a question for creationists??

The same way any geologist would explain it, I'd imagine.

-JC

Originally posted by Churlant
The same way any geologist would explain it, I'd imagine.

-JC

Wait a minute -- you can't say that! Creationists are anti-scientific and will invent alternative theories wherever it seems like the two fields will intersect.

Originally posted by 7ate9
6000 yr creationists

There are a few ways.

1. The time needed for the Earth's shape as we see it today isn't nearly as long as believed by mainstream science.

2. God created the Earth to seem older than it actually is, including continents which appear to have drifted over millions of years.

3. Tectonics is a myth.

4. "6,000 years" is not the same to us today as it is within the context of scripture.

-JC

Originally posted by Churlant
There are a few ways.

1. The time needed for the Earth's shape as we see it today isn't nearly as long as believed by mainstream science.

2. God created the Earth to seem older than it actually is, including continents which appear to have drifted over millions of years.

3. Tectonics is a myth.

4. "6,000 years" is not the same to us today as it is within the context of scripture.

-JC

Er... you forgot the opposite of uniformitarianism -- catastophism and more specifically the global flood -- meteor impacts that could have accelerated continental drift to have occurred over a matter of days/months.

the face of the earth changed after biblical flood

Originally posted by Halitose
Er... you forgot the opposite of uniformitarianism -- catastophism and more specifically the global flood -- meteor impacts that could have accelerated continental drift to have occurred over a matter of days/months.

Ah, yes. I must be slipping.

-JC

Originally posted by 7ate9
4. no good, not 6000 yrs.

3. science should prove this wrong with ease.

2. & 1. could have a little meaning.

4. You aren't paying attention. Review my previous comment on relative meanings of "6,000 years".

3. Science that is wrong, obviously.

2. & 1. Have an answer. You didn't ask for something that makes sense to you alone, now did you?

-JC

Originally posted by 7ate9
4. i'm not concerned about those people.

3. like i said science should prove this with ease, if it wanted.

1&2. you answered where i'm looking at, yes.

In that case you should have re-phrased your question. I understood your original inquiry to be a straight-forward request.

What you actually wish is to have someone explain young-Earth creationism in a way which makes sense to you, which we both know is not going to happen.

-JC