Creation Vs Evolution

Amaterasu wrote:

quater wrote:

death-chan wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

death-chan wrote:Do you think God wanted it to be this way? Bush, anarchy, genocide, disease?

I'm inserting myself in the convo. yay!

and probably not, but He gave man free will to do as we see fit, and well, this is what we've come up with

lol, hey.

hence why kurokumo cannot say that God is not perfect because it was our own faults why we have Bush

I'll Kill you.
President Bush is far better then the alternatives and is a fine President.

ah, my opinion is different, but then again as you knwo i don't pay attention nor do I care about your silly government ^_^

Terra, that was just hilarious, brat-snotty all,

'nor do I care about your silly playhouse kiddie little government hahaha hardy hahaha!'

Kiddie Dreamland Mediocre Little Government, it sounded ...ah lol

I've read almost all the posts in this thread, and I really find this debate interesting specially because I went to a Catholic school.
I always wondered about creation and evolution since I learned it separately, but one year this awesome history teacher told us that God may have pulled all the strings to make evolution possible, but reading this discussion I've noticed that if God being God could have "pulled" those strings making that possible, why bother to make a code on the Bible saying 7 days?
Even though I may agree (by the exposed facts), I've read that the number 7 has a biblical meaning and it's not only in Genesis.

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

quater wrote:

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

it's not lying, it's a metaphor

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

it's not lying, it's a metaphor

\

God Said 7 days. Why would he waste his time? When he made the Israelites lost in the desert for 40 years it wasn't a metaphor. Nor when he flooded the Earth was it a metaphor. God doesn't use metaphors with the things he does. If he says it, he means it. He Poured out 12 plagues on the Egyptians, no Metaphor.

Etc. There are tons of instances when he says things, but I have yet to see it be a metaphor. With something as tremendously important as the Creation of Earth why would he lie? Besides, Science says the Earth is between 15 and 8 thousand years old.

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

it's not lying, it's a metaphor

\

God Said 7 days. Why would he waste his time? When he made the Israelites lost in the desert for 40 years it wasn't a metaphor. Nor when he flooded the Earth was it a metaphor. God doesn't use metaphors with the things he does. If he says it, he means it. He Poured out 12 plagues on the Egyptians, no Metaphor.

Etc. There are tons of instances when he says things, but I have yet to see it be a metaphor. With something as tremendously important as the Creation of Earth why would he lie? Besides, Science says the Earth is between 15 and 8 thousand years old.

wow, the earth's a youngster!

Metaphors were used because people of that time couldn't grasp the concept of so many years. They were just as smart and just as capable of understanding as we were, but they were uneducated! They wouldn't have believed that was possible!

And some people do believe that the Flood was a metaphor. The bible says God will destroy the earth once by water, and again by fire. According the that, we're all gonna be bacon some day

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

it's not lying, it's a metaphor

\

God Said 7 days. Why would he waste his time? When he made the Israelites lost in the desert for 40 years it wasn't a metaphor. Nor when he flooded the Earth was it a metaphor. God doesn't use metaphors with the things he does. If he says it, he means it. He Poured out 12 plagues on the Egyptians, no Metaphor.

Etc. There are tons of instances when he says things, but I have yet to see it be a metaphor. With something as tremendously important as the Creation of Earth why would he lie? Besides, Science says the Earth is between 15 and 8 thousand years old.

wow, the earth's a youngster!

Metaphors were used because people of that time couldn't grasp the concept of so many years. They were just as smart and just as capable of understanding as we were, but they were uneducated! They wouldn't have believed that was possible!

And some people do believe that the Flood was a metaphor. The bible says God will destroy the earth once by water, and again by fire. According the that, we're all gonna be bacon some day

You make me laugh. Why couldn't they? They couldn't understand a Real Long time Ago? You pretend like they are some how lower then us? Why? Just because they didn't have the word Billion, In revelations John said a Million millions (Something like that) and they understood. They could grasp the concept of big. And even if he didn't say big, I think God wouldn't a lied and been like since they don't get big I will say 7 days that makes sense. By the way, Jesus Used Parables, but he never really used Metaphors.

