Longtime denizens here are well aware of my proclivity for emphasizing evidence, and so I'm being consistent when I express my favorable view of this thread and my desire that it stay tightly focused on evidence *for* a young earth while avoiding challenges to evidence for an ancient earth. There are already a number of threads addressing ancient earth evidence in which discussion may be resumed (they seem to be in a pause at present), or a new thread may be opened to challenge this evidence.
As Brian has requested, please use this thread to focus on positive evidence supporting a young earth. To assist discussion, here is my assessment of the direction each of the four points raised by The General needs to take:
- Evidence of human civilization only goes back 6000 years.
Unless you're keying on the word "civilization", the fields of archeology and paleoarcheology already possess a wealth of evidence for human civilization, or at least habitation, going back tens of thousands of years. Since this thread is not about challenging ancient earth evidence, this doesn't seem like a category where positive evidence could be offered. Indeed, even if there *were* no evidence of humanity before 6000 years ago, we would have to haul out the tired but nonetheless devastatingly true saw that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. So I think this point has to be abandoned for this thread - it would certainly be fair grist for the mill in another thread.
- Oil fields under too much pressure.
Though this point has been raised here before, it never received any attention. A quick perusal of the web on this topic did not bring to light any supporting details, like the figures for pressure versus depth, the pososity of rock versus pressure, the particulate size of oil compared to rock pososity, etc. As stated it is merely a bald assertion, so it needs the supporting evidence.
- World population.
I think almost all serious Creationists concede the extreme naiveté of this argument. As per my rubic that stupid debate pushes out good debate, I'd like this point dropped. Please email any objections along with reasons why this point should be addressed to EvC Forum Administrator.
- Carbon dating is unreliable.
Since this is a challenge to evidence for an ancient earth rather than positive evidence for a young earth, it should be addressed in a different thread.
That's all I have to say - have at it!
------------------
| -- | Percy |
| | EvC Forum Administrator |
[Fixed signature. --Admin]
[This message has been edited by Admin, 07-31-2003]
™ Version 4.2
