My Discussion with an Atheist
I was involved in an interesting Facebook debate around New Year’s 2018. I thought it might be a wonderful example of things you may want to watch out for when you are discussing origins with a non-believer. I made many errors in this debate. But ultimately, I gave it a try to help a lost soul find the truth that God has so plainly put in front of us. Jim, a mutual friend, had asked me to help him show John the truth of God in terms of creation. I have tried to make things easy to follow, and to that point, it is somewhat edited for clarification (misspellings, etc.). I have also removed some “outside interference” from Susan and Jeff, so you will see only comments from John and me. Susan’s comment was left in so you can see the immediate response from John and me about our positions. John’s comments are in Blue and mine remain in Black. I have made comments after the fact in Red.
Jim is with John and Jerry.
December 30, 2017 at 10:16am ·
John meet Jerry. Jerry meet John.
Jerry: Hello John, nice to meet you.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 10:49am
John: Hi. Nice to meet you, too.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 12:52pm
Susan: I want to know what is going on. I want to hear this debate! lol
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 12:25pm
John: It’s about Christianity and religion, which I don’t believe in. If it makes people feel better to believe in a God with no proof, that is fine, but it’s the people who also believe in the whole Bible who are fun to have nice discussions with. It’s full of illogical things and inconsistencies. ?
Like · Reply · 1 · December 30, 2017 at 12:57pm
(You will quickly notice that illogical things and inconsistencies only matter when you are arguing for Biblical creation. But if you are a naturalist, don’t worry about it.)
Jerry: But it is also about the inconsistencies in an atheistic belief system.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 1:40pm
John: Jerry I am an atheist since there is no proof there is a God. I’m not saying a god definitely does not exist. Why do you believe in God? Don’t say reason is faith, please.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 3:45pm
Jerry: John, I was on my way to atheism when I was in college. I then read a book by a physicist named Heinz Pagels. He described what we “know” has happened since the beginning of the universe. But he said we knew everything from 10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang. After a few years of contemplation, I came to the conclusion that there was no way for us to absolutely know exactly what happened before then. But more importantly, the universe had to originate from nothing. Before the beginning, there was no time, no space and no matter. The only logical conclusion for these things coming from nothing is God. It does not matter if you believe He wants a personal relationship with you, but it is only logical that He must exist, otherwise the universe could not exist. Now, it is not “proof” in the I can feel, taste and smell, but it is in a “cogito, ergo sum” way. Logically, I can argue for God whereas you cannot. I am looking forward to our discussion. I hope it will be a productive use of our time. The Bible tells us that iron sharpens iron (the context is believers strengthening each other) but it is apropos for you and me in this context as well.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 4:27pm
John: Jerry just because we don’t understand something YET does not mean a God created it. That is gullible and not logical. There are so many things we don’t understand yet. One of the big problems I have with Christian thinking is that God must have created all things that look perfect, including miracles. I had one believer ask me where did dirt come from. We know it comes from the natural breakdown or rock over a very long period of time.
As far a God is concerned, it is not my job to prove God does not exist. It is a believer’s job to prove he exists since there is no proof.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 4:58pm
(And right off the bat we have “just because we don’t understand yet.” This is the naturalist’s mantra. But it is on believers to prove God exists and not on atheists to prove God does not exist. Don’t miss this.)
Jerry: John, I thought we were not bringing faith into this.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 5:02pm
John: Jerry I was answering a Susan question, not yours. I’m fine with no faith as an answer. ?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 7:06pm
(Didn’t he just say this?!? From three hours earlier – John: Jerry I am an atheist since there is no proof there is a God. I’m not saying a god definitely does not exist. Why do you believe in God? Don’t say reason is faith, please.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 3:45pm)
John: Jerry what is inconsistent about an atheist point of view that there is no proof of a god. That is true and direct. Why do you believe in god?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 7:08pm
(I just simply missed this comment. If I were to make a logical argument, a universe created by random chance events does not necessarily have logic or laws. After all, if it just somehow happened, then why should the universe obey any laws? God, on the other hand, has said that there is order to the universe and He keeps it under control. (Hebrews 1))
Jerry: Oh, I guess I misinterpreted your “don’t say reason is faith, please” as a ground rule.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 7:44pm
John: Jerry can you answer my questions without using the word faith? It’s ok to say you don’t know.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 7:49pm
(Wait a minute…didn’t he just say that faith was OK?)
