Are Young Earth Creationists the most deceived people on Planet Earth?

Asked by: Sagey
  • People Believing In Young Earth Creationism (I.D,) Have Been Deceived By Charlatans Who Use Their Religion To Seduce Them Into False Knowledge To Make Money:

    Young Earth Creationism is actually a Commercial Product base on Deceptive Pseudo-Scientific.

    Young Earth Charlatans ( YEC ) are creating empires out of deceiving their following.
    Great examples of this are:
    "The Creation Museum" and the replica of "Noah's Ark".

    People like Ray Comfort and Ken Ham are living a good life out of promoting pseudo-scientific nonsense as real scientific knowledge.
    Many Scientists (ex-scientists) have turned to producing fraudulent, false material supporting YEC nonsensical Anti-Knowledge.
    Because producing YEC material for the lucrative US YEC market (the world hub of YEC belief) is often more profitable than genuine work in Science.
    Such as the Ex Geologist from Australia, Andrew Snelling who even peer reviews non-geological material, so suddenly he is a man of all Sciences, such as most YEC ex scientists pretend to be.

    The National Education Bodies are trying to get rid of the YEC group as it is holding back the education system in those states where it has high support.

    The National Center For Science Education has a great section of information that destroy the ridiculously false teachings of the YEC Charlatans.

    They make money out of many sources, donations, entry fees to their stupid theme parks, numerous books and home school classes.
    They also constantly ask for donations to keep their imaginary fight against the Truth of Real Science, which they try to irrationally paint as Lies Of Science.

    Education, hopefully will reduce their massive money tree of deceived people.
    Though, as long as we have regions where they control the education system and have convinced parents to home school their children in their nonsense, then Society will always have this problem.

    Also the average Education level of students will suffer, as long as we have students being fed non-verifiable, pseudo-scientific nonsense.

    YEC proponents always state that Evolution is Wrong and that their YEC is the only truth and alternative to Evolution.

    Problem there is that YEC arguments are Supernatural Based, even if Evolution was completely destroyed, it can only be replaced by a non-supernatural based Theory, so a supernatural based argument will never, ever be considered as an alternative to Evolution.

    Because Supernatural Accounts are the Least Probable Answers.
    Science only considers the Most Probable Answers.
    If Evolution has a part of it destroyed, it would only be repaired and we would then have Evolution Version 2.
    Evolution is a Theory, A theory is the highest level achievable in science and a Theory must be Verified by all the evidence available. Thus The Theory Of Evolution is Substantiated.

    YEC arguments have absolutely no verified evidence to support them.
    The total evidence for Creation is zip, nul, nudda, zero!
    It's Totally impossible to replace Evolution with Creationism in education.
    Because Creationism is not, nor has ever been an alternative to Evolution.

    Yet: YEC Charlatans, (ie. Ken Ham, Ray Comfort, John Morris) want to make more money, so they arrogantly tell their deluded sheep that Creationism is and alternative to Evolution.

  • The overwhelming evidence points to an old earth.

    Taking a look at geology, astronomy and radiometric evidence. The age of the earth is much older than the 6,000 years that staunch young earth creationists believe. The failure to look at the evidence belays a cultist viewpoint that is not supported by a realistic review of the evidence. Please seek help.

  • I agreed with Sagey.

    Because Supernatural Accounts are the Least Probable Answers.
    Science only considers the Most Probable Answers.
    If Evolution has a part of it destroyed, it would only be repaired and we would then have Evolution Version 2.
    Evolution is a Theory, A theory is the highest level achievable in science and a Theory must be Verified by all the evidence available. Thus The Theory Of Evolution is Substantiated.

  • It's the "Young Earth" that's key here.

    There is no reason whatsoever for a 6000-year-old earth to be a prerequisite for Biblical or Christian beliefs. The Bible never comes anywhere near making claims on the age of the earth, the numbers used by Young Earth Creationists were compiled by some random bishop hundreds of years ago by adding up the ages of all the people listed in Genesis.

    The reason Young Earthers are so deceived is that not only have they been deceived to believe that the earth is 6000-years-old, they've also been deceived into thinking that said age is somehow an important component of their religion. There are hundreds of possible interpretations of the Bible's account of creation that would go hand-in-hand with the scientific discoveries made by man, and none of those interpretations is any less "literal" than the Young Earth one.

    Young Earth Creationism is the new Geocentric Solar System. It's a pointless belief created by a church that had no way of knowing any better and then held onto far longer than it should have been not because of any Biblical need to do so, but because religious authorities hate to admit that they might possibly be wrong about something.

  • NO PROOF none exists

    There is no proof to that humans existed in the time of the dinosaurs. There is ZERO proof of human skeletons that date even a hundred years from the time of the dinosaurs. If they we're to believe that the Earth is amazingly young then they have to be the most ignorant people on the planet earth. There is MASS amounts of proof against this.

  • Coming from a student biologist in college...Who has read on the subject over and over again.

