I'm back for a bit, just stopped by to reply to various atrocities that have been posted by yet another YEC who seems to have skulked out of the woodwork. I'll deal with your points, ibelieveingod, but then satisfactorily answer mine as well. If not, I'll give up hope. I've dealt with one two many fundies recently and it's getting tiresome.
In reference to your post "In Reference To A Human Searching For Answers From God...":
"I don't think God has any trouble communicating with humans at all, I talk to Him and He talks to me. I LISTEN..."
This is a horribly flawed statement. You're guilty of massively begging the question. That is, you're assuming what you purport to prove. Essentially what you're arguing is "God exists because I believe in him" or more accurately "I know I'm right because I say I'm right." Can you say for sure that your experience is not subjective? Can't it all just be in your head? I'm sure you would argue that the religious experiences of other faiths are falsely based. If that can be true for another person's faith, why not yours? It smacks of logical hypocrisy of the highest tier.
"God uses people to do things for Him, you're a sinner, I'm a sinner, because of that, we get hurt and die."
Yeah, about sinning and free will. Take a look at this and tell me what you think (read the replies and replies to replies as well): http://www.astronomy.net/forums/god/messages/17932.shtml?base=30
"Ok, now what can you do to spice the game up a little bit? How about getting SOMEBODY ELSE TO PLAY AGAINST? That would make it a tad bit more interesting, don't you think? Ok, you have that person playing against you, let's call him evil."
Ah, so then God isn't omnipotent? If God truly introduced a competitor, that could truly give God a run for his money, then he is not all-powerful. On the other hand, if he created a weak, subordinate evil being, then it's not competition. It's slaughter. In any event, using humanity against humanity in some kind of perverse attempt to not get bored doesn't just seem incongruous with the notion of a benevolent God, it seems incongruous with the notion of a supernatural entity, period. You are anthropomorphising very human feelings (such as the need for competition and companionship) onto a being that would be infinitely above such concerns.
"You can't even give accurate assumptions about how stars or planets are formed, and what's to say that they aren't infinite? Observations?... yeah right"
How about intermediate stages, mi amigo? If we can look out into the universe and see stars in different portions of their existence, we can connect the dots and come to a pretty accurate representation of how they came to be. Your bypassing the problem by saying "God did it, who needs to know how" is not piousness or wisdom, it is intellectual laziness.
"Cause I got news for you, if something is still doing something... IT AIN'T DEAD! If you actually believe in black holes, when do they die?"
Stars don't die, because they were never alive. Such a question is equivalent to asking "when is an ocean wave born?" That question makes no sense.
In reply to your post "C14 DATING PROVES THAT FOSSILS LESS THAT 50,000 YRS OLD" and its various replies:
"Anytihng over about 50,000 years old, should have no detectable C14 left. Finding C14 in aomething then, pretty well proves that it isn't millions of years old."
No, different isotopes are constantly forming and reforming. C14 is an isotope existent is all living organisms. I might add that for dating very old things, C14 dating is not used. We use more stable isotopes with longer half-lives, such as uranium.
"Radioactive decay releases Helium in the air, but not much is escaping. The total amount of Helium in the air is only one-two-thousandth ( 1/2000 ) of what is expected to be found in the atmosphere if the earth was really Billlllllions of years old..."
Do you have a source on this? A scientific source? If so, cough it up. And I suggest doing so whenever you make a claim of this kind. I might point out that you're talking about elementary helium in our atmosphere. There's plenty of helium in compounds, too.
"The moon is slowly receding from earth (4cm per year) and this rate would have been greater in the past. IF THE MOON STARTED AT THE EARTH (TOUCHING IT) IT WOULD TAKE ONLY 1.37 BILLION YEARS TO GET WHERE IT IS NOW"
HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!! Hooo.. Thanks, man, I needed a laugh. Apparently you are completely ignorant of cycles in nature, ie the tendency of natural phenomena, particulary those involving orbits and spinning, to process. The moon moves forward and backward, spinning closer for a while, and then further away. For example, right now the earth has a slight wobble to it. That doesn't mean it will continue to spin vertically until the earth is "upside down." The procession eventually stops, then reverses.
Now, please answer this. If you can give me a non-insane answer I'll continue talking with you. But you seem to have a very closed mind, even by fundy standards (and THEY'LL take ANYONE!)
If indeed, all land life today spread from Mt. Ararat 4000 years ago, why don't we see a species distribution pattern centered on the mountain? Why are there species in Australia, Tasmania, Komodo Island, etc., not found anywhere else on earth? How did they get there, and why didn't they leave any descendents on the way?
What's your IQ, Kenny?