|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,471 Year: 3,728/9,624 Month: 599/974 Week: 212/276 Day: 52/34 Hour: 2/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: SHIFTING THE BURDEN OF PROOF. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
quote:from weary pilgrim Now this makes me think of evolutionist's explanation for comet's short life spans. If evolution is true we wouldn't see comets right now. But due to the Oort cloud we can. Now noone has ever seen the Oort cloud, and you can not see it. This is called shifting the burden of proof. Now it may exist, but we may never know for sure.But the fact is that there is no proof for it so right now it can't exist as proof am I right? How do you evolutionists explain this. I mean how do you believe something that you have no proof that it exists? (please don't reference to my belief in God for I'm sure someone would have, this isn't the faith and belief forum) I want evidence if it is considered proof.Thanks ------------------"I AM THE MESSENJAH" holla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com [This message has been edited by messenjaH, 08-26-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
Anyone care to explain this?
Thanks ------------------"I AM THE MESSENJAH" holla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
bump
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
Maybe you're not getting answers because evolution has nothing to do with comets and other heavenly objects. Evolution might explain why we have fingernails and appendices, but why should it describe comets? Ask an astronomer, not an evolutionist. Comets are their turf.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
quote: The fact of the short life span of comets would disprove the evolutionary timeline wrong. And proving the evolutionary timeline wrong would basically disprove evolution. Time is evolution's defense for many things. Saying it's not in an evolutionists field is a very bad explanation. It's not a question on astronomy in the first place anyway.Thanks P.S. will any evolutionist care to explain what they feel on what I posted in the beginning post? ------------------"I AM THE MESSENJAH" holla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
How can noone step up on this question!?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
Sorry?
Messenjah, the age of the earth (and the universe for that matter) was not calculated by evolutionists. Geologists and cosmologists do that. And it points to a ripe old age of billions of years. Many lines of evidence confirm this: radiometric dating, star parallax, etc. You seriously consider that the whole universe just popped intopexistence some 6000 years ago?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
quote: I presented the comets for evidence against an old earth, you haven't revealed your opinion on my original post, isn't unfair for me then to answer you? Furthermore.....You make these assumptions with no revelations of evidence, nor do I want to hear what you have to say on that topic HERE, I am also sure you will refer to dating methods(carbon, radiometric) which are obviously flawed, please start a new topic to discuss this please, this isn't what this topic is supposed to be about!!!!!!! CAN I PLEASE RECIEVE SOME ANSWERS!!!!!!!!!Thanks........... ------------------"I AM THE MESSENJAH" holla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4081 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
Boy, you're impatient. Your bump post #3 was two minutes after post #2.
If evolution is true we wouldn't see comets right now. But due to the Oort cloud we can. Now noone has ever seen the Oort cloud, and you can not see it. We know from a lot of other reasons that the earth is very old. Way back in the late 1700's and early 1800's Christian geologists were figuring out that the earth was old from the layers in the earth. Over the last couple centuries, we've learned how stars form and how long they last. We've learned how creatures evolve and how long it takes. We've also managed to learn the half-lives of many radioactive elements and thus determine exact times for the layers that those early Christian geologists could only guess at. Knowing the time frames we're working with, we know that if all the comets we see were formed when the earth was formed, 4.5 billion years ago, they'd all be gone by now. So we know that the comets must have formed later or entered orbit in the solar system later. Thus, the theory of the Kuiper belt and Oort cloud. We need an explanation for where the comets came from. That's not embarrassing. Many short term comets should be gone even if the earth was 6,000 years old. Even creationists would have to explain where comets with terms shorter than 6 to 10 thousand years came from. So becoming a YEC wouldn't solve our comet-source problem. What is more likely, that thousands of pieces of evidence from numerous fields of science that all mesh together are all false, or that there is a source for the newer short term comets in the solar system? The answer's obvious--extremely obvious--to anyone who wants Truth. Of course, if you hate the Truth because it opposes your religious beliefs, the answer may not be so obvious.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
Thank you. But making something up to help your theory along is not right.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
quote:-Jon Covey How do you explain 10,000 year old comets? Thanks ------------------"I AM THE MESSENJAH" holla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
How do you explain 10,000 year old comets? quote: How do you explain the 1400 year old ones?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
Other examples of evolutionists shifting the burden of proof:the Oort Cloud, Dark Matter, phlogiston.
My information was learned from: Page not found – Creation In The Crossfire Please don't criticize the site to help your argument along. This is a topic on how evolutionist's shift the burden of proof.Thanks Feel free to discuss this and your opinions are needed on this topic. ------------------"I AM THE MESSENJAH" holla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1262 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
Did you just ignore the quote I posted by Jon Covey?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
phlogiston. What does phlogiston have to do with evolution? There is of course a difference between shifting proof and proposing mechanisms that have yet to be observed but explain some data. After all Einstien proposed relativity before having seen any of the data that confirms it, and guess what? He was right.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024