Young Earth Creationist DEBUNKED | Talk Heathen: Throwback
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- All the evidence points to a global Earth. All of it. #science #conspiracy #debate
Call the show on Sundays 1:00pm-2:00pm CDT: 1-512-991-9242
Don't like commercials? Become a patron & get ad-free episodes & more: / talkheathentome
► Find all of our links here: linktr.ee/athe...
The podcast may be found at:
tiny.cc/podcastph
Talk Heathen merch can be found at: tiny.cc/merchaca
Note: We request pronouns as part of the call screening process on our shows, and we display the pronouns our callers provide. If you see a caller with no pronouns indicated, this is because they chose not to provide us with any, and we respect that decision.
-------
WHAT IS TALK HEATHEN?
Talk Heathen is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared toward long-form and on-going dialogue with theists & atheists about religion, theism, & secularism. Talk Heathen is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
Talk Heathen is filmed in front of a live studio audience every week at the Freethought Library of the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop & support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing & friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of government-religion separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists & to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
NOTES
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
/ talkheathen is the official channel of Talk Heathen. "Talk Heathen" is a trademark of the ACA.
Copyright © 2024 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.
"If i misunderstand science, religion makes more sense."
Young Earthers in a nut shell
If I remain stupid and ignorant I can pretend everything says what I want it to say, which makes any evidence against my points wrong and actually in support of my side! Ignorant narcissism is awesome!
Ive dealt with people who argue with me that most scientists are "switching sides" and becoming creationists, and that all the science we do and things we discover every day supports creationism more and more everyday. Why? How? Prove it? Nope. The reason is "Because it is, because they are."
And then if they get pushed too far? Well, it's all just opinions and beliefs, and who _really_ knows? Why do you have to be so combative? We wouldn't have this problem without that atheist Darwin nonsense.
The excuses are endless. "Well, I don't think God wrote that part I don't like. That was for this... or interpreted as that...."
Learning Bio and Physics hard.....
Hi sources are AiG, Ken Ham, Kent Hovind…
In that bizarre way that human beings can be so contradictory, creationists claim to worship a creator and the grandeur of his creation, yet the LAST thing they seem willing to learn about are the wonders of that creation, if that knowledge contradicts their mythology. They even view this "faith" in ancient stories as the height of knowledge and morality. (Well...when applied to their own stories. Other cultures' stories are pagan.) It strikes me as highly disrespectful of their creator and creation to refuse to learn about it, out of nothing more than their own egotistical spiteful certainty that they already know everything.
It seems that an HONEST search for a universal higher consciousness, if you think there is one, HAS to exclude the suppositions of ancient mythologies, whose untold thousands of iterations are so improbable, so wildly contradictory, and so equally without evidence, that none can be believed. An HONEST search for a universal higher consciousness recognizes the simple fact that religious people overwhelmingly believe in the gods and mythology of their culture, with little or no question, so that an honest search means they must understand this about themselves and that their own religion cannot, for that reason, be a fair or logical jumping-off point. An HONEST search for a universal higher consciousness jettisons the ludicrous and dishonest notion that "scientists" just make things up, that they are motivated by a desire to undermine the ancient mythology; instead, HONEST search looks at ALL the sciences for evidence and explanation of how the vast creation functions. An HONEST search for a universal higher consciousness does not presume to know the will or purpose of that consciousness. An HONEST search does not presume to know what happens after death. An HONEST search does not merely repeat claims made on videos watched or pamphlets read. An HONEST search doesn't claim to have knowledge of subjects about which they know very little.
I don't believe in the notion of a higher consciousness, but those who DO ought to show it some respect.
There’s something seriously bothering me about these creationists. On the one hand they take the bible literally, but on the other hand they keep trying to fill in the blanks by proposing things not in the book. Like this guy saying “they could have had babies whilst on the Ark”. That’s a no, it’s not in the bible and it would screw up the entire lineage portrayed in the book.
How do you date how long LIVING snails have been DEAD?
“Your inability to understand basic Science does not mean ,god did it,.”
Unfortunately , for these people , that is exactly what it means .
No it doesn't mean it took humans 190K years to figure out how to build structures. There was no reason to build permanent structures until plant domestication happened because they had to keep moving to find food.
When you grow up in a civilized society, its hard to comprehend that for the majority of history, we were hunter gatherers.
