Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 114

Thread: Why YEC can seem plausible

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. Top | #1
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    673
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,559
    Rep Power
    73

    Why YEC can seem plausible

    From my thread:
    https://talkfreethought.org/showthre...l=1#post754682

    ....I think it isn't clear which is the truth out of YEC, guided evolution and blind atheistic evolution. (and other belief systems)
    I also think it isn't clear if the Bible is 100% true, partly true or if there is no God/supernatural.....

    ....If this is a simulation then there doesn't have to be a consistent reality. There could be good reasons to believe any of those three main beliefs....
    I think world views can move between those three main options... e.g. like in the case of myself, people can go from YEC to atheism:

    An "old earth" tract:
    Evolution and Creation Science, The Bible Taught It First

    I am under the impression that the evidence for these three options is deliberately ambiguous and very intelligent people can believe in any of these options, including YEC. (chess champions could be considered to be intelligent)

    I am under the impression that when Genesis was written an intelligent force made it look like it would look like good evidence for YEC for modern people.

    e.g.
    - the talk of "kinds" - it allows micro-evolution but no large scale evolution

    - the global flood - an explanation for fossils without requiring millions of years

    - the 6 days of creation - it is plausible that the sun, moon and stars could have been created a day after plants, and birds being created before any land animals. (note there was already "light")

    - not requiring millions of years of death and suffering (it was "very good")

    - a plausible explanation (to YECs) for how the earth could recover from a global flood where 2 of each "kind" are taken on the ark

    - how the world could be repopulated so rapidly (tower of Babel story)

    - that a woman (XX) was created from a man (XY)

    - the idea that all animals were originally plant eaters (consistent with the idea of things being "very good")

    - 900+ year lifespans - they were initially free from mutations and perhaps a "flood canopy" explains why the ages started to decrease after the flood

    - possible mention of dinosaurs (e.g. the behemoth) and the possibility of "dragons"

    There is no need to give counter-arguments for these things - I am already aware of that. And creationists have counter-counter-arguments for just about everything... even regarding the main reason I gave up on YEC, the Green River Formation.

    I'm interested in the other ways that the YEC beliefs seem plausible to modern readers.

    P.S. About flat earthers - often they use the Bible as evidence - and I think according to the Bible the earth seems to be flat, not a globe. This shows that the Bible isn't 100% literally true though otherwise it can seem to be to YECs.

  2. Top | #2
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Port Clinton, Ohio
    Posts
    2,570
    Archived
    591
    Total Posts
    3,161
    Rep Power
    63
    My opinion -- in the most general terms, so fire away at me, I don't care -- is that YEC, if true (i.e, the earth is, oh, six to ten thousand years old) would overturn biology, geology, astronomy, and physics. Bye-bye, science. Biology and geology for pretty obvious reasons. Astronomy because of the calculations of the ages of stars, galaxies, and our planet; physics because key findings in physics are dependent on those calculations from astronomy. But by all means, why not posit the reliability of a book with talking animals and striped sticks leading to animals with striped hides. Yeehaw. Only (or mostly) in America. Brought to you by Liberty University and the Republican National Committee.

  3. Top | #3
    Elder Contributor Keith&Co.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Far Western Mass
    Posts
    18,319
    Archived
    24,500
    Total Posts
    42,819
    Rep Power
    80
    That doesn't seem to indicate why YEC is plausible. Seems more like the start of a list of things we're really fucking wrong about in order for YEC to be right.

    And by the time you finish that list, you pretty much have to stamp everything ever decided by the scientific method as 'SUSPECT AT BEST' even if it's producing results...

  4. Top | #4
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    6,087
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    11,126
    Rep Power
    78
    Lots of things were plausible to me in the past. Flying reindeer and Santa were 100% plausible. That the Harlem Globetrotters were the best basketball team in the world was 100% plausible. That professional wrestling was an actual contest and not a staged event was 100% plausible. There were, of course, far more people around for which these things were 100% implausible. Miracles were 100% plausible.

