CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:39
Arguments:48
Total Votes:39
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 How do you prove that the Earth isn't 6,000 years old? (28)

Debate Creator

iLoveVersace(1098) pic



How do you prove that the Earth isn't 6,000 years old?

Add New Argument

Here are 32 different ways

Edit: Oops, looks like MuckaMcCaw beat me to it :)

copycat. Or rather....copychihuahua :)

Hitler(2364) Banned
2 points

copycat. Or rather.... copychihuahua :)

LittleMisfit(1745) Clarified
1 point

I started to write the post but stopped to eat dinner. Then right after I posted it I saw that you beat me to it.

BTW, it's a Fennec Fox

QuestionMan(604) Disputed
1 point

Here are 32 different ways

Edit: Oops, looks like MuckaMcCaw beat me to it :)

Hitler posted that argument too.................

LittleMisfit(1745) Clarified
1 point

He's been copying and pasting everyone's arguments lately. He's just up to his usual trolling.

1 point

You don't. Besides, the way this debate is worded it could go either way. You could be asking to prove the Earth is less than OR older than 6000 years old.

How do you prove the Earth is older than 6,000 years old? If Creationists and Scientists have the same evidence how do you determine that the Earth is older than 6,000 years?

MuckaMcCaw(1970) Clarified
5 points

In A LOT of cases, the don't have the same data.

Most creationists get their data from sites like answersingenesis and similar organizations. They don't give them the evidence. They redefine things, they toss out red herrings, they appeal to scripture, they quote mine, they use outdated or non-peer reviewed studies, and from time to time they straight up lie. And the creationists who follow them rarely check up on the actual science.

So they might have access to that data, but it normally gets filtered through a very biased and duplicitous lens first.

Hitler(2364) Disputed Banned
3 points
1 point

Everyone knows that evolutionists and creationists dispute how the universe began. And regardless of which side of the battle line you’re on, most people harbor strong feelings about the issue of origins . . . Yet there are a host of important questions at the core of the battle that relatively few in either camp have bothered to ask—much less answer . . . Why is the issue of origins so universally controversial? ... How can creationists support biblical claims that so obviously seem to contradict modern science? .. Whose side of the argument does scientific evidence support? .. What roles should science and the Bible play in a person’s beliefs about the physical universe? .. With the curiosity of a student and the precision of a veteran Bible teacher, John MacArthur takes you to the heart of the battle in his study The Battle for the beginning .. Based on an in-depth examination of Genesis chapter 1, The Battle for the Beginning takes you on an instructive, fascinating journey into the Bible’s own claims about creation, evolution, and the vital issues at stake ....... http://www.gty.org/products/Audio-Series/255/The-Battle-for-the-Beginning

you cant without burning in hell.

ghostheadX(1105) Disputed
1 point

You'll only burn in hell is the Earth is 6,000 years old. If any religion, which religions throughout history say different times, says another time other than 6,000, is true, then you won't burn in hell. If science is true, then you won't burn in hell. You'll only burn in hell if the Bible is strictly true. Technically, you could argue that you can't prove (I'm going by different religions), that earth isn't 155.5 trillion years old either. That's apparently how long it is in Hinduism, according to this site. If that was the case, then Allah wouldn't do shit right, because he most likely wouldn't exist? Most religions say different time periods. And frankly, if christianity can be right, why can't Greek mythology be right, or Hinduism, or another religion?

I'll intellectually acknowledge that some believe that all religion is true. But according to the math on this website, as I just stated, earth would have to be around for different time periods, which would make no sense.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ageofthe_Earth

Sounds cool. I'll look at the reviews. I like the concept. I know the idea of a stealth game has been done a million times though.

1 point

That's nice, but you posted in the "How do you prove that the Earth isn't 6,000 years old?" debate.

1 point

i dont think the earth is 6000 years old it must be older than that :)

By science the earth is 14 billion years old. It has been some what proven and very accurate.

MuckaMcCaw(1970) Clarified
2 points

No, the universe is established at about 13.7 billion.

The Earth is only established ad about 4.5 billion

QuestionMan(604) Disputed
2 points

By science the earth is 14 billion years old. It has been some what proven and very accurate.

The earth as we know it (not the materials) according to the mainstream scientific consensus is around 4.54 billion years.

I would just make the claim and point to some things and explain how those things mean that the Earth is that old. I mean, no one alive today was the 6000 years ago so who's going to dispute me ;)

Look up at night .