Australian Aboriginal people have been here for 65,000 + years and never built permanent structures.
Not to mention, there's good reason to believe we built rudimentary structures for some time before agricultural settlements. However, because we were nomadic, we lacked the pressures that would cause us to build robust permanent structures. We do actually have evidence that early humans were building shelters from natural materials prior to the creation of settlements. It's merely that reeds and twine are subject to greater decay than stone masonry.
Asserting that our earliest examples of still-standing stone structures must actually be the first examples of structures at all is a clear survivorship bias. It ignores that even earlier structures are simply lost to time.
Carbon dating living snails, Oh good grief that's hilarious,
@@crow7505 They also somehow managed to miss the whole Noah's flood thing.
RJ's "research" into population growth consisted of repeatedly hitting x2 on his Spongebob calculator.
Well because everyone is immortal in his world apparently.
And there was enough left over for deseases and wars. All calculated in at the right time when it happened in history...
You're giving him way too much credit to imply he has a cool calculator
To be fair, that's a WAY more honest effort than anything Malthus ever did
Kudos to Dr. Ray for not shaming the caller by mentioning his PhD in the subject.
Who said, "The intelligent are full of doubts while the stupid are full of confidence?"
I don't know, but whoever it was hit the nail on the head.
As far as I know, English philosopher Bertrand Russell said it first: "The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."
Thats what religion doesnt like having people who are too smart around. Too many questions, too much curiosity. Both are very evil because thats Satan trying to lead you away from god! Just accept the teachings and do as you're told and you'll be allowed to be happy the way we say you can!
That is called the "Dunning-Kruger Effect".
@@toughenupfluffy7294 It was Russell, yes, thanks. 👍
What the caller said about living snail shell was from a paper deliberately misquoted by, who else, Kent Hovind.
The actual title of the paper was "Radiocarbon dating: Fictitious results with mollusk shells."
The paper was actually about how modern mollusk shells could have anomalous radiocarbon ages due to incorporation of inactive (carbon 14 deficient) carbon from the environment. They showed radiocarbon ages of 2300 years.
The experiment was to deliberately demonstrate how environmental conditions could affect radiocarbon dating.
(Keith M. S. and Anderson G. M. 1963 Science vol 141, p 634)
Hovind deliberately misused it to "prove" radiocarbon dating was unreliable.
Now that is a good "revelation"!
Thanks!
Yeah. This is a well known problem called a reservoir effect. It typically happens when organisms collect their carbon from a marine or freshwater environment that is contaminated by old carbon. Radiocarbon dating relies on the (known) ratio of C14/C12 in the atmosphere and so works well for plants that obtain their carbon from the atmosphere and for animals that eat those plants. Any scientific paper using radiocarbon dating has to evaluate the risk for potential reservoir effects : Wood and remains from terrestrial animals are usually fine but organisms in marine or fresh water environments are potentially affected.
I've been familiar with this specific example of bogus young earth creationist claims for over forty years. It's just one of the hundreds of examples of how some prominent young earth creationism pseudoscience promoters cherry-picks some "factoid" out of scientific research, then totally misrepresents it out of context (and by deliberately ignoring the details of the facts presented in the original research article), essentially lying about the scientific research - and then a kazillion scientifically illiterate young earth creationists regurgitate that bogus young earth creationist argument for the next several decades because they have less than zero interest in actually digging into the actual facts for themselves (yes, this attitude of dishonesty is taught in the young earth creationist ideology as a religious virtue). Indeed, they WILL NOT dig into the actual facts about the actual scientific research (willful ignorance), deliberately. And when anyone does take the time to point out the details about the facts that prove that the pseudoscience claim they've made is factually wrong, they'll just deliberately ignore these facts and keep right on promoting their false argument anyway.
In the young earth creationist mindset, this is just standard operating procedure.
(Now, yes, I'm speaking in generalities here, because it isn't 100% of young earth creationists. I'm mostly speaking about the people who go around promoting these false pseudoscience claims. There are certainly people who believe in young earth creationism, but who don't go around promoting the pseudoscience like this. And there are also young earth creationists such as myself - I was a young earth creationist up until 1980 - who were raised by fundamentalist Christian parents, in fundamentalist Christian churches, who are willing to dig into the facts and do their own research, and as they learn more about the details of the actual science of the various topics, they realize how wrong their beliefs are, and then they aren't young earth creationists any more.)
