But I’m thinking that no matter what, we’re talking ages significantly longer than say, 6000 years. In fact, unless Antarctica was moving at a pace faster than you can jog, we’re talking millions if not hundreds of millions of years here.
Of course, creationists have an answer for this, including “catastrophic plate tectonics”, which apparently can have all the continents scurrying across the face of the Earth like cockroaches avoiding light. Go ahead and read that link; it’s pretty entertaining. According to them, the continents all got pushed around by Noah’s flood, then suddenly stopped, except not really stopped; now they move slowly, and at just the right speed to be in concordance with the hundreds of other pieces of evidence that show that the Earth is billions of years old.
this is a personal challenge to my good friend john crane.
any chance you can devote an hour to listening to this (while you’re folding laundry or something) in the next month?
i know you’re just getting back from the UK, so no rush, but i would love your reaction to this:
Taner Edis, born and raised in Turkey, is associate professor of physics at Truman State University and the author of The Ghost in the Universe: God in Light of Modern Science and Science and Nonbelief, among other publications. His latest book is An Illusion of Harmony: Science and Religion in Islam.
In this wide-ranging conversation with D.J. Grothe, Taner Edis explains reasons he thinks religion persists, and explores the complex relationship between science and nonbelief, detailing how the institutional interests of science may prevent some in the science community from working to diminish religion, the New Atheists excepted. He talks about how scientific theories are often misused by paranormalists and supernaturalists to advance their cultural position, focusing on the New Age movement’s use of quantum physics and on the intelligent design movement. He examines differences between science and pseudoscience, arguing that often it is not possible to demarcate what is uniquely science. And he surveys various scientific approaches of examining religion, such as rational choice theory, the secularization hypothesis, and various evolutionary approaches, such as group selection theory, the byproduct theory of religion, and memetic approaches (that religion is a “virus of the mind”).
IE 6 is a last-generation browser. This means that IE 6 can’t provide the same web experience that modern browsers can. Continued support of IE 6 means that we can’t optimize our interfaces or provide an enhanced customer experience in our apps. Supporting IE 6 means slower progress, less progress, and, in some places, no progress. We want to make sure the experience is the best it can be for the vast majority of our customers, and continuing to support IE 6 holds us back.
I’m sure they were paid an assload of money to do this Oreo Double Stuf Lick Race, or whatever it is, but it seems that the Mannings should have rethought their venture into homoerotic brotherly tongue competitions that involve thick, white cream.
the neighbor kid — 4 years old and super cute — has finally been trained not to ring the doorbell 4 or 6 times before we can even get to the door.
only, now he knocks constantly, till you get there.
worse still: he doesn’t take no for an answer.
Kid: CAN (J2) PLAY?
Me: No, Nelson*, sorry, we’re leaving soon.
Kid: BUT WHERE YALL GOIN?
Me: it doesnt matter, Nelson, we’re leaving soon — we’ll be back about 8 and (J2) can play then.
Kid: BUT WHERE YOU GOIN?
Me: Like I just said — we’re leaving, and (J2) will be back later.
Kid: BUT WHERE YOU GOIN?
Me: *sigh*
Kid: BUT WHERE YOU GOIN?
Me: Good bye, Nelson.
Kid: BUT WHERE YOU GOIN?
Me: I will see you later, okay kiddo?
Kid: BUT WHERE YOU GOIN?
Me: *shuts door*
Kid, yelling through door: BUT WHERE YOU GOIN?
Kid, yelling through door: MR CHRIS?
Kid, yelling through door: CAN (J2) PLAY?
according to J2, “chest” is a game you play on a checkerboard, with pieces vaguely resembling mideaval characters, such as “knights”, “kings” or “pawns”.
First of all this suggests that Humans were the expected outcome of God’s creation and while it is easy to understand this flawed logic, after all, we are the outcome of God’s creation, this should not be confused with a forward looking goal. In fact, it is easy to argue that God’s Creation was set in motion to eventually result in a form of life which could gain spirituality and a soul and thus become aware of His existence. Furthermore, even if God had set in motion a Darwinian process, He could still have intervened, as I have explained above, without violating natural law. In other words, the process would still appear purely Darwinian and at the same time would be guided.
So contrary to the fallacious claims that ‘true Darwinists’ cannot be ‘true Christians’, it is self evident that such a position is not logically tenable.
What I find puzzling is why people are intent on rejecting the good science of Darwinism and evolutionary theory as somehow being incompatible with their faith. That shows both a disregard for science, which is a typical ID Creationist affliction, as well as a significant lack in faith.
‘It is possible that in a nomadic setting, a boy with this allele might be able to more effectively defend livestock against raiders or locate food and water sources, but that the same tendencies might not be as beneficial in settled pursuits such as focusing in school, farming or selling goods,’ Assistant Professor Eisenberg said.
