Hello everyone on these forums.

I believe the world is 6,000 years old and evolution is a lie just like the bible and jesus says.

Here are my top 10 reasons why.

1. Galaxies wind themselves up too fast.

The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless disc of stars instead of its present spiral shape.1 Yet our galaxy is supposed to be at least 10 billion years old. Evolutionists call this “the winding-up dilemma,” which they have known about for fifty years. They have devised many theories to try to explain it, each one failing after a brief period of popularity. The same “winding-up” dilemma also applies to other galaxies. For the last few decades the favored attempt to resolve the puzzle has been a complex theory called “density waves.”1 The theory has conceptual problems, has to be arbitrarily and very finely tuned, and has been called into serious question by the Hubble Space Telescope’s discovery of very detailed spiral structure in the central hub of the “Whirlpool” galaxy, M51.2

2. Too few supernova remnants.
According to astronomical observations, galaxies like our own experience about one supernova (a violently-exploding star) every 25 years. The gas and dust remnants from such explosions (like the Crab Nebula) expand outward rapidly and should remain visible for over a million years. Yet the nearby parts of our galaxy in which we could observe such gas and dust shells contain only about 200 supernova remnants. That number is consistent with only about 7,000 years worth of supernovas.3

3. Not enough mud on the sea floor.
Each year, water and winds erode about 20 billion tons of dirt and rock from the continents and deposit it in the ocean. This material accumulates as loose sediment on the hard basaltic (lava-formed) rock of the ocean floor. The average depth of all the sediment in the whole ocean is less than 400 meters. The main way known to remove the sediment from the ocean floor is by plate tectonic subduction. That is, sea floor slides slowly (a few cm/year) beneath the continents, taking some sediment with it. According to secular scientific literature, that process presently removes only 1 billion tons per year.7 As far as anyone knows, the other 19 billion tons per year simply accumulate. At that rate, erosion would deposit the present mass of sediment in less than 12 million years. Yet according to evolutionary theory, erosion and plate subduction have been going on as long as the oceans have existed, an alleged three billion years. If that were so, the rates above imply that the oceans would be massively choked with sediment dozens of kilometers deep. An alternative (creationist) explanation is that erosion from the waters of the Genesis flood running off the continents deposited the present amount of sediment within a short time about 5,000 years ago.

4. Many strata are too tightly bent.
In many mountainous areas, strata thousands of feet thick are bent and folded into hairpin shapes. The conventional geologic time scale says these formations were deeply buried and solidified for hundreds of millions of years before they were bent. Yet the folding occurred without cracking, with radii so small that the entire formation had to be still wet and unsolidified when the bending occurred. This implies that the folding occurred less than thousands of years after deposition.

5. Too much helium in minerals.
Uranium and thorium generate helium atoms as they decay to lead. A study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research showed that such helium produced in zircon crystals in deep, hot Precambrian granitic rock has not had time to escape.25 Though the rocks contain 1.5 billion years worth of nuclear decay products, newly-measured rates of helium loss from zircon show that the helium has been leaking for only 6,000 (± 2000) years.26 This is not only evidence for the youth of the earth, but also for episodes of greatly accelerated decay rates of long half-life nuclei within thousands of years ago, compressing radioisotope timescales enormously.

6. the Law of Biogenesis (bye-oh-GEN-uh-sis).
This law says two things: (1) living things always come from living things; and (2) living things produce only more living things like themselves.
For example, to get a cow, you must first have a living thing. But, that living thing cannot be a horse, or a donkey, or a whale. It must be a cow. To get a rose, you must have a living rose. To get a dog, you must have a living dog. That is what the Law of Biogenesis says. And remember—there are no exceptions to this scientific law.
Evolution is against the Law of Biogenesis! Evolutionists tell us that living things came from nonliving matter. They also tell us that one kind of animal gave rise to a different kind of animal. Further, evolutionists tell us that this happened over and over again to produce all the millions of animals which have ever existed. But that would break the law!
The Law of Biogenesis is real, and accepted as true by all scientists. Evolution cannot be true, because it is against this law. To have a law there must be a law-giver. Who gave us the Law of Biogenesis? That Law-Giver could only be God.