Jerry: The inconsistency is that secular belief in the Big Bang assumes a supernatural beginning. This is faith because there is neither mathematical proof or a scientific proof.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 7:53pm
John: I agree that we don’t know that yet. I don’t have faith in any theory on that yet since I don’t know.
Let’s assume that God created the universe. When do you believe he did that? How many years ago?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:10pm
(But faith is OK if we do not know what started the universe or how, as long as we do not invoke God.)
Jerry: About 6000 years ago, as estimated by Ussher.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:11pm
John: Ok so you believe the Old Testament that god created the universe, sun, Earth, and all life about 6000 years ago?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:15pm
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:15pm
John: So do you believe God created dinosaurs 6000 years ago with everything else?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:16pm
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:17pm
Jerry: We might call one of them Behemoth.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:17pm · Edited
John: Therefore, were at least two of all dinosaurs also put on the Ark
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:18pm
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:21pm
John: Jerry, scientists have used complex bone dating methods estimating dinosaurs became extinct about 200 million years ago. That is a huge difference from being created 6000 years ago, then dying off when do you believe? So dinosaurs coexisted with man in your belief. How do you believe dinosaurs died off and when?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:24pm
(While I do start talking about the problems in radiometric dating techniques in a different part of the discussion, I did not do it here. I got distracted and failed to address this immediately. It was a tactical error on my part, but I wanted to bring up DNA and soft tissue to show John the absurdity of these dating techniques. So I came up with this…)
Jerry: But they are also finding DNA in Dino bones. How can they be millions of years old?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:25pm
Jerry: Most died in the flood. Two of each kind were saved.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:25pm
John: Jerry, so you believe all these scientists are wrong with their bone dating? And how do you know how long DNA lasts? Send me the link of DNA in dinosaur bones. There is a lot of fake evidence out there. Noah’s ark pieces were claimed to be found in Turkey about 200 times, but all of them were proven false.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:30pm
John: Jerry, and why would a flood change the bone dating by almost 2 million years? Explain that.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:32pm
(Once again, I should bring up that scientists interpret the data based on their worldview, and that they have no proof of the age of the earth. Biblical creationists have an approximation of the earth based on the biblical text, and the evidence on earth suggests a flood of biblical proportions which is confirmed by all the dead things busied in rock layers all over the earth.)
Jerry: Mary Schweitzer at NCSU found blood cells in a T. Rex femur in 2007; Elastin in a 80myo Hadrosaur in 2009. Keratin by Edwards in a 40myo lizard in 2011. Chitin and protein in a 310myo scorpion by Cody in 2011.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:36pm
John: Jerry, so if at least two of every dinosaur were put on this ark, but the rest were killed in flood, how long did the saved dinosaurs and their offspring live? And why didn’t the meat eating dinosaurs kill many animals and people after they got off the ark?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:36pm
(Another deflection of the fact, FACT, that tissues and other cells have been found by scientists. And all I can tell John regarding this statement is there is no way for me to know when the last dino died because it is not recorded anywhere.)
Jerry: We are looking at two different types of dating. Radiocarbon and radioisotopes. You find a Dino in a “supposed” 65myo sediment, but the sediment cannot be directly dated because it is an erosion byproduct.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:38pm
(I should press this issue. It shows the circular reasoning that is the cornerstone of evolutionary arguments. They date the fossil by the layer it is in and date the layer by the fossils in it. They presume a date because there is no direct way to date the sediments or fossils.)
Jerry: There are plenty of stories of dragons throughout history. Even evidence of drawings and carvings.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:39pm
(Facts ignored again.)
Jerry: How long does it take to make coal?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:40pm
(And this question will go unanswered because the answer flies in the face of evolutionary theory. Just to let you know, the answer is days to years, depending on conditions.)
