I'm not pretending. The earth is 6000 years old. Science verifies this. The Bible states it. Ron Paul believes it.
Get over it.
Endorsement bigger than Demint...
- Thread starter jpa
- Start date
I'm not pretending. The earth is 6000 years old. Science verifies this. The Bible states it. Ron Paul believes it.
Get over it.
Please stop arguing about creationism in this thread. Think about how fruitless your efforts are. You are NOT going to convince someone of your position over an internet forum, and this forum is not about this. It's pointless bickering.
Last edited:
The moderators can do what they want, but this debate actually is relevant to the thread. A poster said a Tebow endorsement would be bad because Tebow believes that the earth is only 6000 years old. I responded by citing science that shows the earth is only 6000 years old. I really don't see why everyone is having fits over this.
Btw, in a Paul presidency, the states and local counties will have much more control over education than the federal government, so you can be sure a number of states in the south will adopt young earth creationism in the public schools. Isn't liberty great?
Btw, in a Paul presidency, the states and local counties will have much more control over education than the federal government, so you can be sure a number of states in the south will adopt young earth creationism in the public schools. Isn't liberty great?
Paulitics 2011
Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2011
- Messages
- 784
True, but shouldn't this be in the off-topic forum then?
W/e, not a huge deal to me, carry on.
E
evadmurd
Guest
Religion and politics never mix.
Carehn
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2008
- Messages
- 3,635
I fixed for you .
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
- Adams
EndTheECB
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 111
I agree with the moral part. Without moral you end up with ppl like Corzine and Madoff on vital positions in society. That's why a Libertarian society never can work without a moral people.
whippoorwill
Member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2011
- Messages
- 733
Captain Shays
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2007
- Messages
- 2,368
Man, I watched all morning the Tim Tebow story with tears in my eyes. That kid really inspires me. Then I found out that he was home schooled and Ron Paul won some kind of straw poll for home schoolers. This is a natural connection. Maybe a blitz campaign of letters, emails tweets is in order?
Revolution9
Member
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2007
- Messages
- 9,323
No they don't. A dragon dwelled in the sky or cave and either controlled weather or guarded gemstones. The Chinese depictions of them are all similar across the ages and are not of a form that matches anything in the fossil record. They are depicted in the clouds and sometimes pulling the Sun God's chariot..same in Celtic England..same in Central America.
On the footprints..Man has been around in the Universe for tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of years. Man is an expression of the highest order of the Materium's complexity. Now, we may ask ourself..has time always had the same quality of flow to it as we currently perceive it. There was a Golden Age oft referred to that was "timeless". The Gnostics claim we are in a Matrix type simulation, along with the Yaqui sorcerers of Carlos Castaneda's books as well as many other religious, spiritual and shamanic traditions and that this illusionary overlay in our mental processes happened at some recent point in our history. The Library of Alexandria was burned to remove this knowledge from the pages of his-story. The Nag Hammadi scrolls brought this knowledge back into the light of the world, just as Israel was being created after the violence of WW II interestingly enough. There may be some truth to this "creation" being only several thousand years old if one does not take the flow of time as being constant since the beginning of the Universal Creation. We know that even recently the Sun was emitting some force, power or energy that was causing what we always assumed were stable decay rates of isotopes to become varied even over short periods of time..yet we use isotopes to create our measurers of time with atomic clocks which claim precision accuracy in depicting the flow of time. The Mayan calendar and recent scholarly work points to the nature of time as being fractal. There is a distinct possibility we are living in an illusory overlay and have been for the past several thousand years. Something to ponder for both sides of the argument prior to dismissing the other sides perceptions out of hand.
Rev9
Captain Shays
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2007
- Messages
- 2,368
I totally agree with you on this. Tebow is hot and VERY appealing to a lot of people right now. This morning I watched two different specials on him. The game tomorrow may be THE most watched play off game in history because of him. He carries a lot of weight with Christians all across the country. I mean when people are in his presence they well up with tears. He's that inspiring. To get his endorsement is HUGE
joshnorris14
Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2011
- Messages
- 617
A Tim Tebow endorsement would win Ron Paul Florida... You guys who are saying you'd rather have a Palin endorsement... Tebow is worshipped here. I'm not even exaggerating.
sirrealpolitik
Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2010
- Messages
- 39
I don't watch football either but I too think a Tebow endorsement would be huge, not least because it would also be echoed on a massive scale through Drudge and the MSM. They wouldn't be able to ignore it. He doesn't really seem like the endorsing kind of guy, though.
And I just had to chime in on the whole 6000 year thing, although it is a bit off topic. I don't care what people believe, really, and I doubt RP would either, but I do feel the need to make a point that has more to do with academia, as that is my profession.
