Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,403 Year: 3,660/9,624 Month: 531/974 Week: 144/276 Day: 18/23 Hour: 1/3


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Education and Creation/Evolution ⇒

Parable of the candle - should million/billion year dating be taught as fact?

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Parable of the candle - should million/billion year dating be taught as fact?
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 6 of 98 (432734)
11-07-2007 11:26 PM 		Reply to: Message 1 by Macuahuitl
11-07-2007 9:00 PM

Welcome to the fray Macuahuitl.
​
Consider 'the parable of the candle':
The Parable of the Candle | Answers in Genesis
​
A parable -- a story -- is not a scientific theory, nor is it necessarily based on fact. Science on the other hand can be tested against the evidence.
​
Note that AiG is known for publishing falsehoods -- why should you trust a source that publishes falsehoods?
​
Should old age dates be taught as fact in the science classroom? Teaching old age dates as fact is ignorant of alternate logical and even scientific interpretations of radiometric dating results, considering the parable of the candle.
​
Denial of facts is not an alternative interpretation, nor is conveniently not including contradictory evidence. For some of the evidence for an old earth see Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III). Note that no creationist has been able to provide an alternative interpretation that explains all the evidence provided in that thread, evidence explained easily by the fact that the earth is old.
​
I understand that there are many different beliefs out there about origins and they can't all be taught in science (partially as some are unscientific), so may i suggest we just don't teach any viewpoints in school etc., ...
​
So ignorance is a preferred state of mind in your view? You would rather not teach anything if the truth contradicts what you fervently want to believe?
​
... then if people want to find out what the origins of man and the universe are they can teach themselves at home etc....
​
A better solution is for those who don't want to learn about reality to go with home teaching, where it is eminently easy to teach ignorance.
​
That way it won't seem as if teaching only evolution is indoctrination
​
But teaching the truth is not indoctrination, it is the way to understand reality.
​
Furthermore, "It is the height of Bigotry to have only one theory of origins taught in our schools" (Clarence Darrow, see http://www.baptistpillar.com/bd0354.htm - although this quote is often refuted, it is still at the height of bigotry).
​
If it is often refuted then it is really of little use except for those who want to believe in a falsehood eh?
​
Evolution is not a theory of origins, but of the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation
​
What do you think? Isn't that a fair solution?
​
In all honesty I don't think it can be at all fair to the children that want to learn the truth.
​
Enjoy.
​
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Macuahuitl, posted 11-07-2007 9:00 PM Macuahuitl has not replied
  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 24 of 98 (433594)
11-12-2007 4:12 PM 		Reply to: Message 22 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 4:06 PM

Re: The philosophy of science
The topic is the (silly creationist PRATT) "Parable of the candle" - and whether million/billion year dating be taught as fact.
​
Given that the age of the earth IS fact it should be taught as such.
​
If you want to talk about evolution, horse hooves and the like, try starting a new thread. Go to Proposed New Topics to post new topics.
​
Welcome to the fray.
​
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:06 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied
  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 32 of 98 (433627)
11-12-2007 4:59 PM 		Reply to: Message 27 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 4:43 PM

off topic on this thread ... but
... but creationism is a widely accepted religion. Most, if not all, of the world's religions have creationism in it.
​
Creationism is not a religion, but an effect of literalist fundamentalist religions. Thus there are creationist christians and non-creationist christians, creationist muslims and non-creationist muslims, creationist hindus and non-creationist hindus, and there are more non-creationist believers than there are creationist believers. The vast majority treat creation as more allegorical than actual statements of truth.
​
Most, if not all, have a story of a world-wide flood. How is it that around the world, people get the same ideas when they had absolutely now way of communicating through the vast distances?
​
Because agriculture generally was first done on flood plains?
​
Would that fact that SOME religions do NOT have flood myths refute the concept? Certainly IF it were true THEN all people are survivors and should have cultural memories (myths) of such an event eh?
​
Then, kids could choose which they wanted to believe.
​
Are kids able to discern truth from lies?
​
Sure, it may be false, but people thought Homer's Iliad was false, until Troy was found.
​
So even well educated adults could not tell truth from lies, and you think kids will do better?
​
Should we teach things we KNOW to be false so that they can decide?
​
To NOD at the topic: should we teach the parable of the candle so that kids can decide? Should we teach about the false assumptions in the parable?
​
How long do you want to go to school?
​
Enjoy.
​
Edited by RAZD, : added topic comments
​
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:43 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied
  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 43 of 98 (433682)
11-12-2007 7:03 PM 		Reply to: Message 36 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 5:57 PM

Re: Canyon
No, the old age dating should not be taught in public schools AS A FACT.
​
But the age of the earth is a fact. The evidence we have for what that fact is shows a minimum age for the earth of 4.5 billion years, as this is the oldest piece of evidence that has been found.
​
There are also thousands of pieces of evidence showing ages from recent (lava flows and the like) up to 4.5 billion years, thus it is easy to find SOME evidence for a young earth ... but that doesn't explain all the evidence for an old - much older - earth.
​
If the earth were young then there should be no evidence for an old earth. Again, if you want to discuss this FACT, there is an existing thread dedicated to the Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III) which not only discusses various different kinds of evidence for an old earth but the correlations between them.
​
Therefore, by the fact that too many variables exist, no, 'billion-year' teaching should not be taught as a fact, but as a possibility.
​
That life has existed on earth for at least 3.5 billion years is also a FACT.
​
The only way you can dispute these dates is by denying evidence, denying the truth of evidence.
​
Enjoy.
​
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 5:57 PM Aquilegia753 has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 7:19 PM RAZD has replied
  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 50 of 98 (433702)
11-12-2007 7:27 PM 		Reply to: Message 46 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 7:19 PM