@@cynodont7391yep! Although it’s also possible that predators with a super high proportion of their food being fish might also be a few hundred years older. But that effect tops out at 400 years of extra decay worth. Which means human remains from a fishing village, that test 10k years old, might actually be only 9,700y old when the reservoir effect is taken into effect. Which… doesn’t help creationists much.
Also, it was specifically found in snails in arid locations where the only source of water was very heavy in dissolved limestone, and there were few other sources of calcium in the environment, and ranged from a 100 year age up to that 2,300y age.
…and it’s also a paper from the 1960’s, like everything else Kent cites, because he’s allergic to anything that happened since he went to prison for tax fraud.
' Humans are smarter than dogs ' well most of us are
Jury is still out regarding the YECs.
press fffffffff to doubt
i pressed a few times xD
@@mirandahotspring4019 way out
Nobody ever mentions inbreeding. Eight people on a boat is not a viable starting population.
It... May be? I really have no idea. It's definitely uncomfortable to think about what generations of inbreeding would look like
@@randeepwalia1507 In any case they would not result in the variety of humanity's traits that we have today XD
The main problem with creationism, and especially Noah's ark, is that for the very few species that it could accomodate to get to what we have today, evolution would have needed to be thousands of times faster than what happens in reality.
So yeah, while trying to deny evolution, creationists invented super-duper-evolution XD
@@TheDahaka1 I guess it all comes down to "working in mysterious ways". 😁
Why would you let a human build a boat and make trillions of liters of water, let eggs walk to a boat, feed the carnivores on the boat?
Why not build the boat yourself or place a new mountain (much simpler than all that water) and spread a deadly virus that only infected humans and not animals. And after that the polar Bears walked together with the seals through the desert to the north pole. Yeah...
Correct. It takes genetic drift over many generations to evolve the diversity we see today. Inbreeding leads to unadvantageous mutations and oftentimes sterility.
I believe the earth can only be about 120 years old, because if you look at people, there are none who are over 150 years old. Sounds legit.
Last Thursdayism. The universe was created exactly as it is, memories and all, just last Thursday.
This thread is inspiring!
@@toughenupfluffy7294 I'm glad you picked Thor's Day....LOL... it wouldn't make sense otherwise..LOL
@@toughenupfluffy7294 Foolish Last Thursdayism. The truth comes from Last Wednesdayism!
All these Christians talk about a young earth and a global flood while native australians have history going back 65,000+ years and apparently missed out on the creation and end of the world.
Even in Yorkshire we have 11,000 year old settlements, This caller is very confused, Wait until he finds out about Troglodytes.
RJ is terminally confused!
RJs confidence in his ignorance is astounding. 🤦🏽
Theists' confidence in their ignorance is astounding
Dunning-Kruger effect.
He did the calculations on a calculator that assumed every person born survived and never died
😂😂😂😂💀💀💀💀
Exactly. There was famine, war, plagues and no modern medicine. The likelihood of survival into adulthood was pretty iffy at best.
@@jane-cn6nd "yeah but they popped out 24 kids back then....."
WELL NOT IN A FAMINE!!!
"Yeah well according to my spongebob calculator......"
someone, please drag his obnoxious, naive, ignorant, smug ass back to school and I don't mean HOME SCHOOL
"I did my own research". 🤦♂
We never should have made hardware so cheap, and software so idiot proof that the internet became nothing but a way to find any information that reassures your ignorance.
Using RJ's "population" logic, the Pyramids were built by about 200 people.
That's the best counterargument ever.
They were very strong
"I have to disagree with you on that, im just guessing"..around 4:56 summarizes the whole call.
Hearing this makes me wonder why there still is a discussion about how to determine when someone is braindead.
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." --- Voltaire
I thought that was Mark Twain.
Yes, it seems to be Voltaire, just off the top of my google.
Also by Voltaire, "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere."
"Religion was invented when the first conman met the first fool" - Mark Twain.
"It's not what you don't know that gets you into trouble, it's what you know that just ain't so."-Mark Twain
These peope "are thought" - they follow EXACTLY the path people like Kent Hovind have told them. Not a single thought deviates from the programming they have succumbed themselves to.
