Answers in Genesis

Creationists can accurately predict discoveries based on a timescale of about 6,000 years.

5 days ago | [YT] | 872



@purussanguis9885

God created Adam.. 24 hours later, was Adam 1 day old or like 20 years old? when God created the plants, were they fully grown trees and flowers or were there a bunch of seeds and acorns lying around? God can create with inherent age

5 days ago | 24

@DonkeyKongOdyssey

Neither side is willing to admit that the discussion of origins is not scientific.

3 days ago | 5

@noxplay4906

Meanwhile I'm Catholic and I'm just sitting here eating popcorn and watching atheists and Evangelicals fighting over whether science is subordinate to faith or vice-versa.

5 days ago | 7

@thebiblebus

Bro went hard on this one. You can't reason with unreasonable people. Humans have only been on earth for 6000 years, but the angelic host were created prior, perhaps also the formless, void earth with that same creative act. We can debate until He returns, but His Word never returns void, and God will not be mocked.

5 days ago | 11

@cosmictreason2242

Occam's Razor is firmly with the YEC model of the universe.

5 days ago | 16

@Czarseahorse

Name one that has been accurate. Btw, not all creationists accept a 6k year timescale for everything. You ever hear of Old-Earth Creationism; you ever hear of The Vatican. The former generally agrees with deep time but are not settled on an exact timescale; the later accept the scientific models, but as evidence of "god's" magnality. Y do you have to make disingenuous claims, AIG?

3 days ago | 2

@lemmygaming234

99% of comments are people yelling in anger that someone dare believe truth.

4 days ago | 4

@DenisRB-f7x

Beautiful ❤

5 days ago | 5

@Grabczyk

So we actually know the earth is not that old because we have a ludicrous amount of evidence, while you only have words in a book made by man. The evidence you’re most likely to believe is numerous human cave paintings spanning tens of thousands of years old. We use radio carbon dating to measure this, a method that is incredibly accurate and reliable, and literally cannot be wrong in any reasonable sense as the half life of radioactive carbon is 100% consistent under any conditions. If you don’t believe radiocarbon dating because you’re a troglodyte, there are also sometimes long extinct animals depicted in cave paintings, such as mammoths, where on mainland regions (where the paintings are found) went extinct 10000 years ago.

3 days ago | 2

@patelk464

No they cannot. They may well be point to some events recorded in the bible where that event occurred around when the bible was written. Rest of the time YEC have to resort to BS claims.

3 days ago | 1

@ninkstheultimate3376

I'd say 6-10k years, but yes. The Bible is history, after all.

5 days ago | 5

@hush半神

You literally cannot if you're properly using sciences and the scientific method.. This is a case of user error. Even broken clocks are right twice a day

5 days ago | 7

@nate78824

How about the past discoveries of galaxies so far away, it took millions of years for the light to reach Earth?

5 days ago | 5

@Johnny_Eh-theist

"God made it look older" is not an accurate prediction. Your ignorance of reality is not prediction, evidence, proof, or anything else you want to call it. It's lying to yourself to protect your emotions out of fear of being and accepting that you're demonstrably wrong about almost every single aspect of reality. Do better.

5 days ago | 8

@vanwan7610

“Science is wrong until one tiny part taken out of context of every other thing we’ve discovered proves my fringe theories as barely plausible”- Answers in Genesis

5 days ago | 7

@mcjavabelike8320

And so can the church of the flying spaghetti monster. Y'all ain't special.

5 days ago | 7

@DoubleOScotch

Nowhere in the Bible does it actually say Earth is six millennia old. It’s not there. It’s a flawed, baseless, Protestant extrapolation. Kinda like religious flat earthers. Scientia Auget Vires. Laudetur Jesus Christus.

3 days ago | 2

@kgmail7364

The greatest scientist of all time was Sir Isaac Newton. He was also a staunch creationist.

3 days ago | 0

@Columbinesaurus

Y'all sure didn't accurately predict the discovery of Göbekli Tépe, a 12000-year old stone monument in Türkiye...

4 days ago | 5

@johnalexir7634

This sentence doesn't even make sense. Is there a point or question here, or just looking for "Amens"? I'm guessing it means that everything that needs to be explained can fit into the "model" (to be generous) of YEC and 6,000 years, but that is ludicrous.

5 days ago (edited) | 1