7. The second law of thermodynamics tells us that a system will always go from ordered to disordered unless there is a plan or outside intelligence to organize it.
World-renowned evolutionist Isaac Asimov when discussing the second law of thermodynamics said:
"Another way of stating the second law then is: 'The universe is constantly getting more disorderly!'" Viewed that way we can see the second law all about us. We have to work hard to straighten a room, but left to itself it becomes a mess again very quickly and very easily. Even if we never enter it, it becomes dusty and musty. How difficult to maintain houses, and machinery, and our own bodies in perfect working order: how easy to let them deteriorate. In fact, all we have to do is nothing, and everything deteriorates, collapses, breaks down, wears out, all by itself - and that is what the second law is all about."
As Isaac Asimov says, everything becomes more disordered when left to itself. The theory of Evolution puts forward the idea that the atoms produced after the 'Big Bang' organized themselves without a plan and finally produced the human body after billions of years.
Some people argue that the earth is an open system therefore the Second Law of Thermodynanics does not apply. Simply pouring in energy (sunlight) into the earth does not override the Second Law of Thermodynanics. As shown in Isaac Asimov's quote above, the Second Law still applies on earth. Simply pouring energy into a system makes things more disordered!

8. There is no real evidence Evolution ever happened. IF you have some, give it to me.

9. You can't disprove nor prove that Evolution happened, so it isn't science!

10. There is no good evidence for an Old Earth. IF you have some, give it to me.


There. After reading those ten, I'm surprised anyone stills believes what the atheists just want you to believe.

God Bless!

Hahaha, this is going to get torn to pieces.

Not by me, I don't have the patience. But I'll read it when it happens.

Ladies and Gentlemen.....start your engines, and let the games begin! We're going for a ride!

I dont claim to know how old the earth is, and I know many here are just going to bash you, but I think these points are worth a deeper look.

Good post Now I am just interested in why you think these scientists have claimed that evolution occurs, what is the purpose of that? Why the conspiracy?

Cause there minds cant conceive that God exists, If I had to take a quess.

I hate dont like jesus freaks.

It isn't really scientists, just god-hating atheists who have monopolized the scientific media and science to censor all who speak out.


Yeah. Probably they don't want to believe in god, too.


If you look deeper in a lot of science, you see there is a lot of evidence for Jesus and God.

God bless!

You couldn't have just used the search function and plugged your points somewhere into the countless other threads debating evolution?

That is scary - how did they get into these positions of power? Was it deliberate and are they working for Satan?

Where's the scientific evidence for the reanimation of a corpse? If you're going to say since you can't prove or disprove evolution it's not science, it has to go both ways. You can't prove or disprove God.

It is a common courtesy to give credit to the creator of the material that you present here, as I have read this before I know this isnt your work, so it would be great if you could create a link to where you got the material from so that the original creator can get credit. Thank you.

Do you have any proof of Jesus or the bible being true?



There is more evidence of evolution than any god. Have any evidence of god hmm?


You cannot prove a god exists so why should we take your word for it??????



What's your evidence for a young earth? the bible? The bible is not evidence. I can say the harry potter books are real does it make it true? No it doesn't.



After reading your 10 I think that is a good thing we believe those evil atheists. This is a perfect example of a religious person who expects us to take what they believe as fact without giving any facts. Yet you ask us for facts. The point is this we don't know either way if a god exists could be or could not. With so many religions out there what makes Christianity the one true religion that we must take as fact. How do you know Zeus is not real? Or the flying spaghetti monster?

Proof of God:
http://www.allaboutcreation.org/scientific...-of-god-faq.htm


Yes.
The Bible is consistant with REAL science:
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

The Bible has many fullfulled prophesies:
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml


I gave mine wheres yours?


Proof Evolutionists are blind. Look, I just gave you good evidence for a young earth. That was the point of the post! You automatically assume that I'm using the bible! Please read my posts before responding.


Many of the argumets are from:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4005.asp

The atheists tend to be rich(it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then a camel to pass through the eye of a needle), and hence act smarter and get brainwashed completely at expensive liberal colleges.

The atheists tend to be rich, but the church is so much richer. Perhaps they should spread some wealth?