RJ is a genius because inside his bubble of creationism he knows as much as all the others - and he will NEVER look outside. Outside all is wrong, inside all is right.
I grew up homeschooled K-12 in young earth creationism. The only thing I learned about biology matched up with what the bible said or was used to “debunk” evolution. I was told scientists don’t want to believe in (Christian) god, so they desperately try to disprove it and find other ways to explain the world. RJ sounded exactly like how I would have sounded if I had called in after graduating from high school. He has no idea how much he doesn’t know.
The Australian native people hane been in Australia 60000 years. They didn't build things. Thay were hunter gathers.
He actually said, "if you times it by 2". Well, I'll accept that he made it out of second grade. Ok, too much snark and stupidity for one day. Have fun internet people!
The oldest cave painting is dated to be 45,500 years old. Not 10 thousand, so, NO - not everything points to a young earth.
Exactly we have an 11,000 year old settlement in Yorkshire.
We have Native American artifacts in Oregon, USA dating back at least 10,000 years.
@@greeneyedlady5580 Stone Henge is 5000 years old, And it’s not even the oldest.
The callers theory about population growth assumes that everyone is still alive thoughout those thousands of years.
These sort of calls follow a script.
Caller: This is what I believe because I've had it told to me throughout my life by my theist parents, Sunday school teacher, pastors, teachers at my Christian school.
Hosts: The science is this, though.
Caller: .....ummm..... [I never considered that...]. But the Bible says...
"Human technology isn't perfect, so I'm gonna guess on an old book written by humans who lived in the times when technology was even Worse" -- because that makes perfect sense, yeah -_-
ooooo they had up to 24 kids once they got off the ark!!! Well that solves everything then! They could totally make the pyramids with two dozen people then!
“So you’re saying the majority of the world, which are Christians, are wrong and the minority, scientists, are not?”-said in a scoffing way. Argument from ad populum here man. I don’t care if all 8 billion people on Earth believe something to be true…it matters whether or not it’s actually true. We, as skeptics, go with scientists because the methods scientists employ to find the truth have been the most reliable and accurate.
It is so presumptuous to think that by doing an internet search, you know better than thousands of scientists who devoted their life studying that topic!
it's astonishing that there are still people who believe in this (very stupid & terribly cruel) fairy tale.
RJ's ignorance is of biblical proportions.
So he knows humans are mammals, but thinks evolution is fake?
What a mind-numbingly dull and predictable discussion.
Population grew far more slowly thousands of years ago
The "living aquatic animal radiocarbon dated to be thousands of years old" claim is a very old one (I first heard it in 1970, but didn't find the source until nearly 1990 and then refound it about a decade ago when it was cited by Kent Hovind in his PowerPoint presentations -- ironic, isn't that?) and undoubtedly comes from many sources since it's based on a very common issue that scientists are well aware of.
C-14 dating depends on cosmic radiation changing nitrogen into carbon-14 in the upper atmosphere (which very quickly combines with oxygen to form carbon-dioxide), which then disperses throughout the atmosphere to be incorporated into plant tissue through photosynthesis, after which it enters animal tissue through ingestion of plants or of plant-eaters. It can then slowly work its way from the atmosphere into the seas. As a result, the C14 in the atmosphere is mainly "new" while the C14 in the seas is mainly "old" and so has had more time to decay. In Wikipedia articles on radiocarbon dating, search for "reservoir" which describes that.
One issue that raises is that aquatic animals (eg, fish) AND ANIMALS WHO FEED ON THEM (eg, seals, humans who subsist primarily on fishing) will yield radiocarbon ages that are greater than they should be, because the C14 that they ingest is mainly "old carbon".
In the case of the freshwater clams (in the version I was told, snails in the version you heard), they get their carbon from the water, NOT FROM THE ATMOSPHERE. In the article I found, the stream was fed by a spring in limestone and hence the water in the spring contained dissolved limestone, which being calcium carbonate contains carbon and having come from limestone makes that carbon "OLD". It is the living animals' use of "old carbon" that yields "bad dates."
Scientists are very well aware of this issue and so know to account for it. Indeed, on a recent NOVA about an archaeological excavation of an old Viking encampment in England with a known date, they found that carbon dating of the human remains yielded dates that were about 200 years greater than the historical date. The reason for that was the use of fishing for sustenance: the fish grew up on "old carbon" and so when people ate the fish they were also eating "old carbon."
