On 8/23/2023 3:51 AM, jillery wrote:
Ken Ham has created yet another strawman:
<https://answersingenesis.org/young-earth-evolution/>
From the article:
******************************
It is our concern that these ideas receive the scrutiny they deserve
as they stand against the clear teaching of Scripture and even
uncritically accept claims in the evolutionary literature. For
example, though God could have created dinosaurs with feathers, there
is no reason (and no real data to back up this claim) to follow along
with this evolutionary teaching unless you are imbibing the whole evolutionary scenario, which involves classifying dinosaurs and
reptiles as birds, going against the biblical understanding of kinds
and the order of creation. And arguments that begin with “God could
have . . . ” are not exactly good scientific or biblical arguments. It
is inconsistent, dangerous, and confusing to accept so much
evolutionary narrative or present much of evolution as not in direct
conflict with Scripture while still holding on to a biblical creation
model in some way.
***********************************
An irony to the above is well-illustrated in Ken Ham's Ark Encounter,
where they preach the very non-Biblical claim that Noah carried only a
few "kinds" which then hyper-evolved in just a few thousand years to
the millions of species extant on Earth.
--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge
Even the old earth creationists like they have at Reason to Believe, and
likely ID perps like Sewell can't deal with the fossil record in an
honest and straight forward manner. Sewell had to remove the Cambrian explosion from the Top Six ID perp evidence for IDiocy. Like the Reason
to believe IDiots the ID perps just use the gap denial as independent
bits of denial. They can't use it to build anything positive.
https://reasons.org/explore/publications/articles/summary-of-reasons-to-believes-testable-creation-model-1
Land plants do not evolve until the Ordovician, so how is the Cambrian explosion good evidence for their Biblical model?
You can see that the Reason to Believe IDiots use the Cambrian explosion
fossil record just as the ID perps use it. You can search their web
site and find the same stupid denial arguments used as well as the
dating to a 25 million year period over half a billion years ago, but in
their model linked to above they have to deny that reality in order to
claim that land plants were created before sea creatures. The gaps in
the whale fossil record don't mean anything at all because even though
it is evidence that terrestrial mammals existed long before whales
evolved, they have to deny that in order to have whales among the sea
creatures created before land animals. They literally shoot themselves
in the head with their claims about the fossil dating in order to be
consistent with the 7 day creation model in an old earth interpretation.
The ID perps killed ID on TO when they put out the Top Six best
evidences for IDiocy because there weren't any IDiots willing to deal
with them in an honest and straightforward manner. The only ones left supporting the ID perps are the willfully ignorant and incompetent. The
Top Six is just not biblical enough for most IDiotic creationists even
if they are old earth creationists.
The reason to believe IDiots have to deal with the Big Bang and fine
tuning of our solar system by reinterpreting the Bible as the designer
making the sun and moon visible after the creation of land plants
instead of being created after land plants were created. The Answers in Genesis YEC are not willing to make that interpretation, and there isn't
any evidence that there was some kind of vapor canopy existing for
billions of years to block the sun and moon from view, from the surface
of the earth. Why would visibility from the surface of the earth matter
to the designer?
Biblical literalists have to deny their denial.
Ron Okimoto
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)