Another blogger has sparked a fire under me. Hit one of those buttons that gets the engine sputtering and coughing. Dana, over to Life is Good mentioned her conversation with her minister about an upcoming talk by a renowned Creationist. This man would convince all who listened that the Earth is indeed only 6,000 to 10,000 years old.
Bless her heart, Dana was not to be convinced. She obviously is a churchgoing woman. But she is one who has her head screwed on properly when it comes to her religious views. Just the fact she agrees the World is not 6,000 years old and that a little sin never really hurts us that much convinces me of this. Reasonable and realistic faith such as hers seems to me to be just the kind of faith a decent god would be looking for.
This "age of the Earth" issue is one of those subjects I usually just keep locked away in my "who cares" file. Of all the stupidity to get panties in a bunch over, how old the Earth is seems to be about the least important one. It's akin to trying to convince me that it only took six days to make this place. And that on the seventh, The Man took a break, sat in a barco-lounger and sipped cool drinks while he contemplated what he had just done.
The truth just does not flippin matter. To either side of this flash point issue. Rather than accepting the difference in opinion, they would rather waste time trying to convince each other they are right. I swear if there are two things God must have put in play just because he is really an evil bastard would be bestowing politics and religion on us. He had to do this because in reality he has a very sick sense of humor. I would say his comedic interests run to the slap stick side, Three Stooges type comedy. Eye pokin, head bonkin, fall on our butts humor.
Now say that this World is nothing but the accidental confluence of the right chemicals blending together and through their interactions over 4 billion years, the result is us. Put like that I can see why many people who have been hoodwinked from birth that this construction project only took 6 days might raise an eyebrow. But as a disinterested member of the audience, I have to say the people who push the 4 billion year idea have worked a lot harder to prove their point than the folks who believed the first thing they read. If I am to reward my belief on just effort alone, I am sorry but the evolutionists get my vote. They earned it.
The evolutionists say they have all these tools and data to back up thier take. Mathematics for instance. Well we all know after suffering through Math classes as youths, Math is definitely a tool of Satan. So then they say they have a way of telling the age of a rock. First of all, if knowing the age of rock is one of their thrills, I would say they are in need of serious recreation. But anyway, they insist they can discern how old a rock is. Fine. But then they use some kind of chemical magic based on Satanic mathematical formulas and something called carbon deteriation and, blah, blah, blah. Pretty soon it takes on the same kind of mind numbing language found in the Good Book. Instead of "go forth and multiply" it's "through the re-alignment of molecules in the center of the matter, we see extraneous particles exiting at high rates of velocity. We call them snarks and that proves the World is populated through sexual procreation." My eyes roll up into my head when either of them get past certain levels of conversation. As far as I am concerned both of them are tools of Satan. Both use magic to prove their points. And the only thing that really exists is me. And sometimes I am not even sure of that.
(681 / 14,378)