John: Jerry so if those things were found in these bones, what proof is there that the bones cannot be older than 6000 years? Forget the 200 million year estimate for now. All we have to decide is whether or not the bones are more than 6000 years old.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:41pm
(I have been set up with this. I should immediately be talking about the assumptions in dating techniques. Never let the opponent seize the opportunity to force the Bible to prove a date for creation. They will never accept it. In reality they will never accept the limitations (or complete failures) of their religion. And I will discuss this in another part of the thread. I will show that in a later post.)
Jerry: DNA, collagen, etc. should not last a million years. I only have to bridge 994,000 years. You have to bridge 64,000,000. How do you propose to do that?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:42pm
John: Jerry. Please answer my previous post copied here before we move on.
So if at least two of every dinosaur were put on this ark, but the rest were killed in flood, how long did the saved dinosaurs and their offspring live? And why didn’t the meat eating dinosaurs kill many animals and people after they got off the ark?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:43pm
(This was a nice deflection on John’s part. Ultimately, it shows the main problem with evolutionary thought – we have actual proof of actual soft tissue that actual scientists have actually said cannot last millions of years (even 100,000 years) – and they still cling to their religious doctrine of millions of years.)
Jerry: I guess many are still around. Coelacanth, horseshoe crab. Lots of “living fossils” out there. I cannot tell you when the last of them died out, but it is possible that many did not survive a few years after the flood. Man was still predatory after the flood.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:46pm
John: Jerry what ? You already said that God created dinosaurs 6000 years ago. So your answer above makes no sense. Can DNA in the bones last longer than 6000 years? Yes or No?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:47pm
(I am not sure what John is talking about here. I use the quotes around “living fossils” to infer that evolution is a questionable philosophy. But the next sentence truly demonstrates that we really have no idea how long anything can last…)
Jerry: Ask me this in 6000 years. After all, we have no scientific proof of any age, only speculation. But if cells cannot last more than a million years as the consensus of scientists say, then you need to bridge a 64 million year gap. Your turn to tell me how you do that.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:49pm
John: Jerry I’m talking about dinosaurs like T-Rex, brontosaurus, raptors, etc, not a freakin horseshoe crab.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:50pm
(John is still clinging to the old ages philosophy. He does not believe that dinosaurs could exist after 65mya, but we have writings from biblical and secular writers who have seen “dinosaurs,” only they call them dragons or monsters or Behemoth, etc. As a result, I will get nowhere with this.)
Jerry: I told you I can’t give you a date because I did not see or read about the death of the last one.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:52pm
John: Jerry no Jerry. Stop avoiding the question. I don’t know where you are coming up with that many years. If Cells and DNA in bones can last a lot more than 6000 years, then it basically kills the creation theory that all life started 6000 ago.
Let’s face it, the Bible writers never knew dinosaurs existed long before them since the first bones were not dug up until the early 1800’s. Then Christians had a lot of explaining to do by saying the flood killed the dinosaurs (except for the ones you say were on the ark…lol), and that flood process greatly changed the dating of the bones. Is this what you are saying?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:03pm
(I guess he missed this comment 45 minutes before: Jerry: We might call one of them Behemoth.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 8:17pm Now, Christians did mess up – big time – over the next century. We failed to defend what God clearly teaches us in the Bible, that He created the light, heavens and earth on day 1 so on. We came up with odd theories such as the Day-Age and Gap theory to conform to the secular “discoveries” which were completely without foundation. We dug ourselves a hole because we doubted God’s word.)
John: Jerry, Show me scientific proof that dinosaur bones could possibly be 6000 years old or less. This is the easiest way to show the 6000 year old creation theory for all life is false.