Re: Canyon
if God made man a mature man instantly, He could make a mature earth (wilh all evidence pointing toward a mature earth) instantly.
​
In other words ALL evidence is a lie. There is NO reality, even the basis for your faith is false.
​
Enjoy.
​
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 7:19 PM Aquilegia753 has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 7:30 PM RAZD has replied
  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 56 of 98 (433730)
11-12-2007 8:00 PM 		Reply to: Message 52 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 7:30 PM

truth and evidence
Message 51
Yes, I believe that we see evolution happening, micro evolution (the fact). Macro evolution, on which the theory of evolution is based on, isn't happening.
​
Care to define evolution, microevolution and macroevolution so that we can see whether you really understand what these terms mean?
​
Note that if you are not using the same definitions as used in science then you are not discussing the science but some fantasy instead.
​
We don't see any man-monkeys, or winged horses.
​
Which evolution predicts WON'T happen. If you think otherwise you are misinformed. Do you think that the people that told you can be trusted to tell the truth?
​
No. I'm saying that it could be that evidence is a lie. It might not.
​
By assuming that some evidence can be false means you can believe any possible concept you want to believe, and there is no way to distinguish between any that are true from those that are false.
​
The earth is flat, 6,000 years old, the center of the universe and the sun orbits the earth. Any evidence that says otherwise is false evidence.
​
The earth is round, 4.5 billion years old, orbits the sun in the outer arm of a rather nondescript galaxy. Any evidence that says otherwise is false evidence.
​
How do you tell which is true?
​
I believe that God did make the earth old, or that the earth was created with the universe (Gen. 1:1). But there is no distinction between 'God created the heavens and the earth' and 'the earth was formless and void...' (Gen. 1:2). Maybe in that time, the earth aged. Maybe, life was sprung up in the water, which died during creation week. I don't know. I wasn't there. I believe that when Jesus does come again, I'll know when I ask Him.
​
So is the evidence true or not? It's simple: either the evidence is all true, or there is no reality, no truth.
​
Are you in middle school? Homeschooled? The reason is to understand the level of education and ignorance involved and tailor replies to your level.
​
Enjoy.
​
Edited by RAZD, : personal questions
​
Edited by RAZD, : subtitle
​
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 7:30 PM Aquilegia753 has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 8:31 PM RAZD has replied
  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 79 of 98 (433810)
11-12-2007 10:48 PM 		Reply to: Message 58 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 8:31 PM

micro\macro and the simple truths
This is off-topic regarding the parable so I have put my answer at Message 71.
​
Some hints for formating quotes
​
type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
​
quotes are easy
​
or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:
quotes are easy
​
also check out (help) links on any formating questions when in the reply window.
​
Hope that helps.
​
Enjoy.
​
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 8:31 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied
  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 81 of 98 (433849)
11-13-2007 8:02 AM 		Reply to: Message 58 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 8:31 PM

Re: truth and evidence
You didn't answer the other part of my reply, so I'll repeat it and add to it for further clarification.
​
No. I'm saying that it could be that evidence is a lie. It might not.
​
By assuming that some evidence can be false means you can believe any possible concept you want to believe, and there is no way to distinguish between any that are true from those that are false.
​
The earth is flat, 6,000 years old, the center of the universe and the sun orbits the earth. Any evidence that says otherwise is false evidence.
​
The earth is round, 4.5 billion years old, orbits the sun in the outer arm of a rather nondescript galaxy. Any evidence that says otherwise is false evidence.
​
How do you tell which is true?
​
If any evidence can be false, then it is the same as if all evidence is false, for none can be trusted. Neither the evidence of a rock or the evidence of a book.
​
I believe that God did make the earth old, or that the earth was created with the universe (Gen. 1:1). But there is no distinction between 'God created the heavens and the earth' and 'the earth was formless and void...' (Gen. 1:2). Maybe in that time, the earth aged. Maybe, life was sprung up in the water, which died during creation week. I don't know. I wasn't there. I believe that when Jesus does come again, I'll know when I ask Him.
​
Not only did he make it old, then, but he made it of many different old ages, all consistently layered and complete with dead life forms embedded in those layers designed in such a way that they show a progression from one layer to the next exactly as would occur if they had evolved.
​
Not only did he make them old but he made them consistently old for patterns of geological layers, life form and radioactive decay. He gave similar rocks in similar formations different radioactive ages.
​
If the earth is young 99.9% of the evidence just for the age of the earth is false.
​
So IF god does not lie then the earth is old, and those people who have told you that it is young are the ones that have lied.
​
So is the evidence true or not? It's simple: either the evidence is all true, or there is no reality, no truth.
​
Enjoy.
​
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 8:31 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024