    Now I'm in the implausibility camp because I've been able to acquire more information about the actual universe. That additional information, weighed against the old information I possessed is what made the difference. I suppose that if my brain changed in some way those old plausibles would become plausible again. Of course, all that would have changed is my brain, not the rest of the universe.

  5. Top | #5
    Veteran Member Lion IRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,995
    Rep Power
    19
    The young earth creationist has to invoke more miracles than the old earth creationist.
    But both views are still more plausible than the non-theistic alternative.

  6. Top | #6
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Port Clinton, Ohio
    Posts
    2,570
    Archived
    591
    Total Posts
    3,161
    Rep Power
    63
    Right, because if something could've always existed, what makes more sense for that something to be: matter in a state of perpetual mutation or a three-part deity with super powers who impregnated his own mommy?

  7. Top | #7
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    673
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,559
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith&Co. View Post
    That doesn't seem to indicate why YEC is plausible.
    I meant it can seem to be plausible to black and white thinkers who trust the YEC speaker/book/website - it can involve them using quotes from evolutionists and even atheists that seem to support YEC (or at least criticise evolution). And as to "why", I think it is part of a test of the intelligences behind our simulation to test whether people think in a black and white possibly psychotic way (in support of genocide, etc) or whether people might risk the threat of hell and use their own reasoning.

    Seems more like the start of a list of things we're really fucking wrong about in order for YEC to be right.
    Based on logical fallacies, etc, they can seem to be true.

    And by the time you finish that list, you pretty much have to stamp everything ever decided by the scientific method as 'SUSPECT AT BEST' even if it's producing results...
    Definitely...

    1 Corinthians 3:18-19
    "If any of you think you are wise by the standards of this age, you should become "fools" so that you may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight"




  8. Top | #8
    Senior Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    673
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    5,559
    Rep Power
    73
    About Christian flat earthers:

    1 Corinthians has many verses that talk about God's wisdom vs human/worldly wisdom....
    https://www.biblegateway.com/quickse...egin=53&end=53

    Christian flat earthers would believe that the verses that suggest a flat earth are God's wisdom. Arguments against a flat earth rely on human wisdom rather than Bible verses.

    I find it interesting that people in modern times with space travel can disagree about such a seemingly obvious thing (according to worldly wisdom) - it is a test of faith...

    I don't think there being so many verses about God's vs worldly wisdom is an accident...

    This test is related to people's primary purpose in life... (their relationship with God, etc) and about whether there is actually a huge conspiracy involving NASA, etc. It makes for an interesting plot in their life.

  9. Top | #9
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    6,087
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    11,126
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    About Christian flat earthers:

    1 Corinthians has many verses that talk about God's wisdom vs human/worldly wisdom....
    https://www.biblegateway.com/quickse...egin=53&end=53

    Christian flat earthers would believe that the verses that suggest a flat earth are God's wisdom. Arguments against a flat earth rely on human wisdom rather than Bible verses.

    I find it interesting that people in modern times with space travel can disagree about such a seemingly obvious thing (according to worldly wisdom) - it is a test of faith...

    I don't think there being so many verses about God's vs worldly wisdom is an accident...

    This test is related to people's primary purpose in life... (their relationship with God, etc) and about whether there is actually a huge conspiracy involving NASA, etc. It makes for an interesting plot in their life.
    Is it a test of faith or is it an inability to make a simple observation? Looks more like the workings of natural selection than a test of faith.

  10. Top | #10
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,040
    Rep Power
    8
    with the focus of discussion wanting to be about what "can seem" plausible, the answer is anything whatsoever that a person desires, that person can find "plausible" TO THEM.

    A magician can make it seem like things are able to simply disappear before your eyes
    A Politician can make it seem like his opponent is trying to kill you through legislation
    A Preacher can make it seem like your very thoughts can hurt others
    A Teacher can make it seem like the study of a skill is attainable
    A Carpenter can make it seem like two pieces of wood were carved from one.


    what "can seem" plausible is not a measure of anything.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •