Poll

If Extra-Terrestrials are found, does this disprove creationism?

Yes38%38% - 36
No44%44% - 41
Unsure17%17% - 16
Total: 93
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|6747

EricTViking wrote:

On the subject of the scale of the universe, a conservative estimate for the number of planets in the universe would be 10,000,000,000,000,000 (according to the first site I found in google).

So if it takes god 6 days to bash out your typical earth sized planet ( call it 7 including his day off ), it would take him 70,000,000,000,000,000 days to create the universe, and that excludes stars and other non-planety objects. 

This equates to 191,780,821,917,808 years. Since another equally top ten google hit reveals the age of the universe at 14,000,000,000 years, god couldn't possibly have made everything in the time given hence creationism is disproven and needn't be discussed any further.

And to think, all you had to do was google for it ;-)
In creationism it only took one sentence to create all planets.  All you need to do to disprove creationism is prove the earth is older than 10,000 years.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA
yes it would disprove creationism, unless of course the aliens show up sporting a....."NO JESUS NO PEACE, KNOW JESUS KNOW PEACE" bumper sticker on the bumper of their spaceship.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6499|Global Command
How about

No Jesus  Know peace   ?


didn't think so...
twiistaaa
Member
+87|6638|mexico
the bible isn't rational. most of the people who believe in it will cut and paste scriptures together to prove aliens were mentioned.
liquix
Member
+51|6424|Peoples Republic of Portland

jimbo21 wrote:

the first line in the bible "in the begining,when god created the heavens and the earth". if he created the heavens (meaning the universe) how would that disprove creationism?
Well, the word heaven means "sky" not universe.
JaggedPanther
Member
+61|6444

Digital Aura wrote:

.....I don't take the Creation story literally, and many Christians also understand that, as in Revelations and other books, it is written so that the readers of that day might understand it in non-scientific terms. It wasn't meant to be taken literally or scientifically.....
BAHAHAHAHA


Basically a typical response as religous types are being proven wrong as time goes on....


New and Improved testament (now with 400% less BS)!

Didnt' the first testament have 3 references to the Earth being flat.

I suppose they can always say "we didn't really mean it, we just wrote it down but were kidding, really, why dont' you belive us??' and everything is forgived by the sheep.


Evolution vs GOD? Evolution always wins, even their responses are evolving LOL

Last edited by JaggedPanther (2006-10-17 23:38:32)

SpaceApollyon
Scratch where it itches
+41|6490|Finland

Spearhead wrote:

PRiMACORD wrote:

Creationsim is a bunch of backwards bullshit with or without aliens.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

JaMDuDe wrote:

EricTViking wrote:

On the subject of the scale of the universe, a conservative estimate for the number of planets in the universe would be 10,000,000,000,000,000 (according to the first site I found in google).

So if it takes god 6 days to bash out your typical earth sized planet ( call it 7 including his day off ), it would take him 70,000,000,000,000,000 days to create the universe, and that excludes stars and other non-planety objects. 

This equates to 191,780,821,917,808 years. Since another equally top ten google hit reveals the age of the universe at 14,000,000,000 years, god couldn't possibly have made everything in the time given hence creationism is disproven and needn't be discussed any further.

And to think, all you had to do was google for it ;-)
In creationism it only took one sentence to create all planets.  All you need to do to disprove creationism is prove the earth is older than 10,000 years.
Been done already. It's about 4.5 billion years old. Hard to tell exactly, but there's no way they're out by more than a factor of 10.
.:XDR:.PureFodder
Member
+105|6799

JaMDuDe wrote:

EricTViking wrote:

On the subject of the scale of the universe, a conservative estimate for the number of planets in the universe would be 10,000,000,000,000,000 (according to the first site I found in google).

So if it takes god 6 days to bash out your typical earth sized planet ( call it 7 including his day off ), it would take him 70,000,000,000,000,000 days to create the universe, and that excludes stars and other non-planety objects. 

This equates to 191,780,821,917,808 years. Since another equally top ten google hit reveals the age of the universe at 14,000,000,000 years, god couldn't possibly have made everything in the time given hence creationism is disproven and needn't be discussed any further.

And to think, all you had to do was google for it ;-)
In creationism it only took one sentence to create all planets.  All you need to do to disprove creationism is prove the earth is older than 10,000 years.
Nah, the easiest way to disprove the scientific theory of creationism is to apply the scientific theory of creationism to it.

1) Life on Earth is so complex that something (creator A) must have designed it.
2) We can't create an entirely new life form and ecosystem, hence we can assume Creator A is as complex, if not more complex than us.
3) The scientific theory of creationism states that Creator A is so complex that it must have been designed by Creator B.
4) Creator B will be as complex if not more complex than Creator A.
5) The scientific theory of creationism states that Creator B is so complex that it must have been designed by Creator C.
6) etc.etc.etc.

n) The scientific theory of creationism demands that if any deity exists that they must have been created by something.

