Comment on Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism by Allen Roy.
I have no problem with SDA students learning ABOUT the religious belief of Naturalism and it’s evolutionism. It is just as important to know this as to learn about any other religious belief so that one knows how to deal with it and not get lost in the many pathways. One reason why this is a problem today is that not enough about the religious nature of Naturalism and evolutionism has been taught so that when our students are exposed to it, they become confused.
Ellen White was right when but 5 years after Darwin published “Origin of the species,” she wrote that the problem was all about faith. Do you believe in the religious views of naturalism or the religious views of Creationism? Science itself is not the problem. What was not really understood until the 20th century, with Popper and Khun, was that all science is done within a paradigm and that the interpretations within one paradigm were incompatible with interpretations within another paradigm.
Table of Contents
Recent Comments by Allen Roy
Dr. Ervin Taylor: ‘A truly heroic crusade’
Taylor wrote: “He must reject all of the mainline conclusions of 99.9% of all those scientists who are involved in all isotopic dating methods, and all other types of dating methods including dendrochronology, varve dating, ice core dating, stable isotope studies of ocean cores, and on and on.”
This is pure Argumentum ad Populum. This logical fallacy is common among naturalists when faced with opposition which they are incapable of comprehending.
Dr. Ervin Taylor: ‘A truly heroic crusade’
@Taylor. What utter nonsense! He hasn’t a clue what creationism is about, not to mention science!!
Former LSU student letter reveals professor’s agenda
I attended LSU back in the early 1970’s I remember the same professors (Guy especially) expressing doubts about the creation account and using extra reading books which claimed that the Genesis account was myth based on ancient Middle East pagan myths. This was presented in a way that it was enlightening, a better understanding than the traditional, backward views of the old SDAs. At the time, I was puzzled why this would be taught, but didn’t say anything. Now I can see where all that was leading. Happily, I wasn’t taken in [edit].
Angry Scientists: Publishing on Intelligent Design
The difference between the Flying Spaghetti Monster is that he has never told anyone in any book that he wrote or caused to be written that he created them last Tuesday. In fact the argument goes ‘We don’t know but what we were created last Tuesday by the Flying Spaghetti Monster with fake memories of history built in. You don’t know if your “god” created you last Tuesday.”
Wrong. The God of the Bible walked and talked with Adam and Eve and told them that he had created them and why. He has talked with prophets ever since. So, we do know that God created us approximately 6000 years ago because he told us. All we have to do is believe it.
Or, all we have to do is believe, based on no evidence whatsoever, that the Flying Spaghetti Monster did it. It’s all based on faith.
Allen Roy
AKA: SkepticalChristian
Jay Gallimore comments on evolution conflict
24 hour day
By definition an hour is 1/24th of the time of one rotation of the planet.
It doesn’t matter how fast the planet is rotating, an hour is always 1/24 of the rotation time.
If you had two planets side by side (planet A and Planet B) and one (planet B) was rotating twice as fast as the other, each planet would still have 24 hours per day/rotation. The difference is that an hour on planet B, when measured by time based on planet A, would be 1/2 the length of time as an hour on planet A. But still, Each planet would have 24 hour days. What matters here is which planet do you live on.
A minute is 1/60 of an hour and a second is 1/60 of a minute. Our Measurements of time is based on the rotation of the planet. The second is based on the minute and the minute is based on the hour and the hour is based on the rotation of the planet. Time is not based on the second or some fraction there of. Nuclear clocks have been set up to try to have a basis to measure time across the universe based on the second. Still even then it is an measurement at only approximates the time of 1/60 of 1/60 of 1/24 of 1 rotation of the planet.
So to saying that the days of the creation week were 24 hours long is really a redundancy. A hour is 1/24 of a day.
As for physics AiG has an excellent summary and explanation found here:
“Do creationists believe in weird science?”
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab2/do-creationists-believe-in-weird-physics
