Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 143

Thread: Why YEC can seem plausible

  1. Top | #1
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,199
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,085
    Rep Power
    77

    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
    4,281
    Archived
    591
    Total Posts
    4,872
    Rep Power
    71
    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
    20,533
    Archived
    24,500
    Total Posts
    45,033
    Rep Power
    90
    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
    7,473
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    12,512
    Rep Power
    83
    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
    4,512
    Rep Power
    24
    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
    4,281
    Archived
    591
    Total Posts
    4,872
    Rep Power
    71
    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
    Veteran Member Tharmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,267
    Archived
    184
    Total Posts
    1,451
    Rep Power
    75
    Addressing the OP:

    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    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.
    I don't know that "seem plausible" is the right term exactly, and I think "modern readers" is too broad a category. For example, IIRC, far fewer Jews accept Genesis literally than do Christians. It seems to me that a literal interpretation of Genesis is an essential component of basic Christianity: Fall / Redemption / Resurrection. In that sense a literal acceptance of Genesis comfortingly reaffirms one's desire for immortality; it's part of the whole basic Christian package.

  8. Top | #8
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,199
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,085
    Rep Power
    77
    The thread title is "why YEC can seem plausible" - and it is true that some (not many) quite intelligent people believe in it.
    e.g.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Sarfati
    Sarfati is a FIDE Master in chess, and achieved a draw against former world champion Boris Spassky during a tournament in Wellington in 1988, and was New Zealand's national chess champion in 1987–88.
    I have intellectual friends that believe in it - and I did too. In high school I found that books like "Telling Lies For God" were really poorly written and like I said, YECs have counter-arguments for just about every basic issue. If it wasn't for the "Green River Formation" (mentioned by an ex-creationist) it would have taken a lot longer for me to give up on YEC.

    I think "black and white" thinking is involved. (that explains why YECs can jump straight to atheism)

    I'm saying that people with a basic look into the YEC arguments can end up believing in YEC (e.g. the reasons in the OP). I think that YEC is actually false but it can seem to make a lot of sense.

    I mean according to YECs believers, it can seem plausible, I not saying that the reasoning is free of logical fallacies. I think that delusions and even hallucinations can be involved.

  9. Top | #9
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,199
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,085
    Rep Power
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Tharmas View Post
    Addressing the OP:

    Quote Originally Posted by excreationist View Post
    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.
    I don't know that "seem plausible" is the right term exactly, and I think "modern readers" is too broad a category. For example, IIRC, far fewer Jews accept Genesis literally than do Christians. It seems to me that a literal interpretation of Genesis is an essential component of basic Christianity: Fall / Redemption / Resurrection. In that sense a literal acceptance of Genesis comfortingly reaffirms one's desire for immortality; it's part of the whole basic Christian package.
    Yes I mean modern Christian readers - I had been talking about the Bible being 100% true.

    From
    https://www.oldearth.org/tract/tract.htm

    This is what I mean by "modern":

    https://www.oldearth.org/tract/TDSOYECb-13b.jpg
    Last edited by excreationist; 01-17-2020 at 12:52 AM.

  10. Top | #10
    Veteran Member excreationist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,199
    Archived
    4,886
    Total Posts
    6,085
    Rep Power
    77
    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"




Posting Permissions

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