Oh my! You go, JF7! I can't wait for all the hater/debaters to swarm! As you can see, it doesn't take long! I really feel for them though. So many people still don't know we'll ALL meet this Jesus they pretend doesn't exist. Great post...I haven't heard it before.
GIN

We feel for you too, dear

Stars in a galaxy (including ours) rotate with the same velocity. You are simply making this up or have really bad sources. The spiral arm movement appearance is caused by density waves which move slower than the actual material rotating in the galactic disc. Imagine observing a traffic jam from above. All the cars are moving along the highway at a certain velocity, then a traffic jam erupts. You can see the traffic jam move independent of individual car position, which creates a moving wave like effect. The same thing happens with stars in rotation about a spiral galaxy.

Here is a nice video on youtube of a density wave happening with cars. Please watch it as its very short. Notice how the density wave (or shock wave as they call it in the video), MOVES SLOWER THAN THE CARS.

LINK
(I wish this website had an embed function!)




Ok, well all you have done is copy and paste this list HERE. Also failing to reference the original author. The little "3" at the end of this paragraph is the citation for the work of Keith Davies, a notoriously bad astronomer. But don't take my word for it, theres hundreds of websites explaining why he is wrong.

Interestingly enough even the "creationwiki" states this regarding the argument:


You can read a thorough debasing of the claim HERE

As a quick aside, somethings I would like you to seriously consider (though don't hurt yourself):
1. Supernova occur at the end of a star's life, meaning the millions of years.
2. We have observed second generation solar formation from Supernova, meaning millions of years.
3. We have witnessed supernova 50,000 light years away, meaning the minimum age the universe could be based on this is 50,000 year old.
4. The closest supernovas we have witnessed are more than 7,000 light years away.





The depth of ocean sediments is not a constant 400 meters. A great majority of sediment never actually makes it to the sea floor, some is lost to river deltas and some is deposited on continental shelves and slopes. Over thousands of years some of these slopes have accumulated kilometers of sediment!

My advice would be to not take the advice of someone who's "scientific models" read like a see spot run book...




Here you (or Humphreys if you prefer not to go down in his ship) show a terrible understanding of fluid dynamics. Because the strata were not cracked, they were bent slowly over time.

Glass for instance appears to be a solid, but over time it runs. The same thing happens with the strata layers that appear bent "too sharply". They need not have been "wet and unsolidified".





Allow me to point you to a radiometric expert:




LINK



Biological evolution does not state that "living things came from non-living things". Abiogenesis states that chemicals gave rise to self-replicating molecules with life like properties which evolution could act upon. Something need not be alive for evolution by natural selection to act on it. NS requires 4 qualifiers;

1. Differential survival of progeny
2. Mechanism of hereditary
3. Variation produced within progeny
4. Extinction to less fit collections of hereditary material

Furthermore, no where in evolution does it say "kind begets other than kind". If you think evolution states that cats will give birth to dogs, then you have a very poor understanding of evolution. And what the hell is a "kind" of animal? It seems this is a fallacious argument based upon taxonomic rankings. Sometimes you want to say "I want to see a dog give birth to a cat" in which case kind represents Linnaean families. Other times you want to say "Well its still an insect!" Which I guess kind can then be Linnaean class!

So can any of you creationists floating around please provide a consistent definition of "kind"?



Are you guys really using this still? 8th graders can provide a better definition of the second law of thermodynamics than this! Come on creationists try harder!


From Wiki, my emphasis.

You guys can figure out what that means, to be honest this is simple high school stuff here. If your not sure why "isolated system" is important please post here and I'll clarify more, or if you are uncomfortable posting, feel free to PM me.






This is a lot of garbage. HERE JF, start with this (an explanation of phylogenetics and why/how it supports evolutionary theory). If you can "debunk" that then we can move on to evidence for evolution number 2. By the way this is going to go into the thousands so it may take awhile!


Edited for my amazing, most masterful mastery of the English language!

Excellent post Copasetic!

Wow so I hate god now because I understand evolution? If that isn't one of the most ignorant, stereotypical and offensive comments I have ever read.....

Yea buddy, keep preaching that "good ol' hateful Christianity", I'm sure Christ would love to hear you now.....


Edit: You know, the more I think about what you wrote there, the more sorry I feel for you

My flowchart proving evolution

religion ------------> enlightenment--------->science------> evolution
|
|----------->ignorance-------->intolerance-------->Today's GOP


As you can see, there are clearly two branches that EVOLVED

Thanks!

As the Thread's author has been unmasked as a sock puppet account which has subsequently been suspended, I'm afraid they will be unable to reply to your responses, so I'm going to close this thread.

Tiggs
[Forum Mod Team]