    The science that supports evolution is incomplete, inconclusive, and contradicts itself. If that does not set off alarm bells for you, then what will?

    Let us get into some science. I read a report on National Geographic recently that claimed a group of scientists had created evolution in the laboratory. While most people read the headlines, and then stop after the intro paragraph, I read (tediously) through the entirety of the experiment. The scientists were working with e-coli, and bred the bacteria through a period of time equivalent to literally hundreds of millions of years of e-coli history. One group of e-coli remained the same, while the other group grew sets of three flagellum and extra parts (etc etc).

    To the scientists dismay, after millions of millions of years of e-coli time, of breeding and isolating the e-coli, guess what they still had? You guessed it. E-COLI.

    And get this; when they combined the normal e-coli with the supposed evolved e-coli, the normal e-coli was able to out-perform the new e-coli and drove them to relative extinction.

    No matter what conditions scientists create in a laboratory, they cannot genetically isolate members of the same species.

    Nor create life from a pool of chemicals / amino acids.

    And let us not forget that DNA is a language in itself. How could inanimate chemicals create languages to be read by other non-living chemicals which are supposedly all inanimate?

    Now that I am more educated, any person who claims there is adequate proof of evolution loses all credibility to me.

  • Creationism is a valid explanation of matter and life

    There are too many questions and unknowns in regards to the origin of matter and life. Every honest evolutionists must admit that built in the THEORY of evolution are many unanswered problems. Where did the original energy come from for the Big Bang; where did the original matter come from? There is the problem of oxygen where amino acids are destroyed in the presence of oxygen (and in water as well), but life could not exist on the earth due to the ultraviolet rays of the sun without an atmosphere. Those are only a few questions, besides the problem that the question of origins cannot be answered on the basis of the scientific method since no one was present to observe the origin of the universe. With that in mind, evolution becomes a theory of belief based on presuppositions of no God and creation is a theory of belief based on the presupposition of a God. Neither can be conclusively proven and therefore both are valid theories.

  • You can't make an absolute assumption about such a broad group.

    Discussing an entire genre of human and generalizing them all to one accusation is a terrible practice. You're likely to meet people from all types of people who are smarter or dumber than you. A deep look in the evidence gaps and logical gaps can leave numerous groups of people looking toward other theories. I can guarantee you there are Young Earth Creationists 5x the OP's intelligence, and some Evolutionists that are 5x as dumb. You can't generalize such a broad group of people with an absolute like this. Only an idiot would ask this question.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Sagey says2014-01-09T02:53:43.537
Creationists never retract any proven false concepts.
Time and time again, a concept of YEC that has been completely destroyed will appear in their latest documents and books, likely as a page filler to make the book appear to have volumes of knowledge, when truly it has absolutely no knowledge worthy of learning.
Sagey says2014-01-09T03:02:48.007
BTW: I call those who were once qualified as Scientists, ex-scientists because their YEC literature totally destroys their credibility in their field of science. Their peers now consider them as jokes and not fellow scientists.
Such as Andrew Snelling, Francis Collins, Michael Behe, even the originator of the Creation Research Institute (CRI) who was himself a scientist Henry Morris, became a joke among his peers.
BTW: The CRI never conducted any genuine scientific research, so the name is also a Fraud.
Sagey says2014-01-09T03:52:38.673
I just had a comment that ID and YEC are not the same.
Here is the absolute truth about it: Since YEC had been banned from many science classrooms in many states, they decided to change their tactics and attempted to make YEC appear more scientific.
So they took YEC texts and changed the covers and changed the references to Creator to Designer.
According to research in their last court case against science teachers, this alteration of YEC texts to make them I.D. Texts brought their nonsense undone.
Essentially I.D. Is YEC dressed up to appear more scientific, but the nonsense is identical, it even comes from the same books, just with the covers and some text altered.

If you take a Radio, change the covers and knobs and call it a waveform detector, you still have a Radio.
If you take YEC, change the covers and a few words in the text and call it ID, you still have YEC.

The only difference between them in the last few years is that ID is claiming some acceptance of an ancient planet, which YEC does not.
Though when pushed, they still claim the aging of the planet is wrong and continually attack geology and archaeology.

