Can Young Earth Creationism be classed as a conspiracy theory at this point?
Few people believe in it now, those that do tend to believe it's being "hidden" from the public and exist in fringe groups, and it requires rejection of all the mainstream ideas about the world.
Other urls found in this thread:
gallup.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
bump
Probably. It has a lot of conspiratorial ideation in it: "scientists are lying, carbon dating doesn't work", etc. type crap.
It's not true, like all conspiracy theories, so yes.
bump
Well, the term 'conspiracy theory' has taken on the meaning 'a conspiracy so fucking ridiculous and impossible that it can't be true', so in that sense yes. But there are reasonable conspiracies like Watergate that were true.
That wasn't a conspiracy theory, that was a documented crime that led to discovery
Correct. I'm just noting the difference between a conspiracy theory and a conspiracy before any discussion picks up.
but muh chemtrails and moon hoax
Yeah they're all bullshit.
Kek, you think people actually read a thread before commenting?
No, but this thread is pretty fucking short.
True
Like other conspiracy theories, also, there is absolutely no evidence for it.
bump
Yes there is. It's called the bible, maybe you've heard of it?
to claim that the world is billions of years old is retarded. There is absolutely 0 proof of it. Carbon dating is proved time and time again to give wrong results.
If you seriously think the earth is billions of years old then you are insane.
>moon hoax
guess how many references to the moon there are from 1000yrs and earlier BC
Zero.
...
Because human beings could not possibly conspire about scientific findings, right? Scientists have careers to protect. If their field of expertise becomes outdated or invalidated by new findings you better believe they will protect their livelihood tooth and nail. Carbon dating us NOT reliable. Check the data.
is this bait?
I don't think you understand the moon hoax.
To claim that the world is thousands of years old is retarded
look I can do it too
>Few people believe in it now
I'd agree with you, but I don't think this part is true, sadly. According to gallup.com
Which is embarrassing.
You realise there are more ways of dating than just carbon right?
Nice reddit pic, but contradictions don't mean that the book is invalid.
>le reddit
>le fedora meme
>le tips hat
There, I saved you the trouble.
It means it is suspect at best.
hhahahhaha
ahHHhahahahHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
oh god save america, you are fucked
Such as Rohypnol
>If their field of expertise becomes outdated or invalidated by new findings
But that is literally the entire essence of science, you numbskull. Science is always changing and updating, that's the entire point, it is not static.
scientists when corrected by further study are always in denial that they were wrong.
Yes. Because there was once the claim by conspiracy theorists that the U.S. gov was experimenting on the civilian population with lsd/powerful doses of hallucinogenics. The conspiracy was proven true after the government admitted to the experiments. But conspiracy theories never happen right...
en.wikipedia.org
C-14 dating is just ONE branch of ONE specific technique of geochronology.
>Because human beings could not possibly conspire about scientific findings
>Carbon dating us NOT reliable. Check the data.
lol at this irony
That you can't even separate "conspiracy" from "conspiracy theory" tells me all I need to know
As is carbon dating.
I'm gonna post it anyway, because this thread is just that cringeworthy.
are you saying carbon dating is reliable?
Why is it suspect?
I'm saying you claiming "Science data is wrong!" then immediately telling to check some science data is funny.
>I'm gonna post it anyway
Fair enough. Just thought I'd try to save you the burden.
That's the way research works in a vacuum. Enter the Hand of Man. Remember that crazy fellow, Copernicus? They fought him tooth and nail before the shift in the paradigm was able to happen. Same thing with Science today. Go learn some history and stop trying to teach a UC Berkeley graduate how science works. Ah hahahaha hahahaha ha!
So you don't trust carbon dating.
So how exactly have you determined the age of the Earth?
>It's not true, like all conspiracy theories
Right. I can't believe people think that 9-11 was anything but coincidental Pilot errors.
but it was religious figure that opposed Copernicus.
Conspiracy theory is just that a theory until proven true. Then it simply becomes conspiracy. What's the mix up?
A lot of these aren't contradictions. They're referring to new testament claims contradicting old testament.
Well no shit. Remember the old testament said only the Jewish Tribe, the Chosen Ones, born from Adam and Eve could get into Heaven. Then Jesus the world's greatest troll came along and started telling people that EVERYONE, all you non-adamites, you creatures born with the animals, you human cattle, could get into the Jewish Heaven.
I looked up like ten, they're not actually contradictions if you know your theology. As for factual inaccuracies, the books themselves admit that they are comprised of testimony from various sources and may not be perfectly factually accurate. Read the intro to Luke.
That's the thing, it's up for debate because of unreliable results from our primitive methods.
show me your study then, dumbass
two can play the fallacy game
well ofc they had to change that. still puzzles why they chose jewish religion to base a new one on. the old testiment does show that jews are greedy gold loving vermin though. So it has some truth.
Religion is by its nature static, which is why every aspect is now outdated and instead of updating, they just dismiss modern ideas and cling to the past out of "tradition".
Young earth is one of them.
That is not true at all.
So you are advocating what?
