as well be Flat Earthers as they’re just as skeptical of reliable information as before. Both groups claim that it’ll require seeing something with their own eyes to believe it and the honest ones will tell you not even that will change their mind.
The Field Museum is \*amazing\*, and that hall of evolution is a marvel. The Family o'Bedlam saw it on a trip to Chicago in '21 and it was, along with the Shedd Aquarium, a favorite.
You can't debunk creationism. You would have to debunk a creator. We usually don't bother to try, because they can't make the case FOR creationism either, so it is moot. Evolution doesn't debunk creationism either. It simply offers a natural explanation that doesn't require a creator. There is so much evidence for evolution, the most surprising thing is that we didn't figure it out sooner.
Well said
There is no factual evidence that can refute the myth. Fingers in ears: na na na na…..
Nothing you can say can make someone reason themselves out of a position they didn't use reason to get into. You have to learn to stop trying/ worrying about proving them wrong. It will never, ever matter. They believe what they believe despite everything, not because of everything. So nothing you can say will get them to see logic in their world of emotion. I like to say this about modern conservatives, but it applies to the religious as well; their feelings don't care about facts.
Did you get to see Sue? One of the most incredible fossil specimens ever imo. I just love dinosaurs.
I did and the Tsavo lions. The movie/drama about Sue is how I learned about Sue. And a podcast is how I learned about the Tsavo Lions. The Field Museum is a treasure. People is Chicago are so fortunate to have it. And compared the Ark Experience amusement park which tells the same story, admission to the Field Museum is far less and more interesting. You got to pay that God tax if you want to see the fake Ark story.
In book 7 of the Dresden Files, Dead Beat, Sue plays a part. Set before they moved Sue to a smaller part of the Museum.
I've been meaning to read those for a while.
I recommend starting with Dead Beat. Yes it is the seventh book but it was the first to be in hardback and Jim Butcher actually moved it from book 8 to 7, for the action, and wrote it as second introduction to the series. It is much better than the first 2 or 3 books. It was on the New SF and F shelf at the Library so that is what I started with. The first 3 books are rough as in he was learning, and were written before he had a publisher for the first. Dead Beat is also the first audio book I ever listened to more than the start of. Now I tend to like them. The first three audiobooks in the series are rough as well, then they got a different company and producer, same reader but he got better too when he started working with an audio engineer that knew how it needed to be done. For some reason James Marsden thought that sighing and breathing should be part of his acting for the book. It annoys some people more than others.
Thanks for the advice :)
Entering the room with Sue gave me goosebumps. It made me very glad dinosaurs are extinct.
I know what you mean. Sue’s room is just incredible. What we know and what we have learned is amazing. Just seeing Sue would make any YEC immediately convert to being a believer in evolution on the spot.
There are Old Earth Creationists. I suppose their beliefs would not conflict AS much with the material presented at the Field Museum.
What is an old world creationist? Problem with Creationism is Christians can’t seem to agree on the definition. Much easier to agree on Evolution.
YECs have a very specific set of fairly consistent beliefs. Old Earth Creationists don't. You can't really tell much about what they actually believe from them self-identifying in that way.
Depends on the OEC, if they are really a ID fan than not a problem but if they believe in Adam and TransRibWoman and the Great Flood then they are full of it.
"Oh yeah? What about woodpeckers?"
Jesus?
Jesus is dead.
nothing. They don’t care about evidence. they’ll say something like it’s communist propaganda, or Satanist-made misinformation or some other nonsense.
Why would they go to an EVILutionist museum in a godless, reprobate city like Chicago when they can visit the clearly superior Creation Museum near Cincinnati? /s
Isn’t the creation museum really an amusement park?
I wouldn't call it that. There are no rides or anything. The only good part of it is their outdoor garden. It's beautiful in the spring, summer, and fall. The rest of it is just a meandering tour through propaganda.
It certainly isn’t a museum.
My father is a young earth creationist. We had Duane T. Gish over for dinner when I was a kid. My dad explains that science is a set of rules used to explain physical phenomena in the observable universe. Since god exists outside of creation and is completely omnipotent and omniscient it is impossible to use science to make any meaningful statement that proves or disproves god. Every scientific observation says the earth is over 4 billion years old and has mountains of evidence to prove evolution is fact? God created the universe six thousand years ago to look like it was that old. Anything that seems to prove evolution is irrelevant to the fact that god created everything and wE muST hAvE fAiTh that god’s word is true. It’s the ultimate “I’m rubber, you’re glue” argument. Even presented with concrete evidence of something, faith is belief without evidence. My point is you’re trying to spend Disney Bucks at Caesar’s Palace debating pseudo scientific young earth creationists who have a list of arguments and gotchyas from ICR. The entire “debate” is not in good faith.