And how come there are no bones from other animals or humans killed in the flood found anywhere near dinosaur bones, which are much deeper in the ground? This is common sense
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:11pm
(I cannot do what he wants me to because it is impossible. He can’t show me scientific proof of his position, either. Dating techniques do not work. Period. The assumptions scientists have to make invalidate them. Now, here is a good point John makes – how come we do not find humans in the flood. Perhaps I should have used a common naturalist argument: “because we have not found them, yet.” John will use this one later. But to answer the question, there could have been millions and millions more dinos than humans. Perhaps humans did not bury their dead in graves like we do today so that they would have decayed. Perhaps people killed in the flood were more buoyant than dinos and other creatures. Perhaps they lived at higher elevations and did not feel the effect of the flood until later. Perhaps we have found them and presume them to be Homo Erectus instead of Homo Sapiens. Perhaps some of the dinos have been classified as dinos but are actually mammals. Most dinos are the size of mammalian species that exist today. The fact of the matter, is both sides can only speculate about what happened because no one, save God and Noah and his family, were there to witness it. And there is no way we can recreate the event.)
Jerry: No, because we can see DNA in Dino bones says we are closer to the truth than naturalists. I can destroy DNA quickly or slowly. What I can’t do is make it last a million years. Behemoth was known by Job. With a tail like a cedar. A logical explanation of this is an apatosaurus-like creature. Sounds like Bible authors may have known about Dinos.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:13pm
(And once again, a naturalist completely ignores the passages in the Bible were God describes a dinosaur!)
Jerry: Ok, John. How do you date a dinosaur. Please be specific.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:13pm
John: As far as the flood, which was written to have water as high as Mount Everest over the entire world after raining for 40 days and 40 nights, where did all that water go? And don’t say it spilled over the edges of the perceived flat circular Earth since the world is really spherical. You would think God would have known that the world he created was a sphere! So where did all that water go since the whole world was a deep sea? How can anyone logically believe this fairy tale?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:22pm
(John makes a mistake here that is a big presumption of evolutionists – how big were mountains when Pangaea existed? I call him out on it, and he once again deflects and tells me Christians justify their beliefs! The quote in Isaiah 40:22 about the world being a circle does not necessarily mean what he thinks it means. The Hebrew word “Khug” could just as easily be translated sphere (or vault, as in Job 22:14.) When combined with Job 26:7 it is clear that the men of the Bible understood the earth was spherical. Oh, and note how John not so subtly tries to equate Creationsism to Flat-Earth-ism.)
John: Jerry I am not a scientist so I don’t know exactly how the bones are dated so I will look it up. But as long as any dinosaur bone can be proven to be older than 6000 years old, the creation theory is greatly tarnished. Agreed?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:27pm
(John is not a scientist so he does not know how rocks and bones are dated, but he has faith in the scientists to tell us something without making assumptions that could drastically alter the interpretation of the data.)
Jerry: You are assuming Mount Everest existed before the flood. There is an awful lot of subsurface water along the likes of 10-20 times the volume of the oceans. It wasn’t only rain for 40 days and nights. Genesis 7:11 describes the fountains of the great deep broken up. Look at the mid-Atlantic ridge. This could possibly be the fracturing God tells us of.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:27pm
(I will talk about the physics of the mid-Atlantic ridge in another post. For now, I will tell you that it would be impossible for the earth to look as it does today with the theory of a slow-moving ridge as the evolutionary geologists believe.)
Jerry: If you could directly determine the age of a Dino was over 6000, Creation theory would be damaged. Good luck, though. I am a mass spectroscopist, and I have dealt with the equipment used to date rocks. But it is important that you know how it works, so I genuinely appreciate you learning about it.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:30pm
(Geologists make huge assumptions when dealing with radiometric dating. There is a parent:daughter relationship in chemistry when a parent atom decays to a daughter ion. I will refer to them as such. Uranium has a few isotopes (same atom with different masses). The one commonly used in radiometric dating is U238 because it compiles about 99.3% of all Uranium. It decays to the daughter Lead (Pb206 via alpha and beta decay. I will not bore you with details of the decay mechanisms. Geologists assume that Lead is excluded in Zircon crystals and that at formation there is no Lead. Therefore, all the Lead in a Zircon must have come from decaying U238. This is not a good assumption. In fact, since the scientists did not see the zircon get created, they cannot say for certain that there was no Lead to begin with. The other problem with the technique is that the other decay parent:daughter ratios rarely agree with the U:Pb. As a result, you will rarely see multiple dating techniques reported in journal articles.)
