This blog post is in response to a Creation .vs. Evolution post, which I find slightly amusing because the poster didn’t seem to really look up any science on the matter. The answer I provide, links to proper science proof and further reading material is vast.
The current state of Evolution .vs. Creation .vs. Science .vs. Athiets is always about “Define your Terms”. I find that Creation science goes out of its way to ask questions, which is all science does in the first place. What science is actually settled? If you are a scientist and you go around saying that your science is settled and you will never learn more about what you are doing, holy crap, go find something else to do because you are bored or too scared shitless to actually find answers yourself.
…”hypothetical scientific response to these questions that makes even the slightest amount of sense”… The response to this is pretty simple, but the proof is longer across a few websites. Response: Your blog post and questions seem to revolve around a very traditional view of a young earth creation view.
Personally, I am still researching the facts, but a combination of young earth (15-35k year view for me) and old earth (millions of years) is where I fall. I don’t pin my beliefs on how actual facts fall and don’t allow them to detract from my biblical views, because the bible has so much depth which people mis-translate all the time. I can maintain my faith and allow for science to continually present itself to us for all eternity. As we study and understand science, you find that it is not “settled”. In fact, anyone who says that science is settled is speaking politics, not science.
Old Earth Links with references:
Young Earth arguments with reference
Notes to read
My Corner of the Web 