The Bible doesn't say he will destroy it by fire. God carefully planned the end of the World the Second time in Revelations. Ya know, it's in the Bible.

The Flood was not a metaphor either. They have proven it existed too. Poor unbeliever Saba.

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

it's not lying, it's a metaphor

\

God Said 7 days. Why would he waste his time? When he made the Israelites lost in the desert for 40 years it wasn't a metaphor. Nor when he flooded the Earth was it a metaphor. God doesn't use metaphors with the things he does. If he says it, he means it. He Poured out 12 plagues on the Egyptians, no Metaphor.

Etc. There are tons of instances when he says things, but I have yet to see it be a metaphor. With something as tremendously important as the Creation of Earth why would he lie? Besides, Science says the Earth is between 15 and 8 thousand years old.

wow, the earth's a youngster!

Metaphors were used because people of that time couldn't grasp the concept of so many years. They were just as smart and just as capable of understanding as we were, but they were uneducated! They wouldn't have believed that was possible!

And some people do believe that the Flood was a metaphor. The bible says God will destroy the earth once by water, and again by fire. According the that, we're all gonna be bacon some day

You make me laugh. Why couldn't they? They couldn't understand a Real Long time Ago? You pretend like they are some how lower then us? Why? Just because they didn't have the word Billion, In revelations John said a Million millions (Something like that) and they understood. They could grasp the concept of big. And even if he didn't say big, I think God wouldn't a lied and been like since they don't get big I will say 7 days that makes sense. By the way, Jesus Used Parables, but he never really used Metaphors.

The Bible doesn't say he will destroy it by fire. God carefully planned the end of the World the Second time in Revelations. Ya know, it's in the Bible.

The Flood was not a metaphor either. They have proven it existed too. Poor unbeliever Saba.

well, it's said SOMEWHERE God will destroy the earth by fire.
I'm an unbeliever? wow, I didn't know that

they're NOT lower than us, I never said that! I said because they weren't as educated as us, maybe they would not have been able to fully understand the concept of so many years. They were capable of that kind of comprehension, but it was a time where education wasn't nearly as advanced as today

even if they're as uneducated as we are, i think it's common sense that they know how long seven days is.

yeah, but they might not have known what He meant by, like, 4 million years or something

why wouldn't they? i'm sure they know that a day would mean sunrise to sunset and all.

some people believe that when they said" in 7 days" they actually meant a longer cycle of time. Like the orbit of our solar system around the galaxy.

but that's because the time of revolution is greater than that of in earth.

EITHER WAY

I just think that God's "days" aren't 24 hour periods
(and cue the controversy)

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

it's not lying, it's a metaphor

\

God Said 7 days. Why would he waste his time? When he made the Israelites lost in the desert for 40 years it wasn't a metaphor. Nor when he flooded the Earth was it a metaphor. God doesn't use metaphors with the things he does. If he says it, he means it. He Poured out 12 plagues on the Egyptians, no Metaphor.

Etc. There are tons of instances when he says things, but I have yet to see it be a metaphor. With something as tremendously important as the Creation of Earth why would he lie? Besides, Science says the Earth is between 15 and 8 thousand years old.

I'm gonna have to ask here Q, and don't take it as a personal slight to you or your God, but where is this Science saying that the Earth is only between 15 and 8 thousand years old? Everything I've seen, read, and researched on the subject says that it's believed to be in the billions, (Approximately 4.5 billion of those things called years.)

Evolutionism:
The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.


Makes perfect sense.

NinjaPleez wrote:Evolutionism:
The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.


Makes perfect sense.

Evolution is the changing of species, gradually going from the single celled organism to more complex organisms, not for no reason but because of environmental pressures put on them. Your statement just tosses in elements of the big bang, attempts to oversimplify things by claiming that there are no intermediate steps and the "self replicating bits" went straight to dinosaurs.