They are still pretty much identical apart from a few tweaks to make ID sound more reasonable.
Though neither can ever be considered as an alternative to Evolution.
Neither are truly scientific.
Thus Neither can be taught as an alternative to Evolution in science class.
They are still a theological position and belong in a class of Errant Philosophy.
Sagey says2014-01-09T03:59:43.963
Some fun from AronRa on Ken Ham's Facebook nonsense:
Sagey says2014-01-09T07:35:55.963
Nobody appears to be viewing the video??? It would explain why those on the No side are not entirely right, even though they are not entirely wrong neither. I only want people to rationally consider the evidence and then Think.
Though most posters, especially on the No side are not looking at the evidence in the URL I cited.
Typical of Creationists, just make blanket, bigoted decisions about life and science without really considering the evidence.
If one had demonstrated a viewing of the evidence and still decided that No is the right answer, I'd actually accept it wholeheartedly, because they have made the effort to view the evidence.
Most Creationists read the Bible, but never really consider what they read rationally and skeptically, otherwise they wouldn't believe in Creationism.
YEC Devotion is truly a position of complete Ignorance of Evidence.
Ken Ham is a great example of this Complete Ignorance, as AronRa demonstrates in my other URL I cited.
Sagey says2014-01-10T00:40:43.970
Though Jewish scholars now concede through lack of evidence, that possibly Moses never existed and Exodus definitely never happened.
Rendering the entire Old Testament as Fraudulent.
So Creationists are supporting Fraudulent Scripture
Sagey says2014-01-10T00:58:52.360
Vestigial organs prove YEC as False: The designs of life are not great, there are many flaws, which often demonstrate themselves in vestigial organs. One I particularly like is the tiny, useless front limbs found on Ostriches. These may have once been sort of useful, but possibly only useful prior to when Ostriches existed as Velociraptors, since it appears that V-raptors stopped using their front limbs as well, so after 75 million years on not being used, the still exist as vestigial appendages on the chest of Ostriches. A waste of limb. Such useless appendages shows a designer, didn't do a very good job. I'd have sacked God if it was doing design work for me.
We cannot afford to waste materials like that.

Yes, dinosaurs still exist, so Jurassic Park is here, but we know those dinosaurs as Birds!
Sagey says2014-01-10T01:15:33
One friend suggested male nipples and female clitoris as vestigial organs, they are partially useless, but they are not. Male nipples and the female clitoris are simply spandrels. In evolution, changing the sex of a fetus at an early stage is easier if the basics of the organ are already in existence. Thus in creating a female from a neutral fetus, it is easier if such things like the nipples already exist to attach the breast tissue to. Thus the neutral fetus has nipples and so will a male. Same goes if genetics is going to produce a male from the neutral fetus.
So a spandrel for the penis already exists with the high concentration of nerves already attached to make the organ sensitive enough for generating the arousal. So the clitoris is the spandrel for a penis, because the clitoris is much smaller than the head of the penis that it is a spandrel for and it has the same number of nerves connected, it is proportionally more sensitive than the head of a penis where the nerves are spread over a larger surface.
It's the same as we do in engineering, instead of having to design a whole new module from scratch, we leave spandrel or most commonly utilized additions as modules, so we can simply add them in by expanding them when needed. Evolution works in the same way with spandrels instead of detachable modules.
Sagey says2014-01-10T07:10:25.827
BTW: If as one comment on the No side stated: "Creationism is a valid explanation of matter and life".
If that were really the case, it would be in the public science textbooks recommended by the government's education system.

Though it certainly is not a Valid explanation: Why, because there is no confirmed evidence to give it validity.

If Creation was a Valid Explanation it would be a Scientific Theory with Evidence Supporting It.

Evolution is a Scientific Theory, because there is a Mountain Of Evidence Supporting It as being so.

Creationism is only an Argument, creationists are just being Argumentative.

Arguments don't need Evidence to support them.

Even a Hypothesis must have some Agreeable evidence to make it worthy of Discussion.

Creation hasn't even enough evidence to become a Hypothesis, so It Is Not Really Worthy Of Discussion In Science.

Nobody within Science, discusses Young Earth Creationism, because it is Unworthy!

The only time YEC is likely to appear in Scientific discussions is Solely As The Subject Of Jokes!
Sagey says2014-01-10T07:24:17.007
A Large Part Of Being Intelligent is Being Rational. If Somebody Is Not Very Rational, Then They Are Not Very Intelligent.
I think Janetsanders agrees with this??? LOL
Sagey says2014-01-13T11:20:23.987
Here is an excerpt from Tour Egypt: "Strictly speaking, there has never been any clear evidence discovered in Egypt, or elsewhere, to support the Israelite Exodus from Egypt, though there is no small amount of conjecture and theories. In fact, today it is fashionable, among Egyptologists, archaeologists and even some Jewish scholars to doubt the whole biblical story."

People can still believe that Exodus took place, but, they have to not claim it as Fact, since there is no evidence anywhere on Earth that such an event ever happened.
So nobody can ever say that the Exodus is a Biblical Fact.
Apparently it is not and may actually be a Fabrication.
Much like Genesis.
Sagey says2014-02-12T21:27:39.403
Modern Young Earth Creationism was the product of Ellen White's brain damage.
It was her hallucination of witnessing God create the universe in six days that started it all.
One of her subjects, George McCready Price believed in Ellen's hallucination and created his book "Flood Geology" based on her vision.
This is still the reference manual of choice for Young Earth Creationism.
So YEC is a product of One Person's Hallucination, not a product of scientific investigation nor open minded observation.

Though the entire Bible may be the product of Abraham's Hallucination (Old Testament) combined with Saul's Hallucination of Jesus (New Testament), believers in the Bible are likely badly Deceived as well, but not as bad as YEC believers.