A mortal blow to Young Earth creationism

Science refutes itself all the time, the dating method has flaws!

Science does not refute itself. A theory of science might be falsified, but that's all. Science is not inference or assumption of measurements. It is not measurements at all. It is not even observation at all nor the data it produces.

Science is a set of falsifiable theories. That's it. That's all.

All observations are subject to the problems of phenomenology.
 
There is not a concise understanding on how everything that is came to be, how do you suppose they can date it!

That makes no sense. If I'm digging in my garden and run across a piece of ancient pottery, do I have to know how it was made before I can figure out how old it is?
 
The third most important person in Christianity after Jesus and Paul (Saint Augustine) maintained that the Bible needs to be periodically reinterpreted in light of new knowledge.

The problem with fundies and other conservatives, sadly, is that they insist on everything being black-and-white, and in the infallibility of the Bible (and the Constitution). Change or reinterpretation is anathema.
 
No it is not mutually exclusive, Dumbo Donny.

The Theory of Abiogenesis states the life began on Earth through a series of unspecified random events.
The Theory of Creation states that life arrived on Earth through the action of some kind of intelligence.

They are mutually exclusive. One refutes the other.
 
The Theory of Abiogenesis states the life began on Earth through a series of unspecified random events.
The Theory of Creation states that life arrived on Earth through the action of some kind of intelligence.

They are mutually exclusive. One refutes the other.

It does not state "unspecified random events", Dumbo Donny.
 
Back
Top