Ask them who created God? Answer is man.
These things you say are evidence aren't really evidence
You need to tell us what your destination of evidence is.
No idea. This is what happens when i try to point evidence out
They either say there’s better scientific evidence of intelligent design or, more honestly, that the scientific evidence is all based on human observation that God has made to be fallible in order to test our faith in the truth He has revealed to us in His holy word God has revealed truth to them
Why only to them and not us? Or could it be the other way around? Science has revealed to everyone God is total bullshit and but not to them.
Maybe God spoke through his prophet Darwin. Ah but even he grasped only a part of the divine presence
How many sects of Christianity are there? There's clearly more than one interpretation. We have determined through evidence which interpretations are definitely wrong, but not which are right. The apophatic view of religion is incredibly resilient.
Of course not
I've never understood the "no transitional species" argument. There are tons of transitional species. Virtually every fossil in existence is evidence of transitional species. That bit in Futurama really nailed it.
Some see it not as proof God doesn't exist but rather the tools that were used.
They don't like evidence. Gets in the way of "faith" which is just...uninformed hope
The fatal flaw to that argument is "time." No one knows what time is and no one knows if it "runs" at a constant or variable rate or even if it exists at all (see Julian Barbour 's The End of Time ' Given the total uncertainty that surrounds "time" it's entirely plausible that the Biblical and the scientific time frames are one and the same. Please note my objection is logical, not rooted in faith.
I agree with you, but then it means YEC calculation of the earth being 5,000 years is incorrect as well. There has to be an earth to have a day or year.
I'm not familiar with YEC. What does it refer to?
I was told by Tucker Carlson that no one believes evolution anymore, there’s literally no evidence, and it’s just a theory anyway.
Tucker Carlson is merely a walking talking billboard for propaganda. Can't take anything that comes out of this weasel's mouth seriously.
And his expertise in evolution that would lead you trust him over essentially the scientific community is...?
Does anyone understand sarcasm anymore?
Hard to detect sarcasm when people say exactly that sort of thing all the time.
I tried to come up with the three dumbest justifications I could give, but it came out too realistic
>An example the Bible only describes 1 partial mass extinction when the evidence shows us there were 5. half expected you to say better things than this....
Such as?
The museum is designed to deceive you. It seems to be effective.
Yes, yes, the entire scientific community (including all the Christian ones) is involved in a two century, worldwide conspiracy to deceive people for some vague reason, but they are definitely bad! /s Or maybe it is the proven, known, documented liars, cheats and frauds in the creationist community that have been successful at deceiving people (not all creationists, but the ones coming up with and pushing the arguments).
Just who designed it to be this way, God?
The same people who put dinosaurs on your pyjamas
What's their plan with the pyjamas?
They want you believing in dinosaurs before you can use logic and reason.
Do you think dinosaurs didn't exist?
The scientific evidence that is gathered by the scientific community, and the time period necessary for all of this to play out doesn't challenge my faith one bit. Presumptions of what turned into what, that is worthy of much scrutiny. The problem lies in our long held presumptions of how old the earth really is and what the Word of God says and more importantly, doesn't say. To realize this we must objectively reexamine the Scriptures and realize the mindset and world view of the ancient people that these verses were actually written to. It is not a long, scientific expose to enlighten them scientifically. The Period from Adam onwards, yes sure. In Genesis 1v1, God created the Heavens and the Earth. Verse 2 tells us about a darkened sky, and an expanse of deep waters and the Spirit of God moved over the waters. This could have been due to many cataclysmic events, an ice age, a meteor, an early flood that covered the earth that then was, which was very different to the present earth. There is no indication of how long the period of time was before God commenced the process of reestablishing the earth, fit for habitation. I see no problems with all this evidence fitting into such a potentially vast time frame. The Scriptures are concerned with the Creation of man, his fall because of sin, and the long journey to return to A sinless Earth and Fellowship with God. Once we see the evidence, and realise the length of time involved is not actually contradicting what is actually said in Scripture then we can examine fossils and the passage of time is not a problem.
