Creationists going at it… again
Filed under: Rants
Fristly, I will write a report on Roots as soon as I can get it all ironed out… safe to say it was an amazing time yet again. anyway, I got home today and started sifting through my emails. In it is an email from my Brother-in-law, Billy. To cut a long story short… well it is lonely a short story really but anyway… he asked me to post this link, and I quote, “This should get them talking!” Well HERE is the link. I said to Billy in my reply that I’d post it up but with a few of my own comment attached. So here goes…
There are SO many holes in this person’s theory I have no idea where to begin. OK, basically the story is suggesting that the supposed (please note the many if’s, buts, etc in this) T-Rex bone contains flesh and un-fossilised material. Why is this going to be a problem for the “long age” (dumb name by the way) theory? The writer claims that because of these NEW facts and evidence that it should somehow bring down the theory of an old earth yet they continue saying, and I quote, “that facts alone will not readily overturn it”. Funny that scientific theory is based on facts and calculations and if something else appears you have to re-examine your theory (just look at current quantum theory process and how many times a year it has to be re-examined)… OK now admit many scientists can get just as dogmatic, just as stuck in the “I’m right you are wrong” mind set, as many creationists.
If you follow science, believer in God or not, you can see that this supposed discovery is an amazing one and is not have conclusions immediately made from it but rather studied with an open mind as to how it happened and what it could mean (you never know the particular circumstance that led this creatures death could have meant some of it became more preserved than normal) Rather than standing up, King James Bible in hand sticking their tongues out and making a raspberry at science. for really that’s all this article does, its childish, not well throughout and frankly lacking in discussion or facts… faith it has… as for fact well it has a few but none to back up their view.
Frankly I don’t agree with a lot of what this site (not just this page) says, especially that Dinosaurs and humans could live together, why if that’s the case have NO human bones EVER been found in the same level of the Dinosaurs, and why have NO current MAMMAL remains ever been found and only prehistoric versions? If they say that they haven’t been found yet, that poor eveidencing. If they say that they didn’t live at the same time, then when the bible doesn’t mention any pre-eden distrcutive events. If they say they did live beside humans and were wiped out during the flood, then where are the current day mammals… now if they were weren’t there and only came after wards that points towards evolution… sorry I’m really badly ranting now,
Look, I believe in an old earth, I believe in a universe which is billions upon billions of years old (evolution has its problems, and flaws but its at least a workable model to be used as a framework not a rule at the moment at least). I believe in the bible and I believe in Genesis (the first number of chapters anyway) as a poetic work inspired by God and given to Moses (or whoever wrote first 5 books- I forget) so they could understand where they came from. Many see this as a contradiction (some see me as not being a Christian - quite what the only thing that is required according to Jesus is faith in Him … anyway). I see no contradiction. I see, using the bible as my guide and science as an ally, evidence for an old earth created by such a generous God that he gave us all this universe in its complexity, its wonder, its ancient stars. He gave us it so we may study it and see His hands in the physics, in the chemistry, so we can see the beauty. Think of it as a father building a house (or fort) for their kid, some just build four walls, other lavish attention to the project building working doors, windows, small details which may be missed but yet when found show love from a loving father.
Anyway, ranting over. See ya laters. I’m off to use millions of year old gaseous by-products to cook my lamb 
But before I go a timely link from the BBC - LINK.
Peace.
May 4th, 2005 at 3:11 pm
Oh dearest Adam, love your Website by the way, but since you mentioned my name in your T. Rex rant above I simply must post a reply.
There is an ancient Scottish proverb – well actually there isn’t cos I just came up with it – which says “Those who stand on thin ice would be well advised to sit on an icepack (not an icepick) before jumping up and down in a heated rage.�
I had no idea you felt so emotional about the subject of creation/evolution – I hope it’s not indicative of insecurity. Till recently I (like you) took it for granted that all the scientists of the world couldn’t be wrong and that Darwin’s theory was founded on some pretty solid science. However, it would appear that it is not. And it would also appear that far fewer learned men accept it than may be supposed. It would also appear that – no matter how unpalatable - there is a considerable body of scientific evidence to suggest that the Earth itself is less than 20,000 years old and could not possibly be any older. I could go on, and on, but, well, appearances can be deceptive, as any but the firmest believer in evolution would admit.
I am not saying that any of the sides of the debate has all the answers, but the ‘Creationists’ are very far from being nothing more than a small, annoying sub-group of extremely irritating US-based Christian fundamentalist fanatics who have collectively donated their brains to the World Wildlife Fund, as your tone seems to suggest.
I suppose the main problem I have with the dogmatism of those who claim that the main body of scientific evidence supports evolutionary theory is that they will not admit that Darwinism – like Christianity - is basically a faith.
Sadly, no matter how many degrees we collect, intellectual pride is no substitute for wisdom. He who sits in the heavens laughs, but He also cries.
Love in Jesus,
Billy (your brother-in-law).
May 4th, 2005 at 4:22 pm
Yeah, I do tend to get a bit hot under the collar when I get into full ranting flow, but that is generally due to a number of factors…
1 - the security of being behind a keyboard not in face to face conversation, sometimes my online persona of Lurch Kimded is more me than Adam Howie is a lot of the time.
2 - I am my fathers son, and as such I believe what I believe and it takes a lot to change my view
3 - I have a extreme dislike for people assuming that I must believe one thing of another because of a label attached to me by society, I form my beliefs through the Spirit and study, I am not a bunch of performed pieces stuck together that say I MUST be like this because I am SUPPOSED to be, I am me, created, moulded, and developed through study, prayer, discussion, and thought.
4 - I tend to get passionate about things (and people) close to me, science is something I love and I see God in, so I tend to get protective of it. Don’t worry, this is “not indicative of insecurity”, rather the opposite, my confidence in what I believe burns within me fuelling my passion and convictions.
Anyway, I am not a fan of Darwinian evolution, there are a number of flaws in his theory and the theory which has evolved (no pun intended) from it. There is evidence both for and against the theory and at the moment I tend to go along with the principles of intelligent design (although I don’t agree with all their views either).
However, I have looked at the theory’s for a young earth and for an old earth and based on my study of it I still go for an old earth. I do however say it is up to the individual to look at the evidence presented by all parties and come to their own conclusions. I have yet to see evidence from the Young Earth camp that would persuade me away from the Old Earth side of looking at things.
Both theories are just that, theories, there is only being who knows the truth, and I think he does cry, mainly at the arguments, hatred, and distrust that spreads in Christianity over the Creation Story. I believe He is saying, “How Creation came to be is unimportant, just accept that I made it for you, how I made it is more wondrous than any theory you could ever dream, more beautiful than any man could write down on paper.”
When it comes down to it I feel that if people want to believe that the universe was created by God sneezing, that is their choice as long as we (who believe) accept the important facts that God was behind it then really the how of creation is by and large irrelevant in the grand schemes of things.
Anyway, I hope we can just agree to disagree on this one Billy… although if anyone else wants to chip in, feel free (just remember that I have to approve your first comment before it can appear).