>conspiracy theory
who would the conspirators be?
There is absolutely no evidence in existence supporting or suggesting a young earth. It's entirely fantasy.
It was a human being protecting his work. No matter if it was the church. Church was in charge of Science then. Not so now. Human dynamics stay the same. No matter who's in charge now.
>Church was in charge of Science then
Gee, I wonder why it was being held back in those days compared to now.
I'm just stating the facts and limitations of our dating methods. That's all.
The "eeeeevil demon scientists pretending the earth is old with their dark spells of evolution" or whatever.
Actually, there is no Jewish Heaven. Being a good Jew gets you gold in this life, then you go to a quiet place undergound. Christ was the first one to promise more than the Uber elite (e.g. Elijah) the chance to join God.
The Jew was one of the most successful religious groups back in the old days. It makes sense the peasants would cling to the religion that says love everyone and treat everyone fairly while backed up by a God who, from the looks of it, were helping his people.
Where is this proof?
Religion that is static becomes the strawman the liberal media uses to denounce religion. It isn't a necessary state.
A young earth is too young for all of the natural features of earth to form and for life to evolve.
Old earth is supported by the existence of everything around us
Nah
Nothing, really. Still found cures and medicines. It was the birth of the scientific method and the modern notion of Science which you now understand that sees early science as infantile. We are still basically retards. But many feel we can accomplish anything through science. Which is certainly an infantile approach considering our science is reductive by nature.
Don't be stupid, assuming evolution to prove old earth is cyclical logic. I don't believe in young earth but your argument is retarded.
Faggot.
Evolution is true, that's a fact. You can work from that.
It's not the same as the Christian Heaven.
This world is compared to an ante-chamber that leads to Olam Ha–Ba, (the World-to-Come)” (Pirkei Avot 4:21). That is, while a righteous person might suffer in this lifetime, he or she will certainly be rewarded in the next world, and that reward will be much greater. In fact, in some cases, the rabbis claim that the righteous are made to suffer in this world so that their reward will be that much greater in the next (Leviticus Rabbah 27:1)
Olam Ha-Ba to refer to a heaven-like afterlife as well as to the messianic era or the age of resurrection, and it is often difficult to know which one is being referred to. When the Talmud does speak of Olam Ha-Ba in connection to the afterlife, it often uses it interchangeably with the term Gan Eden (“the Garden of Eden”), referring to a heavenly realm where souls reside after physical death. Only truly righteous souls ascend directly to Gan Eden, say the sages. The average person descends to a place of punishment and/or purification, generally referred to as Gehinnom.
>evolution
>fish crawls up on land
>fish becomes amphibien
>fish grows legs and shit
>fish becomes mammal
>fish no like land anymore
>fish goes back to ocean
>fish can't breathe water
>fish no care just go to surface
>fish lose legs and shit
>fish become largest mammal to exist
>fish whale now
Nigger that is not how it happened.
You being stupid does not disprove evolution.
This
+rep x100000000
What the fuck are you talking about? That is not evolution.
Jew's worship Saturn any claim to the contrary is just ignorant. Go and ask some rabbis. They nlknow what I'm talking about. Israel is Phoenician for Saturn. That Star of David is really the Star of Saturn. Look it up. True story.
Problem.
You are acting like it's all the same fish.
What would disprove evolution?
A species that spontaneously appears with zero ancestors
That is as ridiculous as evolution truly is. Nothing evolves at the macro-level. Only have observed evolution at the microscopic level. Adaptation is not evolution. They are not the same thing.
So humans. Problem solved.
so all of life?
Flat Earth Society thread, enjoy.
you need to define that better
or else
are not wrong
baaaaaaaaaaait
Humans have one of the most complete and well documented fossil records of ancestors and common relations.
We aren't.
Just the facts. No spin here.
So the mechanisms of evolution are real and we only directly observe evolution happening in lifeforms that have fast enough reproductive lifespans to witness change in our lifetimes?
Sounds like the scientists must be onto something, there's probably some truth to evolutionary theories even though science isn't all knowing.
aren't what?
lol wut
That is not fact. That's why we are still looking for the missing link in our line of supposed ancestors. Just look at the Lucy hoaxes perpetrated by accepted scientists to try and prove your point. There's only speculation at this point . No actual fossil record linking us with anything.
lol that you actually said "missing link"
Immediately I know you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about
I'm not denying evolution exists. It does, at the Micro-level. I just don't agree with the part-to-whole reasoning present in modern macro evolutionary theory. Ni direct link. Sure, they may or may not be onto something. Don't ever forget the might no part. You people always do. Discarding important facts which don't suit the position you hold and advocate.
>>I'm not denying evolution exists. It does, at the Micro-leve
Macro evolution is just micro over a longer time.
Refute my points or just shut the fuck up, fucking useless-eater.
Sure there isn't..
Yeah the human species was made by aliens. It's not like there are any genetic lineages of creatures similar to humans, primates or simians are just a hoax.
You don't have a point. What you have is vague chatter you picked up from internet forums with no real understanding, and parroted.
You are