I believe a revision of your definition is in order good sir.

Alright then.
Where did mass come from?

An evolutionists view would say the "Big Bang" or that they were always there.

Where did the mass and energy come from to create the "Big Bang"?

And if it was already there, WHERE did it come from?
The laws of nature indicate that mass can neither be created nor destroyed, the same with energy.

I'm not going to argue this for creation, but I will tell you that evolution is a lie.

Once again you've used the Big Bang, a belief that though held by those who are of the opinion that evolution is fact, is not evolution. I'm by no means an expert on the subject of theoretical physics. However, it seems that your argument essentially boils down to the causal principle. Thus I'd like to put this quote out there.

"The claim that the beginning of our
universe has a cause conflicts with current scientific theory. The scientific theory is
called the Wave Function of the Universe. It has been developed in the past 15 years or so
by Stephen Hawking, Andre Vilenkin, Alex Linde, and many others. Their theory is that
there is a scientific law of nature called the Wave Function of the Universe that implies
that it is highly probable that a universe with our characteristics will come
into existence without a cause. Hawking's theory is based on assigning numbers to all
possible universes. All of the numbers cancel out except for a universe with features that
our universe possesses, such as containing intelligent organisms. This remaining universe
has a very high probability - near 100% - of coming into existence uncaused."

The Full Article is found at:
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/smith_18_2.html

I would once again like to return to my previous statement that the big bang and evolution don't neccessarily go hand in hand and the belief in one does not discredit the second. The creation of the universe and the events which occured after that creation do not go hand in hand. Hence, my belief that religion and evolution can both be believed in simultaneously, although I personally remain an atheist.

I apologize if I come across as muddled or confusing in what I say, I'll be happy to attempt to clarify if there are problems.

Sado wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

it's not lying, it's a metaphor

\

God Said 7 days. Why would he waste his time? When he made the Israelites lost in the desert for 40 years it wasn't a metaphor. Nor when he flooded the Earth was it a metaphor. God doesn't use metaphors with the things he does. If he says it, he means it. He Poured out 12 plagues on the Egyptians, no Metaphor.

Etc. There are tons of instances when he says things, but I have yet to see it be a metaphor. With something as tremendously important as the Creation of Earth why would he lie? Besides, Science says the Earth is between 15 and 8 thousand years old.

I'm gonna have to ask here Q, and don't take it as a personal slight to you or your God, but where is this Science saying that the Earth is only between 15 and 8 thousand years old? Everything I've seen, read, and researched on the subject says that it's believed to be in the billions, (Approximately 4.5 billion of those things called years.)

Take a slight? Sado my friend, it's a debate, that's what we are here to do. Discuss. I can tell you that you probably are not looking in the right places, if everything you've seen and read says 4.5 billion years, since I have seen hundreds of writings against this belief.

I will stay away from the Fossil Record, though strong evidence, you asked specifically for the creation of the Earth and that is what I will restrain myself too. For starters, there is a decrease that has been observed in our atmosphere of today. There is indeed, a magnetic change in the atmosphere, with a 7% decay. When we work backwards against this decay, it is clearly visible that the atmosphere can be no more then 15000 years old and still be able to support life with what we have. This includes geomagnetic reversals and similar phenemon. Another example is the neutron stars. They emit large amounts of radiation and even recently our galaxy was invaded by a large amount of Gamma rays from one of these stars. They are called Magnetars. The one that we felt these rays from, has at most 10,000 years left of gamma ray emissions, and this is felt to be the same with most Magnetars. So their is a problem, if most Magnetars run out at around the same time, they must have also formed around the same time, and since they dissipate huge amounts of these rays it is safe to say that they themselves are incredibly young otherwise they should have long burned out.

