Evidence for a Young Earth

by Perry 114 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Vidiot

    Perry - "Many scientists are skeptical of evolution..."

    Not the ones who are actually familiar with biology and how it works.

  • Rattigan350

    Evidence shows that the earth was created billions of years ago and about 42,000 years ago the creative days started and humans were created just over 6000 years ago.

  • Vidiot

    @ Rattigan...

    Okay, now I know you're just trolling for the sake of trolling.

  • Giles Gray
    Giles Gray

    I just had a quick look and the last mention of the 49K belief was the Warchtower, January 1st 1987 Questions from readers.

    That's got to be embarrassing...

  • Crazyguy

    I think the WT promoted a 50,000 year old earth as late as 1987 then just stopped talking about it till 2013 when they threw the whole thing into scientists hands

  • DJS

    Hello. Newman. I mean Rat Again. Long time no smell.

    Thank you so ever so much for dropping off that bit of scriptural wisdom on your way to summer bible camp. Would you mind sharing with us empirical sources of the evidence you reference so that those of us not biblically inclined can compare it with, oh I don't know, actual experts and actual science?

    Thanks ever so much.

  • cofty
    Evidence shows that .. humans were created just over 6000 years ago. - Rattigan

    Please share even one single piece of "evidence".

    Here are 37 pieces of evidence from that show humans evolved from non-human ancestors over millions of years...

    If you think you know of evidence to the contrary let's talk about it.

  • Perry

    Cofty, I found more than you! That makes my view correct, right?

    Here are 44 reasons why the standard evolutionary tale is false.

    The bottom line is not one of us was there to witness the birth of the earth/universe. No one has witnessed evolution either. Real science produces facts. People interpret those facts differently, plain and simple. The tendency is to attack anothers interpretation of the facts and call that interpretation not science, psuedo science, fairy tale etc., when in fact many times interpretation, especially theoretical interpretation, is a process of the mind and not a falsifiable conclusion.

  • cofty
    Cofty, I found more than you! That makes my view correct, right?

    No it obviously doesn't. I have explained all of those 37 in my own words because I understand them. They are full of objective evidence. You haven't read any of them have you?

    You have posted a link to a bullshit creationist website. I could refute all 44 arguments on that page with objective facts. I just scanned the first ten. 1-9 are easy and number 10 is based on a false assumption. I'm sure the next 30 don't get any better. They have been written by somebody who knows as much about evolution as you do.

    If you go to google scholar and type "evidence for evolution" you will get 2.1 million peer-reviewed articles. Creationists have zero peer reviewed articles.

    Your second paragraph demonstrates a total lack of understanding about science. You have never read a single book about evolution in your entire life and yet you wallow in wilful ignorance.

    There is no fact in all of science more certain and irrefutable than that we evolved from non-human ancestors over millions of years.

    You refuse to examine the evidence out of fear that it will undermine your worldview. You are right - it will.

  • cofty

    I just read the rest of your 44 "reasons".

    They are embarrassingly stupid and ignorant. Most European schoolchildren could refute all of them.

    I have endless patience for genuine questions and objections. I have total contempt for wilful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty.

Share this