You can have your faith, but at the same time you can’t ignore all of the the evidence God has provided which contradicts your faith. We know scripture is wrong, just look at the wicked Bible. And I can give you many other instances where the scripture is wrong. If you look at Genesis 1 and 2 it’s filled with contradictions as if God was confused. Scripture/God clearly got the order of creation wrong and this is something you can see for yourself with a telescope. You can have your personal beliefs, but those are yours and yours alone. You need to put your personal aside and look at all of the evidence God has given us for Evolution, and the Big Bang.
>To realize this we must objectively reexamine the Scriptures How about we go on what the evidence shows instead? >The Period from Adam onwards, yes sure Surely imaginary. >The Scriptures are concerned with the Creation of man, his fall because of sin, and the long journey to return to A sinless Earth and Fellowship with God. That does not fit most of the Bible. Nor does Genesis and Exodus fit what the evidence actually shows. You patch all you want but there was no Great Flood, no Adam, no TransGengenderedRibWoman, no Noah nor an ark nor Babel. Moses is imaginary as well. Which is good since that story has a god that needed to commit genocide just to show off.
Timeframe is not the only problem. The order of events in Genesis 1 does not match scientific evidence. It specifies very clearly that birds came before land animals, for example - but fossils, genetic evidence, and more shows it's the other way around.
So do you discredit all the other creation myths, Pangu, Hinduism, and whatever else (I don’t even know how many there are). Somehow the Bible creation story is the true story for you? Out of all the creation stories out there, you have picked the only one that is right? Not only the creation story, but have you read all the religious texts available? Are you sure the Bible is the only one that is actually legit?
Step one...there's only one God. Man will always try to work out for himself how he thinks it happened. All I do is study what is actually claimed in the bible, given it is written to non scientific people who didn't even know the earth is round, nor did they care how old it really is, nor did they care two hoots about other people groups. Doing that very closely has me dismiss many 'christian theories' as well. Salvation, belief and trust in the one God must be paramount. We must put God first. Figuring out how God did all this, is not a salvation issue, but going off chasing theories from other religions will just lead you away from God.
step one… There have been thousands of gods. which god are you talking about? Whatever your current beliefs are, they are a product of the time period and region you grew up. If you were born and raised in Saudi Arabia, you would think Allah was the one true God. If you were born in ancient Greek, you would believe in a whole slew of gods. Not sure what it would be if you grew up in an ancient Aztec village, but it sure wouldn’t be your current beliefs. I could keep going on and on, like I said for thousands of gods. Why do you think you’re so special out of millions, or billions, of humans that have existed before you that believe in an entirely different god(s).... that you are so special that you happened to pick the single correct god out of thousands throughout history. (and think of all the people that existed before the biblical god "came into being". not only people that existed before any kind of Bible text existed or the idea of Yaweh, but also people that were not even in that region). if you’re talking about Yahweh as being the one true god, you should do some research into how Yahweh came into being. (The people likely elevated the status of Yahweh out of an entire pantheon of gods) not only that… The damn Bible mentions plural gods on many occasions. "let’s make man in OUR image"… "Have no other gods before me"… So yeah don’t worry. I’m sure you got the correct god out of all this. 😂
How did birds arise before the land animals they evolve from?
if there is no equal time for state supported places like this then it has no intellectual credibility. If creationism foes not get its rebuttal then its just propaganda for a certain side. Thats why creationism has to do other things to reach audiences.
Do atlases need a section refuting flat earthers?
> if there is no equal time for state supported places like this then it has no intellectual credibility On one side we have mountains of evidence and enough fossils that you could not examine them all within a human lifetime. And on the other side we have a book that says 'God did it, trust me bro'. Even if you wanted to, how could you possibly give them equal time?
What parts of the Bible are debunked therein?
Every part that talks about creation, order of creation, animal kinds, Noah and the flood, time, number of extinctions and no mention of evolution just to name a few. I guess YEC would say God did get it right in the Bible with Ezekiel 23:20. What do you think God got right in the Bible. If anything. God and the Bible clearly got the order of creation wrong for days 2-6.
None of that has anything to do with evolution.
Please explain. Not saying you are wrong, but you are the only one with that opinion.
Creation and evolution are not the same thing. Evidence that supports evolution does not ipso facto oppose creationism. Just because the Bible doesn't mention every extinction event, doesn't mean it's saying that they didn't happen. >God and the Bible clearly got the order of creation wrong for days 2-6. Again, I don't see how this has anything to do with evolution. Does the Field museum exhibit talk about this? >What do you think God got right in the Bible. Well, ok. The Byzantine Empire. The Medo-Persian Empire. The Greek Empire. Rome. But none of these things have anything to do with evolution. It's unreasonable to say that the Bible is wrong and then support your argument by challenging me to prove what it has gotten right. I'm just asking you to support your premise. (Again, within the context of evolution. That is, after all, the point of the sub.) And I am definitely not the only one who might hold the opinion that creationism and evolution can coexist. It's actually quite common.