John: Jerry I find it truly amazing how Christians can justify things that they know deep down are nonsense, but keep defending their beliefs no matter what. It’s not logical thinking at all. At least an atheist is flexible. If I believe something, then science disproves it, I know longer believe it. Period. No need to defend my belief with all this convoluted logic that Christians keep saying. There is no flexibility in true Bible believers at all since if they admit one significant thing in Bible is false, then their beliefs fall apart since a perfect God wrote the book.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:43pm
(I guess John just does not see the justification he and the atheists use – everything just popped into existence from nothing; complex cells just formed from random chemicals; given billions of years, all this could happen, even though we have no proof. There is nothing John has said (or will say in the remainder of the conversation) that proves his position. All atheists grasp at straws, using guesswork and hope to support a theory that is mathematically impossible. “But since we are here, it must have happened.”)
Jerry: John, I was not a Christian when I began months of research on this topic. I would love to show you what I learned. If you are really up for it, I will walk you through all the holes in naturalistic theory.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:47pm
John: I got this online. I should have said mountains, not particularly Mount Everest.
Few doctrines in Scripture are as clearly taught as the global nature of the Great Flood in Noah’s day. Genesis clearly teaches that “the waters . . . increased greatly . . . and the mountains were covered” (Genesis 7:18-20).
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 9:54pm
(Ask an evolutionist where fossils are found and how they became fossils. Every single one was caused by a flood. But more-so, they had to be caught in a catastrophic flood. If they were not buried by many layers, then scavengers, insects and bacteria would eventually come by and clean them up, leaving them to completely disintegrate.)
Jerry: But how high were the mountains? And what defines a mountain then versus now? There is actually no way of knowing since we are not told how high the mountains were. But Pangaea is compatible with both naturalism and Creationism. And there is actually one significant advantage for creation. The mid Atlantic ridge looks like it fits perfectly between Africa/Europe and the Americas. Old earth believes the ridge has been moving at about 1.5-2″ per year for 180 million years. But using F=ma would suggest this is not the most reasonable explanation. A catastrophic force to begin with (as in the breaking up the fountains of the great deep) and it has been slowing down since. This would allow for the creation of mountains on either continent, like the Appalachians. The mass of the splitting continents would be far too much to overcome if the “present is the key to the past” philosophy holds.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 10:04pm
John: Jerry there are many holes on both sides of this. I am saying I don’t know how the universe was created and that there is no good evidence that God created it. Christians however insist it was created based on faith. It’s hard to discuss the origin of the universe for that reason, so it makes more sense to move onto other subjects like the resurrection of Christ and your beliefs on Jesus.
I have no problem believing that he existed and was crucified 2000 years ago, but don’t believe he could have stopped his death, or that he was resurrected by physically walking out of a large stone tomb, or that he was God’s son, or that he was born from a virgin, and many other things. What do you believe on this?
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 10:07pm
(I wonder if John would read this would he finally see that his philosophy requires the same faith as ours? Look what he says – “There are many holes on both sides of this.” “There is no good evidence God created it.” Poof! It just happened without God!)
John: Jerry, I agree we don’t know how high the mountains were back then, but even a small mountain is not a large hill, so the water was very high enough to kill everything. Why do you worship a God that wanted a “do over” by killing every human, innocent babies, and animals except those on the ark? What kind of loving, forgiving, and caring God is that? Not the kind of God I need. Explain that please.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 10:17pm
Jerry: I believe the Bible is the inerrant word of a perfect God. I believe our interpretations are flawed. John, your origins matter because if you came from some “primordial goo” then you are a product of a cosmic accident and are therefore not accountable for your actions – survival of the fittest, you know. But if the world and universe were created by God “for His good pleasure” then you have a judge who will condemn you for your sins. All have sinned (Romans 3:23). If God does not exist, then man’s law becomes flexible. Thou shalt not kill becomes merely a suggestion. If there is no authority other than man, then we are truly animals with no more substance than a rabbit or squirrel. Is it really harder to believe that man was a created being than it took hundreds of millions of years and millions of changes and additions to the first DNA of a single cell animal to eventually and accidentally come up with man? The math just does not add up. The Miller Urey experiment gave us some very good insight – creating life is hard. A 1 in 10^80 chance of putting 20 amino acids in the correct order to even come up with a single protein! Do you really want to know the truth, John? I will take you there. But you have to want to know it. Is it possible for God to exist? I think it is not only likely, but definitive. But you have to want to take this trip.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 10:26pm
(Folks, I fail miserably here. I don’t give John the gospel message. Please, whenever someone admits they do not know what happened in the beginning and they are asking about a God who allows death and destruction, give them the gospel. God gave us a means to overcome death and it is His Son Jesus. Look, it may not ultimately get the person to listen to you, but it might be the best opportunity for them to actually think about what has happened historically and what we know and don’t know. If we don’t tell them about Jesus, they will never come to know Him.)