So creationism not only goes against all reason it also goes against Christian teachings.
The Magic Mullet
Member
+240|6394
Creationism is disproved by having at least an ounce of common sense.
JaMDuDe
Member
+69|6747

.:XDR:.PureFodder wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:

EricTViking wrote:

On the subject of the scale of the universe, a conservative estimate for the number of planets in the universe would be 10,000,000,000,000,000 (according to the first site I found in google).

So if it takes god 6 days to bash out your typical earth sized planet ( call it 7 including his day off ), it would take him 70,000,000,000,000,000 days to create the universe, and that excludes stars and other non-planety objects. 

This equates to 191,780,821,917,808 years. Since another equally top ten google hit reveals the age of the universe at 14,000,000,000 years, god couldn't possibly have made everything in the time given hence creationism is disproven and needn't be discussed any further.

And to think, all you had to do was google for it ;-)
In creationism it only took one sentence to create all planets.  All you need to do to disprove creationism is prove the earth is older than 10,000 years.
Nah, the easiest way to disprove the scientific theory of creationism is to apply the scientific theory of creationism to it.

1) Life on Earth is so complex that something (creator A) must have designed it.
2) We can't create an entirely new life form and ecosystem, hence we can assume Creator A is as complex, if not more complex than us.
3) The scientific theory of creationism states that Creator A is so complex that it must have been designed by Creator B.
4) Creator B will be as complex if not more complex than Creator A.
5) The scientific theory of creationism states that Creator B is so complex that it must have been designed by Creator C.
6) etc.etc.etc.

n) The scientific theory of creationism demands that if any deity exists that they must have been created by something.

So creationism not only goes against all reason it also goes against Christian teachings.
You guys are making theories to disprove creationism that dont even work. You guys should understand creationism BEFORE you try to disprove it. Creator A doesnt need a creator. Creator A isnt in our physical universe so the laws of our universe dont apply to him. There is no time where he is.  He has always been. Simple as that.
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6619

I don't think it would disprove creationism, as the Bible only says what God did on 7 days, it doesn't say what he made before or after that. So he could have made millions of alien controlled planets, and given them laser guns! Which leads me on to wonder perhaps he created a galatic war with us and the millions of aliens, for some entertainment...
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

liquix wrote:

Discuss, always wondered since I'm not a beleiver. I'm interested in what you have to say about it, if you are.
The answer to this question would depend on one's faith, and how flexible they are in "not knowing the mind of God."
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

JaMDuDe wrote:

.:XDR:.PureFodder wrote:

JaMDuDe wrote:


In creationism it only took one sentence to create all planets.  All you need to do to disprove creationism is prove the earth is older than 10,000 years.
Nah, the easiest way to disprove the scientific theory of creationism is to apply the scientific theory of creationism to it.

1) Life on Earth is so complex that something (creator A) must have designed it.
2) We can't create an entirely new life form and ecosystem, hence we can assume Creator A is as complex, if not more complex than us.
3) The scientific theory of creationism states that Creator A is so complex that it must have been designed by Creator B.
4) Creator B will be as complex if not more complex than Creator A.
5) The scientific theory of creationism states that Creator B is so complex that it must have been designed by Creator C.
6) etc.etc.etc.

n) The scientific theory of creationism demands that if any deity exists that they must have been created by something.

So creationism not only goes against all reason it also goes against Christian teachings.
You guys are making theories to disprove creationism that dont even work. You guys should understand creationism BEFORE you try to disprove it. Creator A doesnt need a creator. Creator A isnt in our physical universe so the laws of our universe dont apply to him. There is no time where he is.  He has always been. Simple as that.
Nothing prior to the big bang is in our universe. There is no time without space, so that has always existed (in fact technically the universe has always existed). The laws of our universe don't necessarily apply to anything outside it so anything could have caused the creation of the universe. Alternatively it could be a perpetual loop, without any moment of origin.
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|6706|Salt Lake City

Digital Aura wrote:

liquix wrote:

The talk of Giants is strange... Without any literel reference to ET life in the bible, any correlation made from the Bible to these other lifeforms would be taken as foolishness and without logic.
Actually...there is literal reference as pointed out above. The SONS OF GOD ....and the daughters of men. Why the distinction? Probably SONS of GOD are extra terrestrial (being angels that is) as opposed to humans. Note that Christ himself was refered to as a Son of Man as well as the Son of God.