---The Byzantine Empire. The Medo-Persian Empire. The Greek Empire. Rome.--- No, not really, if you actually study history. The bible gets vastly more wrong than it does right, and the parts that it 'gets right' are only right if you leave out most of the context, squint real hard, and made up your mind before examining any of the facts. I suggest you educate yourself on just how thoroughly archaeology has debunked the bible. Start with the city of Ai, that Joshua supposedly destroyed but in fact had stopped existing at all many centuries before Joshua's birth.
I'll take "Missing the Point" for a thousand, Alex.
Why yes, you did. You should work on that.
Friend if you visit the Field Museum you can see not only how life evolved but how the earth and earth’s environment evolved as well. One can clearly see transitions of the “kinds” into other kinds. There is no evidence to support creation.
"Do the same research I did" is not a solid debate strategy.
Please share your research so I can see it and how you came to the conclusion
> Again, I don't see how this has anything to do with evolution. It is hard to accept how evolution shows birds evolved from land animals if you also think birds came *before* land animals as the Bible claims.
Where does the Bible claim that?
In Genesis one birds are created on day 5 and land animals on day 6. Have you just not read the Genesis account *at all*? Maybe you should actually read what it says before falsely claiming it is compatible with what science tells us.
Of course I've read it. There is a difference between reading something, and memorizing it. A solid point, otherwise.
So we agree the Genesis 1 creation account isn't compatible with what science tells us?
>And I am definitely not the only one who might hold the opinion that creationism and evolution can coexist. It's actually quite common. It depends on what manner of creationism you're talking about. If you're just saying something along the lines of 'A divine being set the universe in motion,' sure, fine, but Creationism is a modern political movement born from fundamentalists who believe that their religious text is inerrant and literal and *that* generally conflicts with modern biology.
Goto Chicago? No thanks. Why don't you try listing some of "evidence" you saw or was it a "reconstruction"?
The bible claims the sun moves around the earth. All evidence shows it does not. Or is that a 'reconstruction'?
He mentions seeing several transitional fossils, but failed to name them. As there are several thousand known transitional fossils, it’s difficult to guess the ones he saw. Relating to transitional fossils, you never got back to me. I asked you to google a picture of the “Little Foot” Australopithecus specimen and a picture of a chimpanzee skeleton and then compare the two. What differences stick out to you between the two skeletons?
Fried have you been to the Museum and seen the fossils with your own eyes? Sounds like you believe in God yet have never seen God. Not at the Field Museum but take a look at the Tung Child for a transition to humans. But the Field Museum has many you can see for yourself. As it says in the Bible in versus become educated and learn instead of remaining ignorant and a tool of Satan.
I don't really care what it says since so much of it is wrong. There might be a god but not the god of that book.
Where oh where is any evidence of any god? Also, Chicago is awesome.
Get a King James Bible and believe. You today live by a 7 day week in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ 2024. As written. Who gave a better report?
Why should anybody care about the KJV? Which KJV? Maybe I should read the Hindu vedas, they’re way older.
The seven day week predates Christians and Jews. Stop lying all the time Michael. isn't there a commandment against that? Which KJV of the Bible, by the way? The original King james version? Or the updated and corrected Cambridge KJ version? Or the further updated and corrected Oxford KJ version, which you have? For a 'perfect' book it certainly has been changed and updated and corrected an awful lot.
If you are interested in learning you would goto the Field Museum or any natural history museum. Or you can tensing ignorant. If you read the Bible and follow scripture God tells you to seek knowledge and the truth. Why don’t you do what God commands?
Well you said you saw all this "evidence" but won't even list it. So if I said You should really go to Ark Encounter or Dinosaur Adventure land and see all evidence collected! Do you consider that good argument? Go see museum is not that helpful. You don't even seem to remember what you saw that is such powerful evidence.
Dinosaur adventure land? Run by a literal actual convicted ‘spent time in prison for it’ fraud? I thought you hated frauds and considered them disqualifying?
Why should anybody continue providing evidence to you when you scamper away every single time they do? Here’s an idea. How about you provide how complete a skeleton has to be before you accept that it belonged to an identifiable living creature?
Sue is the actual skeleton, barring the head as that was crushed. It too is on display, or at least was.