Another example is creation. According to Baryon's number, it says that to create something from energy (Which is what the Big Bang Proposes) That an equal amount of Matter and Antimatter must be concieved. However, in our universe Matter greatly overwhelms and practically swallows out the anti matter counterpart. This does not bode well for the Big Bang, because if it was supposed to be created equally and there is no known reason not for it, this thus goes to say that something is desperately wrong with that model. The biggest "Detriment" To creation is supposed Radioisotope dating which says that half lives, which have only been measured for a hundred years, support the belief that the universe has to be years old. However creationists have raised points that if Potassium or argon were present before when the elements were created (the elements being the sediments these rocks are found in) Then the age could very well be supported as 15,000 years.

This is just a handful of evidences that the Earth cannot be logically 4.5 Billion years.

Sado wrote:

NinjaPleez wrote:Evolutionism:
The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.


Makes perfect sense.

Evolution is the changing of species, gradually going from the single celled organism to more complex organisms, not for no reason but because of environmental pressures put on them. Your statement just tosses in elements of the big bang, attempts to oversimplify things by claiming that there are no intermediate steps and the "self replicating bits" went straight to dinosaurs.

I believe a revision of your definition is in order good sir.

I ask you Sado now a Question.

Answer me this, propose a believable solution for the creation of life, that is supported by science, that accounts for the first cell that you said is important to evolution. Without this first cell, all evolution is lost, so it is impertinent to your belief am I right? So, tell me how it happened.

Sado wrote:Once again you've used the Big Bang, a belief that though held by those who are of the opinion that evolution is fact, is not evolution. I'm by no means an expert on the subject of theoretical physics. However, it seems that your argument essentially boils down to the causal principle. Thus I'd like to put this quote out there.

"The claim that the beginning of our
universe has a cause conflicts with current scientific theory. The scientific theory is
called the Wave Function of the Universe. It has been developed in the past 15 years or so
by Stephen Hawking, Andre Vilenkin, Alex Linde, and many others. Their theory is that
there is a scientific law of nature called the Wave Function of the Universe that implies
that it is highly probable that a universe with our characteristics will come
into existence without a cause. Hawking's theory is based on assigning numbers to all
possible universes. All of the numbers cancel out except for a universe with features that
our universe possesses, such as containing intelligent organisms. This remaining universe
has a very high probability - near 100% - of coming into existence uncaused."

The Full Article is found at:
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/smith_18_2.html

I would once again like to return to my previous statement that the big bang and evolution don't neccessarily go hand in hand and the belief in one does not discredit the second. The creation of the universe and the events which occured after that creation do not go hand in hand. Hence, my belief that religion and evolution can both be believed in simultaneously, although I personally remain an atheist.

I apologize if I come across as muddled or confusing in what I say, I'll be happy to attempt to clarify if there are problems.

I do indeed love the simplicity of your url. Secularhumanism just is drenched in your bias my friend.

But, fear not, for I have read this before. It is true, that the universe has a probability. However, do not let some of what you read there convince you it is a high probability. This is inaccurate. Especially, when we regard life. Intelligent life, which is a different subject to the universe, has a lower probability then I can define in the terms of zillions.

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:EITHER WAY

I just think that God's "days" aren't 24 hour periods
(and cue the controversy)

Sabaku, you know I have pointed out that silliness, I have no need to fight it again see page 3 if you forgot.

quater wrote:

Sado wrote:

quater wrote:

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:

quater wrote:

spyke543 wrote:Bush isn't as bad as everyone says he is. Ok, maybe he is. idk, I don't pay for gas or taxes. But no way on Earth Kerry was going to win.

He's not. The Gas taxes are lower because of him.

I agree Titan it was funny. And to Amaterasu, if you don't care then you don't need to worry about our leaders. By the way still waiting on the Mark and the Economy to fall.

Biblically yes, 7 does have a special meaning. It's called 7 days, and like I said, possibly 7 parts of God. But no, God didn't "Pull strings" To make it happen because God is God why not just do it in 7 days and start our first week system? He's the man I say if he said he did it in 7, why believe he lied? It's really strange. I actually did not know so many people had bought into the God's a liar who used Evolution theory.

