Heath Winchester wrote:After all, it's just another theory just like Evolution.
No no no no no. There is a world of difference between a solid, scientific, peer-reviewed Theory (highest accolade any concept can achieve in science), and so-called "creation science" theory (more like the general use of the word, i.e. guess).
The Theory of Evolution explains all the current evidence we have - and if some evidence were to come up which is unexplainable by the current theory, it must be modified or discarded. That is how science works.
"Creation science" generally involves picking something we don't fully understand (e.g. what triggered the Big Bang), and then saying "but isn't the simplest explanation that God did it?". That or saying "but you can't prove it wasn't
God, can you? AHA!".
Evolution is a fact. It has been observed to take place, for example, in fruit flies under laboratory conditions. Creationists will say "Ah, but that's micro-evolution. Macro-evolution has never been observed". They fail to understand that science does not differentiate between the two, and that macro-evolution is just accumulated micro-evolution.
Abiogenesis (creation of life from non-life) has also been observed under specific laboratory conditions. In the Miller-Urey experiment, amino acids (the building blocks of life) were formed from inorganic chemicals using purely natural means.
Possumdude0 wrote:I don't know where the number 6,000 years comes from.
I'm just confused about how they arrived at the number 6,000 years for the age of the Earth.
What they did was count backwards using the incredibly boring chapters of lineage in the Bible which go "And X beget Y, beget Z, beget...". However, they also assume that most, if not all, of these people lived at least a hundred years, and some many more (eg Noah supposedly lived to be over 900 years old). They make these assumptions because - you guessed it - the Bible says so.