Jerry: A righteous god must judge sin. What does it matter if we die at age 2 or 200? We are sinners just the same. The question is whether or not there is an afterlife. If we are a cosmic accident then there is no consequence to sin. God did not choose to sin. Adam did, and as a result we have all inherited a sin nature. Jesus is our free gift of salvation. All we have to do is accept it.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 10:31pm
(I mention Jesus here, but I should really hit harder.)
Jerry: God does not want any of us to perish (2 Peter 3:9), but He has given us free will. He did not want us to be robots; He wanted us to choose Him. But we are given the choice.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 10:34pm
John: Jerry all of this jumbled talk is meaningless to a person like me who only wants to hear answers based on fact and high probability assumptions based on what we know today, not quotes from mostly fiction books written 2000 to 3000 years ago.
There is so much scientific evidence that shows the earth is about 4.5 billion years old, not 6000 years old. There is also so much scientific evidence that shows life is much much much older than 6000 years old.
As time passes, there will be more and more proof that creation is nonsense. This is why the number of atheists in our world keeps increasing over the years, especially now that we the internet so that we can actually look up the fair takes that the churches are telling you. Have you heard of the Clergy Project? It consists of a largely growing number of long time priests who are now atheists.
Like · Reply · December 30, 2017 at 11:39pm
(As you can see, John is not budging. He is set in his faith. He will never come around unless he allows himself to be open to the possibility that God exists, and we cannot do that for him. He alone can make this decision. All we can do is pray and show him what we believe and who we are in Jesus.)
Jerry: John, the evidence I have is the same exact evidence that secular scientists have. If you are not able to see that it is possible to have different interpretations, then I guess your statement about atheists being flexible was simply idle posturing. Look, I am going to do something. In a new place on this thread I will talk about some evidences that can be interpreted different ways and why the creation model fits the evidence better. I already talked about Pangaea and the physics of it. There is no possible way that a constant force like we have today (a requirement of naturalism) could overcome the friction of the continents to move them such that they move 1.5″ per year and form mountains. The math does not work. The fact of the matter is that as time goes on, it is naturalism that fails. Did you know that a creationist correctly predicted the magnetic field strength of Uranus by using a young earth model? Secular scientists were so far off it wasn’t even funny. You want science, John. Here is a predictable result from the real world. When you do your research on radioisotopes, ask yourself one question. How many daughter atoms existed in the sample when the rock was formed. You never really told me more about evolution than a fruit fly can turn into a fruit fly. There are NO KNOWN transitional fossils from one kind of animal to another. Scientists and reporters of science love to keep that dirty little secret quiet. Creation science has no problem with a finch changing beak size or a dog changing into a different dog. It is expected. And there are BIG problems with the Big Bang theory. Did you know they have problems with flatness, horizon, monopoles, distant galaxies, Barton number, light time travel and several other issues. A scientific theory needs to make specific, testable predictions. Yet the BBT is unable. The math just doesn’t work.
Like · Reply · December 31, 2017 at 8:01am · Edited
(I decided to hit hard and show John the many failings of his faith. I show him a Creationist success in predicting a real scientific result! But it is all for naught. My failure is not God’s failure. I can only do what God has given me the ability to do. I can learn from the encounter and do better in some ways next time. In the second part, I try to get the discussion a bit more focused. I hope you will check back in for that one.)