Pat Robertson challenges creationism

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**d-usa**

via CNN:

Washington (CNN) – Televangelist Pat Robertson challenged the idea that Earth is 6,000 years old this week, saying the man who many credit with conceiving the idea, former Archbishop of Ireland James Ussher, “wasn’t inspired by the Lord when he said that it all took 6,000 years.”

The statement was in response to a question Robertson fielded Tuesday from a viewer on his Christian Broadcasting Network show "The 700 Club.” In a submitted question, the viewer wrote that one of her biggest fears was that her children and husband would not go to heaven “because they question why the Bible could not explain the existence of dinosaurs.”

“You go back in time, you've got radiocarbon dating. You got all these things, and you've got the carcasses of dinosaurs frozen in time out in the Dakotas,” Robertson said. “They're out there. So, there was a time when these giant reptiles were on the Earth, and it was before the time of the Bible. So, don't try and cover it up and make like everything was 6,000 years. That's not the Bible.”

Before answering the question, Robertson acknowledged the statement was controversial by saying, “I know that people will probably try to lynch me when I say this.”

“If you fight science, you are going to lose your children, and I believe in telling them the way it was,” Robertson concluded.

Forty-six percent of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years, according to a survey released by Gallup in June. That number has remained unchanged for the past 30 years, since 1982, when Gallup first asked the question on creationism versus evolution.

The Gallup poll has not specifically asked about views on the age of the Earth.

Ussher’s work, from the mid-1600s, is widely cited by creationists as evidence that Earth is only a few thousand years old. Answer in Genesis, the famed Christian creationist ministry behind the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, cites Ussher as proof of Earth’s age. They describe the archbishop as “a brilliant scholar who had very good reasons for his conclusions concerning the date of creation.”

For Christians who read the creation account in Genesis literally, the six days in the account are strictly 24-hour periods and leave no room for evolution. Young Earth creationists use this construct and biblical genealogies to determine the age of the Earth, and typically come up with 6,000 to 10,000 years.

Most scientists, however, agree that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old and the universe is 14.5 billion years old.

The idea of creationism has been scorned by the mainstream scientific community since shortly after Charles Darwin introduced "The Origin of Species" in 1859. By 1880, The American Naturalists, a science journal, reported nearly every major university in America was teaching evolution.

The question about Earth’s age has been in the news recently. Earlier this month, Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida attempted to walk the line between science and faith-based creationism in remarks that that provoked the ire of liberal blogs and left the door open to creationism.

“I'm not a scientist, man,” Rubio told GQ’s Micheal Hainey. “I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States.”

– CNN’s Eric Marrapodi contributed to this report.

Now I truly feel that there are some incredible stupid things coming out of Pat Robertsons mouth on a regular basis, but every now and then he says something smart.

**sebster**

d-usa wrote:
Now I truly feel that there are some incredible stupid things coming out of Pat Robertsons mouth on a regular basis, but every now and then he says something smart.

Even then he managed to fill his statement full of stupid. Ussher* wasn't wrong because he was speculating on matters of science before scientific evidence was available, or because he was attempting to peace together the literal statements of a book that isn't written as a series of literal statements... no, according to Pat Robertson Ussher is wrong because his calculations weren't inspired by the Lord.

fething Pat Robertson. Even when he gets something right he's still part of the problem.

*I can't believe I never noticed how close that guy's name was to Usher until just now.

**LordofHats**

Wait, so the greatest R&B artist of the late 90's and early 2000's wasn't a renowned 17th century Irish scholar and theologian?

No wonder he's been ignoring my fan mail

**Howard A Treesong**

46% of Americans are stupid enough to think that humanity was only created in the last 10,000 years? I know there are more creationists is the US than UK, but that has to be an overestimate, I hope.

**Peregrine**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
I know there are more creationists is the US than UK, but that has to be an overestimate, I hope.

It's not, sadly.

**d-usa**

You are talking about a country that still has school district that fight against having to teach evolution...

**Ensis Ferrae**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
46% of Americans are stupid enough to think that humanity was only created in the last 10,000 years? I know there are more creationists is the US than UK, but that has to be an overestimate, I hope.