First, to those who keep implying like Danjlion7 that evolution is some big liberal/academic conspiracy of the last 100 years: I wonder what your position is on the geocentric model of the universe? Passages from the bible suggest geocentrism because its writers were going off of Ptolemy and Aristotle and were reflecting the scientific understanding of their time. This was why Copernicus and Galileo ran into such trouble from the church when they tried to refute geocentrism and replace it with their empirically based heliocentric model. So would a creationist also subscribe to the idea that the earth is the center of the universe? Or do they recognize that it isn't even the center of our solar system. This debate was FAR more consequential historically than that of evolution/creationism. Would schools start teaching the geocentric model again?
Though the idea of evolution is specifically tied to Darwin, ideas about the age of the earth and the universe have varied for thousands of years. Classical authors like Lucretius and Parmenides speculated that the universe was basically of an infinite age, or simply really really old. Those who agree with them aren't simply part of some some century old neoliberal academic conspiracy. The history of scientific thought in the west is, I think, far more diverse than you give it credit for.
And also, just out of curiosity, how do you explain cool 30,000 year old stuff like this?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_man_of_the_Hohlenstein_Stadel
And I just had to chime in on the whole 6000 year thing, although it is a bit off topic. I don't care what people believe, really, and I doubt RP would either, but I do feel the need to make a point that has more to do with academia, as that is my profession.
First, to those who keep implying like Danjlion7 that evolution is some big liberal/academic conspiracy of the last 100 years: I wonder what your position is on the geocentric model of the universe? Passages from the bible suggest geocentrism because its writers were going off of Ptolemy and Aristotle and were reflecting the scientific understanding of their time. This was why Copernicus and Galileo ran into such trouble from the church when they tried to refute geocentrism and replace it with their empirically based heliocentric model. So would a creationist also subscribe to the idea that the earth is the center of the universe? Or do they recognize that it isn't even the center of our solar system. This debate was FAR more consequential historically than that of evolution/creationism. Would schools start teaching the geocentric model again?
Though the idea of evolution is specifically tied to Darwin, ideas about the age of the earth and the universe have varied for thousands of years. Classical authors like Lucretius and Parmenides speculated that the universe was basically of an infinite age, or simply really really old. Those who agree with them aren't simply part of some some century old neoliberal academic conspiracy. The history of scientific thought in the west is, I think, far more diverse than you give it credit for.
And also, just out of curiosity, how do you explain cool 30,000 year old stuff like this?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_man_of_the_Hohlenstein_Stadel
Muwahid
Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2011
- Messages
- 2,151
Someone asked Tebow to put Santorum on his eye stripes?
To put frothy under his eye stripes?
nastySirra,
Carbon dating is ine if the worst ways to determine age largely because it's built on the false premise that the amount if carbon remains constant in the atmosphere. Even mist evolutionists no longer use such a dating method. That artifact is probably no more than 4000 years old or so.
You do realize Galileo was an ardent bible believer, right? The catholic church of hus time was a statist pagan monster that hardly followed the scriptures.
It us true that up until about a 100 to a 150 years ago, most people believed in Genesis as a literal account and in young earth creationism. The rise of old earth evolution largely arose from racists seeking to bolster their narrow minded bigotry, Darwin being foremost among them. Without evolution, Hitler would have had no basis to claim ine race inferior to another. Planned Parenthood was also based in evolution and promoted eugininc and racial cleansing.
The fruit of young earth creationists have been prosperous societies. Ron Paul would be such a young earth creationist example. The fruit of old earth Darwinian thought has birthed Hitler, Planned Parenthood, abortion on demand, etc.
My main purpose was to show that there are intelligent scientific reasons to believe the earth is only 6000 years old, as Tim Tebow believes. And as, wonderfully, Ron Paul believes as well.
Carbon dating is ine if the worst ways to determine age largely because it's built on the false premise that the amount if carbon remains constant in the atmosphere. Even mist evolutionists no longer use such a dating method. That artifact is probably no more than 4000 years old or so.
You do realize Galileo was an ardent bible believer, right? The catholic church of hus time was a statist pagan monster that hardly followed the scriptures.
It us true that up until about a 100 to a 150 years ago, most people believed in Genesis as a literal account and in young earth creationism. The rise of old earth evolution largely arose from racists seeking to bolster their narrow minded bigotry, Darwin being foremost among them. Without evolution, Hitler would have had no basis to claim ine race inferior to another. Planned Parenthood was also based in evolution and promoted eugininc and racial cleansing.
The fruit of young earth creationists have been prosperous societies. Ron Paul would be such a young earth creationist example. The fruit of old earth Darwinian thought has birthed Hitler, Planned Parenthood, abortion on demand, etc.
My main purpose was to show that there are intelligent scientific reasons to believe the earth is only 6000 years old, as Tim Tebow believes. And as, wonderfully, Ron Paul believes as well.
I don't think Ron Paul is a New Earth Creationist, and I certainly hope he isn't (though I can forgive him for not having the time to understand why we know the Earth is much older than that). If the liberty movement is associated with anti-intellectualism we'll be stuck as fringe forever. Free thought is great, and if you want to believe Earth is 6000 years old or whatever great, but don't associate that with the movement. That's as bad as 9/11 truth stuff.
Similar threads
