Sentences with phrase «many young earth»

It was young earth creationists who drove me away from the church.

Newton was a young earth creationist, and said that if God was true then the universe must reflect His consistent, unchanging nature and therefore be able to be studied and reliably tested.

No, just over 40 % are young earth creationists, based on their infantile beliefs in the Easter Bunny, or some other fictional character.

I don't think Christians do themselves any favors by throwing their lot in with «Young Earth» creationists like Kenneth Ham.

Young earth creationism is ludicrous and young earth creationists, most of whom live in the United States and are fundamentalist Christians, are the laughing stock of the thinking world.

@Topher It seems that before Ken Ham started his own project over there at AIG, he worked for the Insti / tute for Creation Research, which basically does the same thing as the Discovery Insti / tute — namely, try to create a «sciencey» veneer for Young Earth Creationism.

The changes on the earth's surface due to tectonic plates shifting has to be accelerated if Ham's model of a young earth is true.

An Australian geologist who got his credentials dating rocks billions of years old, still selling his services as a qualified geologist, but also employed as as a «Creationist Assistant Professor of Geology» by the Institute for Creation Research in the USA, where he supports a young earth.

Collins «subsequently rejects Young Earth creationism and intelligent design.

Perhaps you can disprove certain beliefs, such as the «young earth» idea, but at the core level science and religion are not in conflict.

Meanwhile, Schweitzer's research has been hijacked by «young earth» creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn't possibly survive millions of years.

Trying to use current geological and scientific evidence to support a young earth theory is like trying to use current cancer research to prove young girls really are infected with cooties...

check this out: «Richard Dawkins versus Young Earth Creationist Politician» Richard Dawkins vs Steve Fielding on «Q&A» on March 8th, 2010

For young earth creationism to be true it requires all of that phenomena to have changed its rate of formation at the same exact time, for no explainable reason at all.

(for those who aren't aware, L4H is a young earth creationist)

Evolution merely disproves Biblical Inerrancy and Young Earth Creationism.

Ham utterly failed to establish his contention, that Creationism, in particular Young Earth Creationism, is a viable model.

Now it is but not back then (and the people on the young earth creationism side are back then).

The percentage of actual young earth creationists (Christian fundamentalists) has been declining steadily as more information is readily available.

Absurd: young earth earth created before the stars birds created before land animals Pi = 3 bats are birds not mammals the list goes on and on...

When it comes to the day to day workings of an engineer that builds stuff and solves problems a young earth creationist can do the scientific job just fine.

Set the «young earth» / «young Universe» argument to the side.

Dave Well maybe if you ask our Topher if he would want to see young earth creation or ID taught in schools over evolution then would you understand my concerns.

And yet you are a self - professed «Young Earth Creationist» nutjob without an ounce of understanding in science.

Putting arguments aside, there is actually lots of scientific data that strongly supports a young earth and universe.

The story of Genesis has a modern scientific theory attached to it called the young earth concept.

I don't «poke fun» of people but I do challenge Young Earth Creationists in matters of science.

Christian Fundamentalists!!!! Please drop the Young Earth thing and go with God - driven - evolution.

A selection of statements on this blog by young earth creationists in just the last few days: Nope..

I wouldn't say it's my favorite, but yes the moon test does demonstrate at the very least a much younger earth than billions of years... a million at the most.

One can get easily confused, as the young earth don't is used very often here; although it is sometimes indistinguishable from the sarcasm font, I will admit.

Yeah, they probably don't even believe in other stuff like talking snakes, a young earth, walking on water, virgin birth, and all that other everyday stuff that wacked - out Christians believe...

This is absolutely not the case concerning young earth creationism.

I just love these young earth creationists, they see the huge amount of evolution evidence but are just too brain - washed to get away from the bible.

@topher, it's only people in your cult that say that current dating methods are flawed or that they point to a young earth.

Devin, you didn't use the sarcasm font, you used the young earth font.

Ninety percent of dating mechanisms point to a young earth.

And to claim no «legitimate scientists» believe in a young earth is a fallacy.

I would like the name of one scientist that believes in a young earth and does so for non-religious reasons.

My point is that if the evidence, and only the evidence, truly points to a young earth there should be plenty of scientists that are secular (non-religious) and hold a young earth position.

Like those who argue for a young earth, many flat earthers used scriptural interpretation to bolster their belief.

[6] Although many young Earth creationists (YECs) are active in the development of creation science, an endeavor that holds that the events as - sociated with supernatural creation can be evidenced and modeled through an interpretation of the scientific method, the consensus among scientists is that creation science is unscientific in both conception and methodology.

In fact, it's been demonstrated that population numbers are well within the limits for the Biblical view of a young earth.

If a professor of evolutionary biology announced that they were going to spend the next year as a young earth creationist, they'd lose their job and their peers would likely deride the decision.

Those earlier Christians who believed Scripture teaches a young Earth and human origins only 6000 years ago could not explain Indians in America without unsupported speculation.

You must be willing to accept your position on a young earth based on science alone without any reference to the Bible.

Not only are there reasons not to trust in an old earth, there's plenty of evidence in support of a young earth.

Not only does Scripture teach a young earth, but there's plenty of science to back that up.

Most of the 350 - plus books written by «creation scientists» consist in large part of discussions of the supposed errors of evolutionary teaching, reviewing vast amounts of technical scientific data and theory, challenging this or that piece of evidence, method of dating or use of data, while producing evidences and counterarguments of their own in favor of a young earth, recent humanity, worldwide flood, etc..

And the Grand Canyon only lends itself to evidence for the flood and a young earth.