I'm not sure about that 46% thing, but I KNOW there are more creationists out there. It's just a matter of the difference in numbers between the "Young Earthers" and the ones who feel that science is able to give us timelines and whatnot, just not necessarily that anything happened "accidentally" the way they view most people who are atheists or big bang/evolution theory fans.

**d-usa**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Howard A Treesong wrote:
46% of Americans are stupid enough to think that humanity was only created in the last 10,000 years? I know there are more creationists is the US than UK, but that has to be an overestimate, I hope.

I'm not sure about that 46% thing, but I KNOW there are more creationists out there. It's just a matter of the difference in numbers between the "Young Earthers" and the ones who feel that science is able to give us timelines and whatnot, just not necessarily that anything happened "accidentally" the way they view most people who are atheists or big bang/evolution theory fans.

That's also true, and I don't know how (or if) these surveys differentiate between these levels.

I am fully on board with the big bang/evolution/science/etc. If some survey asked me "do you believe God created the earth" I would answer yes. If some survey asked me "do you believe God created the earth 10,000 years ago (or any other young earth stuff)" I would say no. But would a yes answer on either question put me in the 40% creationist camp on a survey?

**Orlanth**

Seven day adventism is a subset of creationism, it is not all of creationism.

At its core creationism advocates that God was in control of the creation process, the actual belief on mechanics of the process varies. I hate the concept of 'intelligent design as it accumulates dogma and is unnecessary. It's just creationism, that is best applied by taking a doctrine of a non-literalist interpretation of Scripture, which is what a lot of the New Testament is about.

**KalashnikovMarine**

d-usa wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Howard A Treesong wrote:
46% of Americans are stupid enough to think that humanity was only created in the last 10,000 years? I know there are more creationists is the US than UK, but that has to be an overestimate, I hope.

I'm not sure about that 46% thing, but I KNOW there are more creationists out there. It's just a matter of the difference in numbers between the "Young Earthers" and the ones who feel that science is able to give us timelines and whatnot, just not necessarily that anything happened "accidentally" the way they view most people who are atheists or big bang/evolution theory fans.

That's also true, and I don't know how (or if) these surveys differentiate between these levels.

I am fully on board with the big bang/evolution/science/etc. If some survey asked me "do you believe God created the earth" I would answer yes. If some survey asked me "do you believe God created the earth 10,000 years ago (or any other young earth stuff)" I would say no. But would a yes answer on either question put me in the 40% creationist camp on a survey?

Yeah that's the rub... we've polarized god and science into two camps, one can't exist with the other for some reason that's beyond me.

**Kilkrazy**

Plenty of scientists are religious and reconcile their faith with the evidence that indicates the age of the Earth, evolution and so on.

**Ensis Ferrae**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Howard A Treesong wrote:
46% of Americans are stupid enough to think that humanity was only created in the last 10,000 years? I know there are more creationists is the US than UK, but that has to be an overestimate, I hope.

I'm not sure about that 46% thing, but I KNOW there are more creationists out there. It's just a matter of the difference in numbers between the "Young Earthers" and the ones who feel that science is able to give us timelines and whatnot, just not necessarily that anything happened "accidentally" the way they view most people who are atheists or big bang/evolution theory fans.

That's also true, and I don't know how (or if) these surveys differentiate between these levels.

I am fully on board with the big bang/evolution/science/etc. If some survey asked me "do you believe God created the earth" I would answer yes. If some survey asked me "do you believe God created the earth 10,000 years ago (or any other young earth stuff)" I would say no. But would a yes answer on either question put me in the 40% creationist camp on a survey?

Yeah that's the rub... we've polarized god and science into two camps, one can't exist with the other for some reason that's beyond me.

I think that this is fairly true on a media/political level, but i suspect that the majority of creationists love science and what it is showing us about the world around us. I mean, if even someone as crazy as Pat Robertson (who has a huge following within Christianity for some reason) believes that scientific processes like carbon dating and whatnot show us just how old Holy Terra is, i think theres still some hope of altering some folks' viewpoints.

