Which is worse?
- Thread starter J_Dee
- Start date
Knowing the age of the earth is complicated. Looking around the universe and thinking anything is flat is just completely idiotic.
Both are dumb but you literally just need eyes to prove flat earth is nonsense.
At that level, comparisons are meaningless. LOL
It's like trying to divide by zero.
It's like trying to divide by zero.
If you believe in a miraculous god being able to form everything out of nothing, then any age of the earth could be completely plausible to you. And that’s fine, just don’t tell me you know it as a fact, and I’m not going to tour your giant boat either.
Atheists, Christian, Jews, Agnostic, Pastafarians, et al., can agree that the damn earth isn’t flat.
Atheists, Christian, Jews, Agnostic, Pastafarians, et al., can agree that the damn earth isn’t flat.
Well perhaps the God formed everything out of something else not nothing, age is relative to interpretation of time which we now believe isn't exactly linear.
The religion(s) aren't at fault, like Glenn(N), it is those that interpret them and him
that are questionable.
The religion(s) aren't at fault, like Glenn(N), it is those that interpret them and him
that are questionable.So, here’s the thing, you do realize that people believe what they’re indoctrinated to believe, right? With that being said, let me ask you this, all things considered, why does it spark such outrage?
Not sure about any outrage. For me it’s more amazement that in this modern era there are still people that embrace magical/mystical/make-believe nonsense and reject provable scientific facts.
I think both are ridiculous, but to me the shape of the Earth is more readily observable and apparent. Whereas the age of our planet is more complicated, and arguments can be made on the accuracy of carbon dating, etc. etc. So Flat Earth theory is my pick for being worse.
I find both to be silly, but it’s pretty easy to tangibly prove the earth is round.
The other one has a lot more grey area since literally no one can say for sure the origins
of earth. Being nonreligious, I tend to err on the side of big bang or evolution more than “invisible man made the universe in 6 days” bit. Young earth creationism is regular creationism of steroids.
The other one has a lot more grey area since literally no one can say for sure the origins
of earth. Being nonreligious, I tend to err on the side of big bang or evolution more than “invisible man made the universe in 6 days” bit. Young earth creationism is regular creationism of steroids.
I agree.
No outrage from me either, although I’ve experienced a lot of outrage directed towards me from various friends and relatives when I “came out” as a nonbeliever.
I want to say flat earthers but I have to give them some points for trying. Takes way more thought to imagine the weird **** they come up with versus the “big guy did it”. Both are ridiculous but I’d bet the flat earthers are at least more fun to talk to.
I'm regretting this, even as I type it. Setting aside 'religions' and just sticking with a creator instead; it takes about as much faith to believe either one (that complex life accidentally happened, as it does to believe that it had a helping hand.
If life on Earth DID have a "helping hand" I'd be willing to bet that He/She/They/It are sure as hell regretting THAT decision.
Cosmic "Buyer's Remorse"
(pictures the Creator, waking up with a headache, car parked in the front yard, and then, in the shower, spotting a tasteless tattoo that now adorns it's chest.)
"Who the **** is Brandie???"
Cosmic "Buyer's Remorse"
(pictures the Creator, waking up with a headache, car parked in the front yard, and then, in the shower, spotting a tasteless tattoo that now adorns it's chest.)
"Who the **** is Brandie???"
Last edited:
Both are ridiculous, but you have to be clinically insane to believe the earth is flat. Even if you were a member of a tribe deep in the Amazon that had never had contact with civilization, you'd figure out that the earth isn't flat just from observing the sky.
Sky? LOL
Ummmm I think you mean firmament, you miserable Luddite. LOL
Ummmm I think you mean firmament, you miserable Luddite. LOL
Where's Brushy/Bushy Bill when you need him?
I think he fell of the face of the flat earth.
So do you think that a random explosion created everything including trees, oceans, suns, moons, planets, humans and animals?
Is JDee's shtick just to create a thread (often controversial) and then just bounce? lol
I'm not around these people but I don't understand how the theory even exists. Religion is based on faith. You can neither prove nor deny it.
But has anyone explained the pictures of earth from space? Do they believe that's faked? How does one explain this away? You can't show me a basketball and say it's a pancake. I can clearly see that it's a basketball. Then again, I guess media and academia routinely do this **** through conditioning and warp reality.
No one has read the Old Testemant.
Yes. There are people that think any and all pictures and videos taken from space are fake. It really is amazing. There are even people that think satellites aren't real
I believe that suns, planets and moons came from the explosion. Scientists have learned through observation that the universe is still expanding, meaning that an explosion took place. The plants and animals came some time after that.
I also believe that the best possible way to solve a mystery is to examine the evidence and see where the facts take you. Then reach a conclusion. The worst possible way is to make up an answer (like, some old dude that lives somewhere above the clouds oversees everything), and then pretend that all the questions fit your answer.
Does a Big Bang Theory dismiss God? Couldn't one make the claim that God did the big explosion to create the universe?
It's obvious that you aren't open to any outside theory other than the one you believe to be true so I see no need to further this discussion.
Actually, I’m always open to new theories that are based on observable data and presented by educated, knowledgeable modern-day scientists.
I’m not open to theories that were offered up thousands of years ago by illiterate hunter/gatherers that didn’t understand where the sun went at night.
But some of those guys were smarter than you; they just didn't have scientists or google algorithms to tell them they were wrong.
But okay... whatevs, totes magotes. However, "explosion" is not the right way to think of the big bang, which was orignally a derogatory term used for the idea. It's an expansion out of darkness.
Just like and the Lord said, let there be light.
There is no observable proof for the origins of the Universe. In so far as what CAUSED it to happen, and how life came from nothing. Creator, Chance, both are equally fairytale"ish" if you ask me.