Kent’s a con man
“Ummm ummmm der ummmmm I’m guessing and disagree ummmmm man made structure 10 million ummmmmm. They have overlooking this.” Wow.
On structures: How did he rule out that we dont have older manmade structures that were destroyed and cant be detected?
Also with regard to human population growth. No one in this call mentioned high maternal mortality rates during childbirth. Thats only been largely fixed recently in countries with high medical standards. It still exists today in other places. One imagines that back 5000 years ago it was even more common for mothers to die in childbirth
Exactly, and I was telling something to that effect while watching this clip. I'm only here today because I was able to get a DNC after a miscarriage almost 50 years ago. I don't know what the actual data might have been, but I wouldn't be surprised if as many as 1 I! 4 women died in pregnancy or childbirth thousand of years ago. Probably the best majority of children didn't live to adulthood. Even today, the US has high maternal death rates, particularly along Natives and Black people.
The first human structures were wood huts. They don’t last thousands of years. The giant stone buildings came much later, but were finally big enough for us to find now.
Göbekli Tepe is made in around 9000 BC which is far older than the 6000 year old.
Theopetra's Cave, Meteora, Greece Built: 21000 BC
Barnenez, France Built: 4850 BC
Theres in fact quite a few things that are older than what SHOULD be if earth was just created at the same time.
When London was a great city there were millions of native Americans in the NA continent
Where are their structures, when they lived here for 20 000 years?
They just didn't build out of the kind of stuff that lasts. Kind of like people did 100,000 years ago. They DID build structures. They just didn't last.
Caller: I would say my belief is based on evidence. Any “evidence” I don’t like is disregarded using whatever random “source” I can find on google, and I choose to seek out, and only believe sources that make the claims I like.
Holy Cognitive Dissonance Batman!!!!
I know nothing about population studies and I suck at math...yet I can still see how utterly flawed his population calculations are.
One thing to think about is that none of the animal species we know existed in the past and are now extinct or in a much changed form are mentioned in the Bible.
"Humans are the smartest mammal on the planet". Dude, you are disproving this!
The problem with his calculation is, that nobody dies in all of his doubling. He just adds all the new people and never subtracts the dead ones.
He really think that humans should have been making vast structures that stand the test of time as soon as we gained our current level of sentience. Like we didn't have to, idk, figure it out first? Also the fact that we couldn't settle until we developed agriculture and domesticated animals.
"the oldest tree supports young earth"
Alerce Milenario, Prometheus, Methuselah, and the oldest known bristlecone pine (I don't think it has a name like the others) would all have had to *survive* the Flood to be as old as they are
I also love his """"""math"""""" on the population growth. His math assumes that prior generations don't die off
@@botaniccal Well the Bible claims Noah was 900 when he began building the ark, so if he did factor in life expectancy, I doubt he was very realistic about how long that would be.
His claim based on biology , ignoring geology totally as it debunks his main premise.
So typically Christian, “I don’t know the exact number but I’m going to give one anyway.”
"So typically Christian, “I don’t know the exact number but I’m going to give one anyway.”"
Translates to: "I am not capable of saying 'I don't know' because I'm representing my faith and I'm told the Bible has all the answers."
Just checked. Living snails have shells that have been incorporating “dead carbon” when living in an environment with ancient limestone
RJ from Colorado, A new level of ignorance. If I had a time machine I go for about 3000 years and hope that religion has died out.
That happened to Cartman on South Park
18:00 uhhh, RJ does know the world is a globe... right?
It seemed like he was throwing darts at a wall... In the dark... With no dart board... And no darts
The Dunning-Kruger effect in full view!!!
I wonder if heaven will be filled with people like this dude.
RJ,
Odin promised to rid the planet of ice giants. I see no ice giants. Do I have a valid reason to believe in or put any faith in Odin?
(Citation of source is necessary for honesty and honest discovery. Shh, don't tell them I told you our secret)
That happened, I believe the full quote was
"We're going to eliminate the Ice Giants, and Jötunheim is going to pay for it"
The story of Noah is not 6000 years ago.
"Humans are smarter than dogs, so they have a larger lifespan than dogs"
So is it safe to say that turtles and whales are smarter than humans? Than RJ? Because they live waaaay longer than humans do
That’s not mentioning trees, fungi or coral. All way smarter than humans.