**Alfndrate**

Interesting read, I mean technically 10,000 years ago we were on the cusp of developing society and becoming the humans we are today in terms of behavior, etc...

**kronk**

d-usa wrote:

Forty-six percent of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years, according to a survey released by Gallup in June. That number has remained unchanged for the past 30 years, since 1982, when Gallup first asked the question on creationism versus evolution.

I'm having a very hard time wrapping my brain around that one. I had no idea it was that high.

**LordofHats**

46% of Americans are stupid enough to think that humanity was only created in the last 10,000 years?

In their defense, that's not so much a creationist thing as an our education system is crap. I'll bet most people in the US would guess humanity is only 7,000 years old, i.e. the dawn of history as most people understand it (ignoring that it's more like 12-13,000 years but w/e).

I don't think stuff like Cro-Magnon is even talked about in High Schools here and Neanderthals should be happy their extinct cause we'd probably be using them for slave labor

**Alfndrate**

Except that it's not a high school thing. Looking back at "standard" College Prep science courses, you're looking at 2 specific science classes, and 2 general (with most schools only looking at 1 general). On average it's some earth science freshman year (which doesn't deal with development of humanity), Biology sophomore year (which deals with evolution, but rarely the human side of it), Chemistry during Junior year, and Physics senior year.

We learn about the evolution of humanity more through our history classes than we do from our sciences.

**Experiment 626**

LordofHats wrote:
46% of Americans are stupid enough to think that humanity was only created in the last 10,000 years?

In their defense, that's not so much a creationist thing as an our education system is crap. I'll bet most people in the US would guess humanity is only 7,000 years old, i.e. the dawn of history as most people understand it (ignoring that it's more like 12-13,000 years but w/e).

I don't think stuff like Cro-Magnon is even talked about in High Schools here and Neanderthals should be happy their extinct cause we'd probably be using them for slave labor

If you start at the earliest descendents of modern man, the human race is around 50,000 years old give or take a few thousand years.

We can thank the mass extinction of the dinos for our coming about, since there was nothing huge and insanely epic-awsome to eat all the mamals that took over once the dust settled!

**Alfndrate**

Anatomically and behaviorally, the attributes of modern man started to show up around 200,000 years ago. That is generally accepted "start" to Homo Sapiens Sapeins, though you are correct in the fact that more than just bits and pieces of our "behavior" were more common at 50,000 years ago, considering that at 200,000 years ago we were alive at the same time as some of our cousins with bigger builds but smaller brains...

**Ahtman**

I know the Twilight movies were popular, but I don't think that really lends any weight to his opinions on scientific endeavors.

**Chongara**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
46% of Americans are stupid enough to think that humanity was only created in the last 10,000 years? I know there are more creationists is the US than UK, but that has to be an overestimate, I hope.

You can see the effect on US political maps. It's just like observing other objects in our universe. The faster they're moving away from positions of the rest of the world, the greater they're red-shifted.

**Frazzled**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Plenty of scientists are religious and reconcile their faith with the evidence that indicates the age of the Earth, evolution and so on.

Eating pizza helps reconcile both sides. Mmmm....pizza.

In other news Genghis Copnnie went to school this morning in a motorcycle jacket and Tardis hat. Yea, biker time lord girl, thats my daughter.

**hotsauceman1**

Tardis hat? Can you show me a link to get one of those?

Also, I used to be creationist, But i stopped because its stupid. And because i love dinosaurs.
I know there is no debate(You sign up for a course on human biology here, you are assumed to know you will learn Evolution) But does anyone else live in a place that does?

**KalashnikovMarine**

Ahtman wrote:
I know the Twilight movies were popular, but I don't think that really lends any weight to his opinions on scientific endeavors.

This is what I expected coming into this thread.

I still have no idea who Pat Robertson is, but I think that's a net victory for me.

