Modern humans have existed for 300,000 years but Abrahamic religions are only 3500 years old

[MMS]

Ummm, I don't have a MBA which is why I said "I'm not", I have a CS degree and you don't have to win over anyone, you just have to pass the classes

You said humanity is only 6000 years ago, what evidence do you have for that?

like I said: you have never applied for grad school if you believe that

i have not said that humanity is only 6000 years old

in truth. the 6000 years in the bible could be like fruit. There could be trillions of 6000 year cycles and you would never know.

 

[Sccit]

Yes and as more evidence was gathered more people agreed upon it was the likely case

Why do you people think everything is set and stone and as more evidence is presented that you can't change what you belief

After all most people in ancient times thought natural phenomena was the work of "the gods"

LOL

YOURE MISSING MY POINT

IT WAS SCRIPTURE THAT SPOKE OF A BIG BANG FIRST

SCIENCE WEIRDOS TRIED TO PAINT SCRIPTURE AS SOME LUDICROUS HOCUS POCUS NONSENSE UP UNTIL THE EARLY 1900S

BUT THEN SCIENCTISTS REALIZED WE WERE RIGHT ALL ALONG

“WE CAME TO A CONCLUSION!!”

UMMM.. NO U DIDNT


THERES TONS OF EXAMPLES OF SCRIPTURE BEING AHEAD OF SCIENCE


READ THIS

 

[Maximus Rex]

OP needs Jesus

Jesus needs me

 

[BaldingSoHard]

of course, but those concepts are not in question here

and most of those experiments are easily repeatable

but just because I do an experiment testing newtons laws or resistance doesn't mean that magically other experiments must be just like that and easily repeatable

to me, you guys love to attack religious people for not believing in science but not once do you consider why you "believe" the findings of certain scientists who are paid to put out new studies! Most religious people are not paid for their beliefs. If they were they would be pastors.

I guess my question is what reason would I have for questioning the scientific method, considering its track record?

 

[Won Won]

you jest, but if you were to attempt to discredit the findings how would do so? as @BaldingSoHard insinuated

you trust people are formulating new molecules and new extrapolations to cover for the lack of understanding and gaps predicted by their experiments and instead of seeing it as the jenga blocks that they are you want me and other people to just take their word for it.

I'm being completely serious. You clearly have an understanding of "enumerous" scientific fields and the faults to their methods, so you need to find a way to correct these errors

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

They worshiped the sun

 

[MMS]

I guess my question is what reason would I have for questioning the scientific method, considering its track record?

who here is questioning the scientific method? once again the two of you confuse science for religion and the belief you need to "defend" science

what you need to defend are your erroneous claims

 

[EndDomination]

carbon dating was designed for forensics within 100 years but is being used to determine ages of things thousands, to millions, to billions of years old (based on the assumption carbon 14 has a unique source billions of years ago which is also unproven)

while noone was there to verify the claims

furthermore no two dating methods agree with eachother on dates

Advancements in carbon dating, alongside other indicia of age - are pretty commonly used to date fossils.

atheists need a hobby

?

I don’t understand how people could possibly put so much energy into something they claim not to care about and don’t believe in.

Like writing a phd thesis on Santa’s Elves and being dead ass serious.

Who are you referring to?

 

[BaldingSoHard]

who here is questioning the scientific method? once again the two of you confuse science for religion and the belief you need to "defend" science

what you need to defend are your erroneous claims

I... don't think I've made any erroneous claims?

 

[MMS]

I'm being completely serious. You clearly have an understanding of "enumerous" scientific fields and the faults to their methods, so you need to find a way to correct these errors

oh ok. Well I think you seriously should find new things to study

as my posts are apparently limiting your capacity to continue positively contributing to the thread.

 

[Wildhundreds]

Ain't no fukking clique, you have your evidence or you don't

Evidence can't change a wicked mind. You should understand this and it's crystal clear during these modern times.

 

[Maximus Rex]

like I said: you have never applied for grad school if you believe that

i have not said that humanity is only 6000 years old

in truth. the 6000 years in the bible could be like fruit. There could be trillions of 6000 year cycles and you would never know.

The point was me being in grad school is immaterial to anything we are talking about

Now it's trillion of years of 6000 year cycles, you might as well as believe we are living in the world of Attack of Titan with what you are talking

 

[BaldingSoHard]

Evidence can't change a wicked mind. You should understand this and it's crystal clear during these modern times.

That is true, but I would not classify the majority of the scientific community as "wicked-minded".

 

[MMS]

I... don't think I've made any erroneous claims?

what matters: truth or what you believe.

alittle thought experiment

 

[Everythingg]

Some theories say that there was advanced technology in the past. So long ago that we have no evidence.

Yea based on what they built (pyramids, castles, cathedrals etc…) the only explanation is that they had a higher understanding than we do or than the people that pass down history let on… We’d be hard pressed to do those things today with more people and “more technology”

We don't need to question it because we know what happened. There have been many inventions that have caused technological booms throughout history, but the one you're specifically referring to happened in 1947 with the invention of the transistor. I know that wasn't the point you were trying to make, but yeah that's what happened there.

”We don’t need to question it”

And there lies the problem. People quick to question the Bible but accept whatever story mainstream/science hands them down about history.

The technology they claim to have invented was already here. You don’t come to America on horse and buggy and 100 years later have a car and 100 years later have a Lamborghini unless you got a push from something. Especially after hundreds of thousands of years of making no progress when it comes to that. But nah we don’t question that. But a book that we claim is fairytales? Yea let’s comb thru that and see what we can find