That would make the Greenland Shark the smartest animal on the planet at 400+ years?
Am I the only one concerned about the incestual implications of starting with 8 humans?
No!
👍👍
Considering 5 were related to begin with lol
Look at the trees, Oh sheet here we go again.
He’s not accounting for people dying. He’s just a x2 and hitting the equals button over and over
His calculations have 2000 year old people
This was my first thought also.
But to be fair, every single person named in genesis dies of old age at like 800-900 years old hahah
Human technology is flawed Hutchins dating method is that of bishop usher. I'm laughing!
Biologically, after three human generations of inbreeding, we have the type of birth defects that strongly affect fertility. I think the heat problem is a worse "nail in the coffin" of these creationists, but the fertility is absolutely a killer of the idea.
Young Earther never played Crusader Kings
ancient american cilivizations are marked historically from approx 14-15,000 yrs old.
We do have existing human structures that date back more than 7,000 years, check out Karahan Tepe.
There’s loads of even older structures around. Circular stone foundations for huts and fireplaces. Not as spectacular, but still a human made structure.
Wow! A complete waste of time for 2 great hosts!
The entire Egyptian empire was there about 600 years after the flood and made slaves of more than 1 million israelite miles! You can't get those numbers f4on 8 people!
RJ, go read a different book, outside that old comic you have gotten your comedic knowledge from. Your lack of knowledge about anything, is laughable...... 😂😂😂
Oldest SURVIVING man-made structure. SURVIVING structures. Jebus fkn crow. 🙄
There are 35 mountains in the world taller than Ararat. Everest is 13,000 ft taller than Ararat. Ararat was underwater for a very long time.
This guy is a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Abraham Lincoln was born 211 years ago. He has zero living descendants. (He had four sons, but his line died out with his great-grandchildren.)
This guys maths doesn’t account for any dying.
In regard to the young earth creationist's first argument, it's hilarious how he totally ignore both the facts of archaeology and history that prove that the civilizations and cultures that existed BEFORE the Bible's time frame of some alleged worldwide flood (the mythological flood story in Genesis; which in the biblical time frame would have been around 2350 BC also existed AFTER that time. In other words, IF there had actually been a worldwide flood that killed every human on the planet except for eight people on a giant wooden boat, THEN all civilizations and cultures that existed at that time would have CEASED TO EXIST, and EVERY civilization and culture that sprung up after that time would have come from ONE SINGLE SOURCE: the eight people on the ark. Both archaeology and history prove that no such "universal discontinuity" of civilizations and cultures ever happened.
So his entire argument here is based on a young earth creationist delusion. (Not to mention that this delusion is based on literally ignoring the very existence of all of the cultures that existed outside of the Middle East region - in other words, it's based on ignoring the existence of all of the cultures that existed everywhere else on the planet, such as in Asia, the Indian subcontinent, Africa, and North and South America.
(This is just dealing with his specific claim here in the context of his own argument. We could also talk about the fact that in regard to geology, there isn't any geological evidence of any worldwide flood. But that's another discussion.)
Caller's argument also doesn't take genetic deviation from just 8 progenitors into account.
Oldest clonal tree is nearly 10,000 years old, so there goes that whole tree thing.
Oldest buildings is 9500-1100 years old
Earliest evidence of humans in the Americas is 18,000 years old.
So none of that seems to line up with anything RJ says.
@7:30 Sorry RJ, by Price is Right rules 6,000 is not a better guess to reach 12,000 than 200,000 is. Come back when you have an actual methodology and model, not arbitrary "close enough" incurious trash.
Classic religions argument
No, I’m right because it sounds better to me
That should be proof that would persuade anyone
8000? "Damascus, Syria, is one of the world’s oldest continuously inhabited cities, a distinction it bears with its history lost in the mists of time. Damascus is a living example of the tenacity and durability of human civilization, with a history spanning more than 11,000 years."
Great math there RJ, I'm looking forward to having 16 billion people on earth 30 years from now based on that.
The age of writing was badly misunderstood, and misrepresented.
The oldest surviving, preserved, writing media, is approx 5,500 years.
There is no rational, logical, critical, reason to think that writing could not have evolved over thousands of years, prior to methods of preservation.
These long preserved materials correlate to stationary civilisations, not nomafic, hunter gatherers.