**Frazzled**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tardis hat? Can you show me a link to get one of those?

Also, I used to be creationist, But i stopped because its stupid. And because i love dinosaurs.
I know there is no debate(You sign up for a course on human biology here, you are assumed to know you will learn Evolution) But does anyone else live in a place that does?

https://www.google.ca/search?num=10&hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=823&q=tardis+hat&oq=tardis+hat&gs_l=img.3..0j0i5l2j0i24l7.2140.3687.0.4703.10.10.0.0.0.0.266.1156.0j6j1.7.0.pchatac..0.0...1.1.CIRjMMgU-CA

Automatically Appended Next Post:

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tardis hat? Can you show me a link to get one of those?

Also, I used to be creationist, But i stopped because its stupid. And because i love dinosaurs.
I know there is no debate(You sign up for a course on human biology here, you are assumed to know you will learn Evolution) But does anyone else live in a place that does?

Creationism isn't stupid. There is no conflict between C and evolution. I never get the issue.

**KalashnikovMarine**

Frazzled wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tardis hat? Can you show me a link to get one of those?

Also, I used to be creationist, But i stopped because its stupid. And because i love dinosaurs.
I know there is no debate(You sign up for a course on human biology here, you are assumed to know you will learn Evolution) But does anyone else live in a place that does?

Creationism isn't stupid. There is no conflict between C and evolution. I never get the issue.

What the Avatar of T-Bone Kala' Kain said. The only conflicts between science and God(s) are imposed by fringe elements of one group or another. Aggressive atheists who demand the whole universe see things like they do, and backwards hill people who have only ever read one book (guess which?) and don't need any other answers respectively.

**Alfndrate**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tardis hat? Can you show me a link to get one of those?

Also, I used to be creationist, But i stopped because its stupid. And because i love dinosaurs.
I know there is no debate(You sign up for a course on human biology here, you are assumed to know you will learn Evolution) But does anyone else live in a place that does?

Creationism isn't stupid. There is no conflict between C and evolution. I never get the issue.

What the Avatar of T-Bone Kala' Kain said. The only conflicts between science and God(s) are imposed by fringe elements of one group or another. Aggressive atheists who demand the whole universe see things like they do, and backwards hill people who have only ever read one book (guess which?) and don't need any other answers respectively.

Dick Goddard's Farmer's Almanac?

**Seaward**

Frazzled wrote:
Creationism isn't stupid. There is no conflict between C and evolution. I never get the issue.

Creationism/Intelligent Design, as its proponents would like to have it taught in schools, is quite incompatible with evolution. ID adherents state that evolution is a myth, their position largely hinging around the development of "complex biological structures" that simply could not have evolved, and thus had to have been designed.

**KalashnikovMarine**

Alfndrate wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tardis hat? Can you show me a link to get one of those?

Also, I used to be creationist, But i stopped because its stupid. And because i love dinosaurs.
I know there is no debate(You sign up for a course on human biology here, you are assumed to know you will learn Evolution) But does anyone else live in a place that does?

Creationism isn't stupid. There is no conflict between C and evolution. I never get the issue.

What the Avatar of T-Bone Kala' Kain said. The only conflicts between science and God(s) are imposed by fringe elements of one group or another. Aggressive atheists who demand the whole universe see things like they do, and backwards hill people who have only ever read one book (guess which?) and don't need any other answers respectively.

Dick Goddard's Farmer's Almanac?

okay maybe two

**LordofHats**

It's perfectly possible to incorporate evolution into an intelligent design model. Deism would exemplify the idea.

But at that point there's no real point bringing up god cause evolution remains valid, so naturally the hardcore just revert to crazy

**d-usa**

Seaward wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Creationism isn't stupid. There is no conflict between C and evolution. I never get the issue.

Creationism/Intelligent Design, as its proponents would like to have it taught in schools, is quite incompatible with evolution. ID adherents state that evolution is a myth, their position largely hinging around the development of "complex biological structures" that simply could not have evolved, and thus had to have been designed.

Which is a problem with the labels, and the number of definitions that float around.

As such there is no conflict between science as we know it, and believing that everything was created by God who used everything we know about science to design the universe. You can believe that God created man and used evolution as the tool to get there. The fringe groups on the edges just love to engage in the same type of behavior that we see in our fancy congress.