A 6 Day Creation

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 961 here:

There is now more evidence than ever before about 6-day creation.

For debate:

Please offer evidence for a literal six day creation of the Universe.

Please remember that in this section of the site the Bible is not considered authoritative.

[dad1]

Putting the spiritual and creation squarely in the same bin as the non-existent or purely imaginary. Wishful thinking and faith are not pathways to the truth.

You can arrange your mind and beliefs any way you like. What you fail to do is support them here.

[brunumb]

You do realize that forces exist that work to cause this radioactivity?

Not sure about that. I am interested in hearing you tell us what these forces are and how they operate within the nucleus of an atom causing radioactive decay.

[JoeyKnothead]

Score that as one agin the claim presented in the OP.

There is no evidence for creation from science. There is no authoritative source other than the Bible for creation. Therefore when someone calls for evidence and bans the bible as possible evidence one is left in the dark with nothing at all. If you are happy with that, OK.

Nobody's banned the bible, cept to note it ain't considered authoritative.

That being said I will point out that science has no evidence that is against a 6 day creation by God!

Nor does it seem science can confirm any of it.

Sounds like a problem for the claimant.

[dad1]

Assumptions.

Reasoned educated and informed deduction actually.

Now all you need to do is demonstrate the truth of those unsupported claims.

Science knows the continents moved a lot. What it doesn't know is why and when. Fitting this known quantity into a bible timeframe does indicate that the move was after the flood year. Now you can say science disagrees, but what you can't do is support that here. Why? Because I will expose it as faith based, rather than science.

Science, on the other hand, has thoroughly debunked the biblical flood along with the absurd explanations put forward by creationists.

Sorry, that is less than an old wives tale.
Show us how science debunked the bible or creation?

There was no Noah and no flood

No? No Abraham either? Jacob? Moses? David? Keep us posted on where you draw the line.
.

[dad1]

Score that as one agin the claim presented in the OP.

There is no evidence for creation from science. There is no authoritative source other than the Bible for creation. Therefore when someone calls for evidence and bans the bible as possible evidence one is left in the dark with nothing at all. If you are happy with that, OK.

Nobody's banned the bible, cept to note it ain't considered authoritative.

That being said I will point out that science has no evidence that is against a 6 day creation by God!

Nor does it seem science can confirm any of it.

Sounds like a problem for the claimant.

The OP said that the bible is banned as any authoritative source or evidence. Those who cry because science cannot deny or confirm some things above their paygrade are not my problem.

[dad1]

Not sure about that. I am interested in hearing you tell us what these forces are and how they operate within the nucleus of an atom causing radioactive decay.

Why would I go off topic? The topic is not HOW things operate now. The issue is whether science knows that the forces and laws that make them operate as they do existed in the distant past on earth or not.

[brunumb]

I'm always struck how uniformitarianism, continuous processes are assumed by materialists ignoring the fact that there must have been a discontinuity at some point in the past when everything started to exist.

I'm always struck by the way everything is supposed to have begun with the appearance of having been around doing things for a very, very long time before. Billions of galaxies and trillions of stars all created at the same time in hugely different stages of development. Light already on its way to Earth so that it arrives with the appearance of having traveled for billions of years. Earthly landscapes with millions of years of wear and tear already built in. Isotopic abundances in various amounts that the creator imagined would be interesting or whatever. The list goes on and on. It's no wonder we get the old fall back excuse "God works in mysterious ways". The whole scenario makes absolutely no sense with God in the picture and there is no logical explanation for what we actually observe in the universe based on a creation even as described in the Bible.

[Diogenes]

[Replying to DrNoGods in post #261]
Matthew 7:6 comes to mind.
“Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."

[brunumb]

Putting the spiritual and creation squarely in the same bin as the non-existent or purely imaginary. Wishful thinking and faith are not pathways to the truth.

You can arrange your mind and beliefs any way you like. What you fail to do is support them here.

We can summarise your entire argument here with "'Tis not". That is all you have presented.

[brunumb]

Science knows the continents moved a lot. What it doesn't know is why and when.

On the contrary. If you study up a little on plate tectonics you might come to the realisation that the creationist version of it all happening in the framework of the biblical flood is impossible.