Quote:

I will first assume that our observations about nature are true. They are not artificially created by a God in order to deceive us.



That's a good place to start.

Quote:

Christians (not your sect, but mainstream Christianity) normally assume that Genesis does not describe the literal creation of the world, but maybe God's fine tuning of the nature mechanism.



You would have to purposely misread the bible to make this assumption.

I just take this as they're confused.

Quote:

Those obstacles are superstition: The attempts to explain nature not by His designed natural laws, but by supernatural events.



I fail to see how any of what I've said relating to science is superstition. According to the definition, you believe a lot of superstition yourself.

Quote:

If he wanted us to believe in creationism, he had certainly not given us the possibility to directly observe the evolutional relation of all species in their DNA record.



You can't just mix a lie with truth and expect the lie/guess/whatever to become true by association. When we see common aspects of DNA, we literally only know for sure that there is DNA in common. Every other conclusion except that DNA is similar is merely speculation. At that point its just as correct to say that its a reflection of common design as it is common ancestry.

What's more important is noticing how even the small differences in DNA (chimps<->humans) are an overwhelming barrier that mutations cannot overcome.

Quote:

In that case he has intentionally created our world in a way as if it were billions of years old.



I'll touch on this later, because this is more of a problem for you than it is me.

Quote:

and on the other hand believe in that he placed photons in space so that we can see far-away stars.



I don't believe that.

Quote:

and especially creationism.



...

Quote:

Yes, but that's not an argument against the infinity of the universe. In fact it will happen no matter whether the universe is finite or infinite.



I wasn't aware that energy went through infinite cycles. If you look back infinitely into the past, the universe would have become useless for life infinity ago. I would think this would cause all sorts of mathematical problems. All matter in the universe would be as far apart as it can get in an infinite amount of time, and energy would be converted to 'unuseable' form infinity ago too.

I thought infinite time couldn't exist because it caused all sorts of paradoxes. Or am I wrong?



Ok, back to my point. My theory would predict that, even if there are certain calculations that might lead to an old earth, there will be some that lead to a young earth. In fact, it won't be compeletely certain. Salinity of the ocean, reef growth, etc all give a maximum young(er) age. Oh yeah! And the moon is escaping, giving a young age even for our solar system. The oldest tree is also about 5000 years old, strangely enough (which could fall within the range of the biblical flood if you consider that dual rings can form in a year). Wonder why that would be.

My theory also predicts that some dating methods which should correlate will not, which is what happens. No one knows for sure, and even as a creationist, the only reason I'm sure that the earth is young is because I think the bible says so. However, that isn't scientific reason, but I think I can scientifically say that we can't really know for sure. If the earth was created with an apparent age, then there should be other evidence that it was created that way. Which I think we find. There is more young earth evidence, but I'll leave it at that for now because I'm tired.

Last edited by Irish_Farmer; 05/29/06 23:21.
"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."