Lot's of numbers have Biblical secrets. 12, 7, 3, 666, 40 to name a few.

it's not lying, it's a metaphor

\

God Said 7 days. Why would he waste his time? When he made the Israelites lost in the desert for 40 years it wasn't a metaphor. Nor when he flooded the Earth was it a metaphor. God doesn't use metaphors with the things he does. If he says it, he means it. He Poured out 12 plagues on the Egyptians, no Metaphor.

Etc. There are tons of instances when he says things, but I have yet to see it be a metaphor. With something as tremendously important as the Creation of Earth why would he lie? Besides, Science says the Earth is between 15 and 8 thousand years old.

I'm gonna have to ask here Q, and don't take it as a personal slight to you or your God, but where is this Science saying that the Earth is only between 15 and 8 thousand years old? Everything I've seen, read, and researched on the subject says that it's believed to be in the billions, (Approximately 4.5 billion of those things called years.)

Take a slight? Sado my friend, it's a debate, that's what we are here to do. Discuss. I can tell you that you probably are not looking in the right places, if everything you've seen and read says 4.5 billion years, since I have seen hundreds of writings against this belief.

I will stay away from the Fossil Record, though strong evidence, you asked specifically for the creation of the Earth and that is what I will restrain myself too. For starters, there is a decrease that has been observed in our atmosphere of today. There is indeed, a magnetic change in the atmosphere, with a 7% decay. When we work backwards against this decay, it is clearly visible that the atmosphere can be no more then 15000 years old and still be able to support life with what we have. This includes geomagnetic reversals and similar phenemon. Another example is the neutron stars. They emit large amounts of radiation and even recently our galaxy was invaded by a large amount of Gamma rays from one of these stars. They are called Magnetars. The one that we felt these rays from, has at most 10,000 years left of gamma ray emissions, and this is felt to be the same with most Magnetars. So their is a problem, if most Magnetars run out at around the same time, they must have also formed around the same time, and since they dissipate huge amounts of these rays it is safe to say that they themselves are incredibly young otherwise they should have long burned out.

Another example is creation. According to Baryon's number, it says that to create something from energy (Which is what the Big Bang Proposes) That an equal amount of Matter and Antimatter must be concieved. However, in our universe Matter greatly overwhelms and practically swallows out the anti matter counterpart. This does not bode well for the Big Bang, because if it was supposed to be created equally and there is no known reason not for it, this thus goes to say that something is desperately wrong with that model. The biggest "Detriment" To creation is supposed Radioisotope dating which says that half lives, which have only been measured for a hundred years, support the belief that the universe has to be years old. However creationists have raised points that if Potassium or argon were present before when the elements were created (the elements being the sediments these rocks are found in) Then the age could very well be supported as 15,000 years.

This is just a handful of evidences that the Earth cannot be logically 4.5 Billion years.

My friend, if you will be so kind as to allow me some slack as I am not the quickest of wits and far from an expert on science as I have previously stated. So I shall attempt to deal with your arguments and questions as best I can.

I should like to see the formula which you have used to arrive at 15,000 years old by magnetism. Because the formula which you speak of seems like it would not take into account the variances in Earth's magnetic field. As although you mentioned the 7% decay rate, that rate has not been a constant over the years. It is similar to me claiming to have lost 10 pounds this year, that does not mean I lost 10 pounds every year. Though it is wholly possible I'm confused, perhaps you could explain it to me at such a level that even I can fully comprehend your drift if I am indeed wrong in my assumptions.

I shall move to the second point after I have eaten, for my bodily health is of the foremost priority at this moment.

The sad thing is that neither side of this arguement can prove itself correct, nor can we give near enough evidence to prove the other side wrong. It's an infinite paradox that has no point other than to provoke hatred and war between the two sides, which is exactly what is has done for millenia. Jews persecuted in Egypt. Jesus being crucified. The Crusades. The German Holocaust.

All have no point other than to attempt to win the arguement of religion versus religion or religion versus theoretical science, by anhialating the other side.

Now riddle me this.

Is it really worth debating?