Claim CG020:
Source: No source given.
CreationWiki response:
Here is a good example of the Talk Origins' total lack of objectivity, particularly with regards to Young Earth Creationists. The first paragraph of #2 shows that the claim is indeed correct. Here was an opportunity to show objectivity, by admitting that the claim is essentially correct. However, true to form Talk Origins goes in to attack mode. (Talk Origins quotes in blue)
1. The fact that something can happen in less than 3000 years is not evidence that the earth is young. |
No kidding. The claim only says that it is consistent with a young Earth - it is not being presented as evidence. It is also consistent with an old Earth.
2. Religions can indeed develop quickly. Witness Scientology, which arose in much less than one generation. Languages also can develop quickly, in just a few generations. American Sign Language is an example. |
This actually proves the claim. It also exposes Talk Origins' bias against creationists in their failure to acknowledge the fact that this proves the claim. They clearly are unwilling to give creationists credit for accuracy even on such a minor point.
|
First of all, this is irrelevant to the accuracy of the claim, since it speaks only of rates of development and not age.
Second, all of these "ages" are based on the assumption that there was not a global flood. If they are recalibrated to take the Flood into account, they would postdate the Flood.
This part of Talk Origins' response is just an example of, "Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong." Another way to express this is a follows:
Theory A makes a claim.
Theory B makes a claim.
Claims of A and B disagree.
Proponent of B claims that because A disagrees with B that A must be wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||
