PDA

View Full Version : Do you believe that the Earth..



StrongVibe
May 1st 2007, 02:49 PM
Do you guys believe that the Earth was once one huge land and slowly drifted (continental drift) into the way they are now? Here is what I mean: http://geology.com/pangea.htm

Quickened
May 1st 2007, 03:08 PM
I dont even believe in Earth

JesusisGod
May 1st 2007, 03:31 PM
Hi StrongVibe.
I believe when God created the earth it was one land mass. Genesis 1:9 might suggest that there was originally one continent when it says the water was gathered into "one place."
I think it would be a mistake to assume (as God haters do) that continental drift has always been constant.

Matthew 12:21
May 1st 2007, 03:41 PM
Is there a reason I shouldn't believe that? I didn't think it was a matter of "belief" or "faith".

Matthew 12:21
May 1st 2007, 03:43 PM
I think it would be a mistake to assume (as God haters do) that continental drift has always been constant.

Why in the world would you consider me a "God hater" because I believe in continental drift? :confused And how can you make such a generalization?

rchivers
May 1st 2007, 04:06 PM
Do you guys believe that the Earth was once one huge land and slowly drifted (continental drift) into the way they are now? Here is what I mean: http://geology.com/pangea.htm

I was taught that this is true in school actually. The continent shapes do sorta fit together in my opinion.

JesusisGod
May 1st 2007, 04:10 PM
Hi Matthew 12:21

Is there a reason I shouldn't believe that?
If you are asking if you shouldn't believe that land masses have constantly drifted apart at a rate of a few cms a year, then yes, there's a very good reason why you shouldn't believe it.


I didn't think it was a matter of "belief" or "faith".
Since no one on earth knows for sure, it has to be a matter of belief or faith.


Why in the world would you consider me a "God hater" because I believe in continental drift? :confused
I never considered you a God hater. I said God haters believe continental drift has always remained constant. People who consider themselves christians may also believe this. This flawed thinking adds to the "evidence" that the earth is older than the number of hamburgers McDonalds has sold. Of course the argument is used by God hating people to show how we are the product of chance. Watch out who you're arguing for, kid.

rchivers
May 1st 2007, 04:12 PM
Wow, and here I thought it was a proven fact that continents are adrift.

Matthew 12:21
May 1st 2007, 04:28 PM
If you are asking if you shouldn't believe that land masses have constantly drifted apart at a rate of a few cms a year, then yes, there's a very good reason why you shouldn't believe it.

Alright, I'm listening.


Since no one on earth knows for sure, it has to be a matter of belief or faith.

No, faith is "belief that is not based on proof". (dictionary.com) There is substantial proof for continental drift.


I never considered you a God hater. I said God haters believe continental drift has always remained constant. People who consider themselves christians may also believe this. This flawed thinking adds to the "evidence" that the earth is older than the number of hamburgers McDonalds has sold. Of course the argument is used by God hating people to show how we are the product of chance. Watch out who you're arguing for, kid.

I am not arguing for any person, and I have not been brainwashed into "anti-God" rhetoric. The Theory of Continental Drift is just that- a theory. It's not a religious sacrament, it's not "anti-God". It's the best hypothesis for how the continents formed.

JesusisGod
May 1st 2007, 07:59 PM
Hi rchivers.

Wow, and here I thought it was a proven fact that continents are adrift.
They are.

JesusisGod
May 1st 2007, 08:27 PM
Hi Matthew 12:21.

Alright, I'm listening.
If continents took millions of years to drift apart, the Bible is unreliable as to the age of the earth and therefore unreliable when it comes to anything else.


No, faith is "belief that is not based on proof". (dictionary.com) There is substantial proof for continental drift.
Faith and belief may also be based on observation. The diciples believed Jesus to be the Messiah because of the things He did. Their faith was based on evidence....evidence which became infallible after He rose from the dead (Acts1:3). I'm not disputing the evidnece that continents are drifting apart, just that the rate of movement hasn't always been the same. I hope you can understand this.


I am not arguing for any person, and I have not been brainwashed into "anti-God" rhetoric.
Ok, just be aware that everything you say on this site might affect someone who's reading it. Continental drift was originally theorized by a believer. It is now used by atheists as "evidence" that the earth is much older than the Bible claims.


It's the best hypothesis for how the continents formed.
The unbelievers will tell you that evolution is the best theory of how we got here too. Do you believe them?

StrongVibe
May 1st 2007, 09:27 PM
I believe that the earth was once one big land mass and slowly drifted into what it is now. What I don't get is how people argue that the earth is 6000-10000 years old. I was always under the impression that it was 4.5 billion years old (or something like that)

TEITZY
May 2nd 2007, 12:57 AM
I believe that the earth was once one big land mass and slowly drifted into what it is now. What I don't get is how people argue that the earth is 6000-10000 years old. I was always under the impression that it was 4.5 billion years old (or something like that)

It may well be true that there once was one giant land mass however there are numerous problems with the idea of gradual continental drift over millions of years. From a Biblical perspective, individual continents are most likely the result of Noah's flood and this could happen in a very short period of time. You also need to keep in mind that the age of anything cannot be proven with the scientific method (only eyewitness accounts provide proof of age) and that the area of historical science relies on many assumptions and presuppostions when CALCULATING dates or ages.

Anyway, here (http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter11.pdf) is an article that discusses the issue of continental drift.

Cheers
Leigh

JesusisGod
May 2nd 2007, 09:08 AM
Hi StrongVibe.
There's a creation scientist named John Baumgardner who thinks the earth could have been rapidly separated by some catastrophe.

Jemma Ash
May 2nd 2007, 04:02 PM
I was taught that this is true in school actually. The continent shapes do sorta fit together in my opinion.
and are going to beleive everything that you were/are taught at school? I was tought that evolution was true but I don't believe that...

Dunedanranger
May 2nd 2007, 04:39 PM
I wasn't there, so I don't know. But hey, I don't think aboriginies got to Austrailia by swimming...

nebula_omega
May 2nd 2007, 04:52 PM
:agree: That'd have been an quite a swim...

rchivers
May 2nd 2007, 05:09 PM
and are going to beleive everything that you were/are taught at school? I was tought that evolution was true but I don't believe that...

I was just pointing out that I remembered being taught it in school. Of course I dont believe everything the public school system taught me.

TEITZY
May 2nd 2007, 11:38 PM
I wasn't there, so I don't know. But hey, I don't think aboriginies got to Austrailia by swimming...

More than likely they came from Asia by canoe/boat bringing dingoes (descended from dogs in South East Asia) with them.

Cheers
Leigh

Dunedanranger
May 3rd 2007, 09:13 PM
That is definately a possibility, but Aboriginies share more cultural and physical characteristics with Africans than with Mongoloids IMO. And I thought that dingoes were relatively new to Australia, biologically speaking, with the thylacine being the true native predator-mammal. :hmm:

TEITZY
May 3rd 2007, 10:17 PM
That is definately a possibility, but Aboriginies share more cultural and physical characteristics with Africans than with Mongoloids IMO. And I thought that dingoes were relatively new to Australia, biologically speaking, with the thylacine being the true native predator-mammal. :hmm:

No the dingo is not native to Australia. Here's (http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1913) an article if you're interested.

Cheers
Leigh

Dunedanranger
May 3rd 2007, 10:46 PM
Oooo... cool site TEITZY. I bet you would like http://www.trueorigin.org/

But we're getting off topic. Does any1 know why they think that there used to be only one mega-continent?