Are Creationists shooting themselves in the foot?

When Christians cling to claims which are so obviously and demonstrably false, they make themselves look foolish.Eventually they are forced to admit that they've been wrong and they look even worse.See "The Earth is the Center of the Universe and the Sun goes around it"
See "Lighting is God's wrath"
See "Rainbows are made by God"All the Christians have to do to fix the problem is say "We are interested in these books for their message, not their inaccurate account of the pre-historical world."

No.Stop teaching it as anything other than a myth with a message. That's the ONLY way you'll stop shooting yourself in the foot.Here's what you are doing divorced from your personal issues.There is a story "The tortoise and the hare". In it, there is a talking rabbit and a talking tortoise. Not only can they talk, they talk to one another and agree to have a race, with rules.That's SILLY.You can say "Well, there REALLY are rabbits and there REALLY are tortoises. It never ACTUALLY says that they are speaking English. We can't KNOW FOR CERTAIN that these two animals NEVER raced..."Blah blah blah. It's GARBAGE.The POINT of the myth is that the rabbit didn't finish the job and the tortoise did. End of story.When you start trying to prove that it's true, you lose the entire friggin' message.Genesis is a collection of myths that a bunch of goat herders half remembered from stories they heard from other Middle Easterners. It's NOT MEANT to be taken seriously. They themselves didn't REALLY take it seriously.

Which God?

Green, I'm afraid you've lost me.What exactly are you trying to prove with your post?Are you suggesting that the Younger Dryas is responsible for a worldwide drought? This is highly unlikely. While some fresh water would have been locked up in glaciers, it's virtually impossible to impose a single weather event which hits all places equally.Are you suggesting that the Youger Dryas was a contributing factor for switching from hortoculture to agriculture? Probably. However, aggriculture developed in different ways in different places at different times.Are you suggesting that the Younger Dryas was a contributing factor in domesticating livestock? Probably.But, most importantly...Are you suggesting that any of this is evidence FOR Creationism? From previous posts, it seems that way.The Younger Dryas, as an event, at the very least disproves the literal YEC view of the Bible - especially when looked at in context of New World archaeology.

Why? Clearly the Bible is not refering to the Younger Dryas event.It's refering to a legendary time.Hell, why start at the Younger Dryas and a debate about aggriculture? Let's start 50 million years ago. Clearly the Bible is right that 50 MILLION years ago there were no farmers and no domesticated plants. "Eden" was taken from the Sumerian "edin" meaning steppes or plains. There would be no mountain. Clearly the Bible is incorrect. Except that they aren't. That sort of a statement is nothing more than fantasy.You might as well say that the events of the Civil War correlate to the temperment of Thor.There's no evidence to support the existance of, let alone actions of, any sort of magical wizard, Jewish or otherwise.Co-opting Gould's work for your own purposes is dishonest.

I particularly like it when they display profound stupidity.I've actually had this argument presented to me:"The Earth is very young, only a few thousands years old. It was created shortly after the last ice age."When someone presents something that ignorant, it's almost impossible to respond.What argument could you POSSIBLY make that that person would comprehend?Edited by Nuggin, : No reason given.

I assume you've taken into consideration the very real possibility that Moses was a fictional character repurposed from earlier religions.This would explain why Moses story is a direct rip off of Sargon. It would explain why the history doesn't mesh. It would also explain why Moses (the Jew) went up a mountain to get stone tables with the laws on them just the Egyptian Law gives Mises did.Would also nicely explain why so much of the ten commandments is just a rewording of the Egyptian Book of the Dead.

Well, seeing as the myths I reference predate the Torah by a few hundred to a thousand years, unless ancient Jews had some sort of time travel machine, we can scratch #1 off the list. These cultures did not retroactively adjust their ancient beliefs to fit the Jewish mythology.As for #2, I don't have a problem with that concept. It's ENTIRELY possible that the first people hearing about Moses knew full well that this was just a rename of an earlier law bringer from a religion they were already familiar with.However, the point is that MODERN DAY people believe that this was a historical figure and that the Bible is a literal account of his behaviors.That's simply not the case.At BEST you could argue that there was a historical man (be it Moses, Jesus or Elvis) who later was attributed with magical powers in order to form a religion.That still violate the Creationist core belief that everything in the Bible, even the mistakes, is 100% the word of God.As soon as they make that statement, the game is over. The Bible simply isn't a historical account.If you want to say "The teachings in the Bible are morally superior to X" then you've got room for discussion.