Yec/Not Yec? - A "let's keep it short topic"

Randman made the above statement in message 61 of the "The state of ID/YECism here at EvC", just before Adminnemooseus closed that topic down.Let us truly focus on the above quoted statement. Can a non-YEC find YECism to be "a respectable view"? My view is, only if you are looking purely at the Bible, without any input from any outside reality.Kind of like "Thinking that Hobbits exist is a respectable view in light of the writings of JRR Tolkien is not the same as being a believer in the existance of Hobbits".MooseThis message has been edited by minnemooseus, 12-23-2005 04:16 PM

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

OK, the ENTIRE message was: I see nothing else relevant there.You are saying that it is valid for you to make use of any source of information you choose, while ignoring any source of information you choose, to support any statement you make. You have no defined position in the creationism/evolution debate.Either support the statement quoted in message 1 (and "bolded" above) or withdraw it as not actually representing you perspective. It's as simple as that.And lay of the "idiocy" and such terminology. It reflects mostly on your attitude, not that of the others.Moose

OK - Specific straight forward questions to you:Tapping ALL the information at your disposal, is YECism a reasonable valid view on how the Earth and everything of the earth came to be?Tapping ALL the information at your disposal, is old Earth theistic evolutionism a reasonable valid view on how the Earth and everything of the earth came to be?Tapping ALL the information at your disposal, is agnostic (don't know if God was involved or not) old Earth evolutionism a reasonable valid view on how the Earth and everything of the earth came to be?And drop using "asinine" also.MooseEdits: Changed three "everthing"s to "everything".
2nd edit: Added the "old Earth" to the 3rd question.This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 12-23-2005 05:36 PMThis message has been edited by minnemooseus, 12-23-2005 05:39 PM

Unless your just talking about chatting Randman's debate style - Then the chatroom is a fine place.Moose

OK, I'll concede that the quoted of message 1 is a valid view, AS FAR AS IT GOES.But note what I said elseswhere in that message: Now, please, the questions of message 12.Moose

Looking at your registration date and message totals indicates that you've averaged 10+ messages per day. I'm not condeming this in itself (this forum puts a heavy load on the creo members), but it does mean that your presented information is pretty dispersed.In an earlier reply to me, you stated that you are neither a YEC nor some variety of evolutionist. To me, what has stood out is that you are indeed an "anti-evolutionist", without having staked out any clear creationist position. This includes my impression that you are "not a YEC, but still support YECism". What does that make you? A "semi-Yec"?Bottom line - I'm trying to get a clear, concise creationist position out out you.Moose

If so, it's lost in the clutter.How about the short version right here?Moose

Randman, I thank you for message 27.What I ask now, before I file that message 27 away for future reference, is that what you wish to be the final version of your position statement?Moose

There really isn't that much to know about YECism. God created everything in 6 24 hour days, about 5 to 10 thousand years ago, and a while later did a remodeling via the great flood. Pretty well covers the essence of YEC. I think that the age of the Earth is fundimental in the creation vs. evolution debate, and by extension, the exploration of ID.If you are unwilling to take a position on the age of the Earth, then we have no context to discuss anything else.Moose

I'm just trying to really nail down your age of the Earth position.You stated "I think the age of the earth is old". By that statement I assume that you accept the mainstream scientific view that the Earth is ~4.5 billion years old. Correct me if my assumption is incorrect.If that assumption is correct, then YECism should not be any part of any discussion between Randman and those of the mainstream evolution persuasion. In other words - Randman is in no way a YEC.Moose

I will take that as Randman being an "old Earther", and not remotely being a YEC in any way. That should end this topic.I hereby request that an admin (other than Adminnemooseus) close this topic. Please keep the subtitle of this message in the subtitle.Moose