And what about documented, examined and tested, cave drawings?
The "evolution" of the written language HAD to have developed for a long time, arguably and rationally, before enduring writing materals were put into use.
The mental gymnastics tripped over and broke it's neck with this dilude! 🤣👌
(Sorry, I don't know the names of the people here.)
The panelist on the left (of the video) says: "Evolution is not even the issue here.... Human habitation on this planet is the issue, that goes way, way back before any flood."
Young earth creationist: "Well, see, there's a reason I have an issue with that, because if you do believe in evolution and that we're around 200,000 years that would mean that it took us like 190,000 years to figure out how to make a man-made structure."
Which is just another example of how young earth creationists have an inordinately difficult time grasping basic logic.
Evolution isn't even the issue. Period. Biological evolution has nothing whatsoever to do with what he's discussing here. But with the young earth creationist, no matter what it is in science or history that we're talking about, everything in science or history - or any other field at all in which the research results contradict young earth creationism dogma - it's all "evolution, evolution, evolution."
Why do young earth creationists talk in such a brain-dead manner like this? It's because in the young earth creationist ideological mindset as it has been constructed since the late 1800s, any and all facts produced in science or any other field of research that contradicts has been portrayed as part of a massive worldwide "evolutionist" conspiracy to promote evolution in an assault against fundamentalist Christian beliefs. I'm NOT exaggerating here. This is not a straw man. (Indeed, a lot of the fundamentalist Christian rhetoric on this - young earth creationism itself being just another branch of fundamentalist Christian apologetics - takes this conspiracy theory rhetoric even further, making it even more delusional, in portraying all of these things as part of a massive worldwide atheist conspiracy.) Thus, in the young earth creationist mindset, all of the scientific research results in astronomy and astrophysics that show that the universe has been around far, far longer than just 6,000 years is "evolution," because it's all part of the worldwide evolutionist (or atheist) conspiracy against fundamentalist Christian belief. The same with geology, geophysics, physics, and any other field of science in which research results contradict their beliefs (i.e., prove that those religious beliefs are false). It's all just part of the "evolutionist" conspiracy.
It's because their minds are so deeply tied up into this young earth creationist rhetorical framework that when some critic comes along and points out the simple fact that the topic being discussed doesn't have anything to do with evolution, the young earth creationist literally cannot "think outside of the box" of his young earth creationist mindset. The basic logic of the situation is simply beyond his ability to grasp.
Hey, RJ.
Big difference between beliefs, poor evidence and good evidence.
There's one big big major thinking mistake RJ made with his calculation. Let's grant that from all children, only 2 reach maturity and successfully reproduce: Did you know that actually only the females give birth to offspring? So to speak only to avoid the argumentation that men sometimes had several females, but given the birth rate of male and female offspring is about the same, that only means that some males did not reproduce. So, only couples formed families, needing 2 people to create 2 new people, which leads to no growth.
One day a caveman got up, grabbed some stones, got some sticks and some vines, put 'em all together and poof- a little caveman shelter was made. First man-made structure. Too easy 😄
The problem with doubling starting with 8 hitting 8 billion after about 30 times is it assumes that people lived 3000 years you have to take numbers away for death as you double
Tribes all around the world still living in simple structures or even nomadic ones.
Why’s he think humans would just jump straight to massive stone structures lol
RJ's arguments are so poorly thought out and expressed that I'm tempted to think he's a troll. Damned Poe's Law!
Yes carbon dating is flawed, when you don't do it correctly.
He doesn't know where the middle east is,,,he's talking about the near east or the Levant.
It never escapes me that I think these people are obviously dead wrong, and they think the same about me.
The question is, does religion somehow increase illogical thinking in society? Does it actually go as far as to influence political positions and such?
Young earth proponents thought the days in Genesis account of creation is a literal 24-hour day period forcing to accept the creation of light on the first day is just as 24 hour day period of the creation of the heavenly bodies on the 4th day. This is absurd, and an erroneous interpretation of the Genesis account of creation.
Newgrange passage tomb here in Ireland predates the Pyramids of Egypt and we are a fair distance away from the Middle East.
You cannot take 8 people because you have to work with couples. So there was 4 couples to begin with
"the amount of knowledge you are lacking is astounding"
"If they had kids while they were on the boat??!"
How long does this kid think it takes to make a baby??😂😂😂