Here's something to chew on. It's estimated that for every grain of sand on the planet earth, there is an entire galaxy in the universe. Each galaxy containing billions of stars. This number is so massive, your brain pretty much just shuts off when attempting to think about it (heh.) With such a large number of stars, is it silly to think that life would exist nowhere else in the universe? Seems like a waste of space without it.
It is also estimated that the odds for having conditions where a planet is habitable, in a life sustaining solar system that is the proper distance from the (a) sun, with the right proportions of nitrogen, oxygen, etc to maintain cellular life and evolution of cells is astronomical. The odds actually are that there IS NO LIFE elsewhere. (Google the Drake Equation)
The problem with these theories is that they are all based on assuming that the life forms are like us.  We use our understanding of life forms on this planet, and what it would need to survive to make these assumptions.  We don't know that other life has not evolved in an environment which we would deem not life supporting.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6461|Northern California
I think most of you ignorant fools who bash creationism have no friggen clue what you're talking about.  You all purport to have proved creationism false based on your completely ignorant understanding of it.  But then that's to be expected from closed minded people who have never actually shown interest in knowing it to begin with.

And yes, creationism fits in perfectly with science.  But I don't expect anyone to fathom my explanation even if i gave it.  I'd be called "crazy" or something...  lol
Sh1fty2k5
MacSwedish
+113|6680|Sweden
creationism is such a stupid and useless topic. Why do americans even discuss it? It's supposed to be the most modern nation on earth.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

IRONCHEF wrote:

I think most of you ignorant fools who bash creationism have no friggen clue what you're talking about.  You all purport to have proved creationism false based on your completely ignorant understanding of it.  But then that's to be expected from closed minded people who have never actually shown interest in knowing it to begin with.

And yes, creationism fits in perfectly with science.  But I don't expect anyone to fathom my explanation even if i gave it.  I'd be called "crazy" or something...  lol
Which sort of creationism? Some sorts of creationism do fit in with scientific evidence, to an extent, others are complete gibberish and don't fit in with any things that science has shown to be true.

Which sort of creationism is it that you think fits in perfectly with science? In my opinion the only theory of creationism that is in the slightest bit credible is the theory of theistic evolution. Inteligent design is another more progressive theory of creationism, but is still clearly nonsense.

Young Earth creationism of all forms is simply fiction.
jonsimon
Member
+224|6465

IRONCHEF wrote:

I think most of you ignorant fools who bash creationism have no friggen clue what you're talking about.  You all purport to have proved creationism false based on your completely ignorant understanding of it.  But then that's to be expected from closed minded people who have never actually shown interest in knowing it to begin with.

And yes, creationism fits in perfectly with science.  But I don't expect anyone to fathom my explanation even if i gave it.  I'd be called "crazy" or something...  lol
Maybe it's you without the clue? While it is impossible to disprove modern flexible creationism, it was once possible to disprove rigid catholic doctrine of creationism by proxy. During the medieval ages catholic doctrine and thought was such that all knowledge was fixed by god, and thus, if one could disprove any aspect of catholic doctrine, it was possible to indirectly question all of catholic doctrine and in a sense disprove it. This questioning, which did occur, slowly brought an end to secular catholic power, and inspired modern discussion such as this one.

Since I've just presented a logical and rational line of reasoning to draw the conclusion that creationism could be disproved, I hope I've instilled just a smidgen of respect in that growing emptyness that serves as your opinion of non-religious or anti-religious peoples.

Next time, don't jump at the throats of others.

Oh, and keep using that "you all think i'm crazy lol" defense. It's oh so classy.[/sarcasm]
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

jonsimon wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

I think most of you ignorant fools who bash creationism have no friggen clue what you're talking about.  You all purport to have proved creationism false based on your completely ignorant understanding of it.  But then that's to be expected from closed minded people who have never actually shown interest in knowing it to begin with.

And yes, creationism fits in perfectly with science.  But I don't expect anyone to fathom my explanation even if i gave it.  I'd be called "crazy" or something...  lol
Maybe it's you without the clue? While it is impossible to disprove modern flexible creationism, it was once possible to disprove rigid catholic doctrine of creationism by proxy. During the medieval ages catholic doctrine and thought was such that all knowledge was fixed by god, and thus, if one could disprove any aspect of catholic doctrine, it was possible to indirectly question all of catholic doctrine and in a sense disprove it. This questioning, which did occur, slowly brought an end to secular catholic power, and inspired modern discussion such as this one.

Since I've just presented a logical and rational line of reasoning to draw the conclusion that creationism could be disproved, I hope I've instilled just a smidgen of respect in that growing emptyness that serves as your opinion of non-religious or anti-religious peoples.

Next time, don't jump at the throats of others.

Oh, and keep using that "you all think i'm crazy lol" defense. It's oh so classy.[/sarcasm]
Good points.

But you've got to remember the Catholic church is very different these days - and they were the ones to come up with the big bang theory in the first place. Modern Catholic beliefs are changing to fit in with an ever changing society. The Pope abolishing limbo as mere "theological hypothesis" is an example of this. Once a religion starts dismissing aspects of itself as being "theological hypothesis" it can only be a matter of time until the religion dies out, because that's what religion is, theological hypothesis.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6375|North Carolina

IRONCHEF wrote:

I think most of you ignorant fools who bash creationism have no friggen clue what you're talking about.  You all purport to have proved creationism false based on your completely ignorant understanding of it.  But then that's to be expected from closed minded people who have never actually shown interest in knowing it to begin with.

And yes, creationism fits in perfectly with science.  But I don't expect anyone to fathom my explanation even if i gave it.  I'd be called "crazy" or something...  lol
I'll put it this way...  Intelligent design is fathomable.  Creationism is not.  If you're implying that God started the Big Bang, then yes, I agree that that is possible.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6375|North Carolina

Sh1fty2k5 wrote:

creationism is such a stupid and useless topic. Why do americans even discuss it? It's supposed to be the most modern nation on earth.
It's one of the excesses of religion.  More secular societies have moved on.
jonsimon
Member
+224|6465

Bertster7 wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

I think most of you ignorant fools who bash creationism have no friggen clue what you're talking about.  You all purport to have proved creationism false based on your completely ignorant understanding of it.  But then that's to be expected from closed minded people who have never actually shown interest in knowing it to begin with.

And yes, creationism fits in perfectly with science.  But I don't expect anyone to fathom my explanation even if i gave it.  I'd be called "crazy" or something...  lol
Maybe it's you without the clue? While it is impossible to disprove modern flexible creationism, it was once possible to disprove rigid catholic doctrine of creationism by proxy. During the medieval ages catholic doctrine and thought was such that all knowledge was fixed by god, and thus, if one could disprove any aspect of catholic doctrine, it was possible to indirectly question all of catholic doctrine and in a sense disprove it. This questioning, which did occur, slowly brought an end to secular catholic power, and inspired modern discussion such as this one.

Since I've just presented a logical and rational line of reasoning to draw the conclusion that creationism could be disproved, I hope I've instilled just a smidgen of respect in that growing emptyness that serves as your opinion of non-religious or anti-religious peoples.

Next time, don't jump at the throats of others.

Oh, and keep using that "you all think i'm crazy lol" defense. It's oh so classy.[/sarcasm]
Good points.

But you've got to remember the Catholic church is very different these days - and they were the ones to come up with the big bang theory in the first place. Modern Catholic beliefs are changing to fit in with an ever changing society. The Pope abolishing limbo as mere "theological hypothesis" is an example of this. Once a religion starts dismissing aspects of itself as being "theological hypothesis" it can only be a matter of time until the religion dies out, because that's what religion is, theological hypothesis.
Exactly. Thus we have modern christianity. Unprovable, but equally protected from disproof.
I2elik
Member
+12|6722|Perth, Western Australia

JaMDuDe wrote:

ATG, you forgot the best one. Go read the first chapter of Ezekiel, its pretty creepy. Heres a little of it.

5 Also from within it came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance: they had the likeness of a man. 6 Each one had four faces, and each one had four wings. 7 Their legs were straight, and the soles of their feet were like the soles of calves’ feet. They sparkled like the color of burnished bronze. 8 The hands of a man were under their wings on their four sides; and each of the four had faces and wings. 9 Their wings touched one another. The creatures did not turn when they went, but each one went straight forward.
10 As for the likeness of their faces, each had the face of a man; each of the four had the face of a lion on the right side, each of the four had the face of an ox on the left side, and each of the four had the face of an eagle. 11 Thus were their faces. Their wings stretched upward; two wings of each one touched one another, and two covered their bodies. 12 And each one went straight forward; they went wherever the spirit wanted to go, and they did not turn when they went.
13 As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like burning coals of fire, like the appearance of torches going back and forth among the living creatures. The fire was bright, and out of the fire went lightning. 14 And the living creatures ran back and forth, in appearance like a flash of lightning.
15 Now as I looked at the living creatures, behold, a wheel was on the earth beside each living creature with its four faces. 16 The appearance of the wheels and their workings was like the color of beryl, and all four had the same likeness
Ezekiel was a prophet who had visions in his sleep, not himself seeing them awake, the mind can fabricate alot of creatures in the mind. Though I don't necessarily doubt the existence of other intelligent life, it seems damn far fetched we'll reach another solar system (the closest being Proxima Centauri at 4.21 light years, a damn long way on conventional propulsion).

Creationism is way too far fetched, there's basically no proof at all that proves the idea, comparitively, the Big Bang theory seems more logical in some sense, but we can't really know, and I doubt Extra Terrestrials would know either.
BVC
Member
+325|6665
Knowing what I do about creationism, I would say discovering ETs would be irrelevent; it would neither prove nor disprove creationism.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard