Is this a valid type of proof?

Question

I see creationists talking about how if the earth is older than 6000 years or so then why aren't there older writings or cities, what have you. Well, when I was growing up my mother would mark the wall and write the year so I could go and see how much I had grown. Regardless of my birthdate and certificate, my first line is 6 years later. Is this not proof of my 'real' birth and the fact that I was born 3 ft tall and standing?

? · Accepted Answer

Good point. Now let's see how many of the literalists out there will not get your point. (And that includes both theistic, and atheistic literalists.)

Peace and Namaste!

Pirate AM™ · Answer

Good point, except there is incontrovertible evidence that the Biblical timeline in no way comes close to matching or describing actual history.  We know that modern humans reached Australia around 40000 years ago and that that culture has consistently and contiguously existed.  We know that the neolithic tribes in the Nile valley from 9000 ago developed into the kingdoms that became Egypt.

There simply is no way to reconcile a 6000 year old earth with the existing evidence.

Corey · Answer

Never mind that there is fairly good evidence that there is writing older than 6,000 years ago and there's very good evidence that there were cities before 6kya.

BigAl · Answer

It is evidence. Proof is what you get when all the evidence has been considered. Some of the other evidence could make your claims look stupid.

? · Answer

It's troll proof.

gw · Answer

no, it is not proof...
.
you just said it was six years later...
.
reality and fiction...
.

? · Answer

Okay...

Anonymous · Answer

???????????????????

Trending News

Is this a valid type of proof?

8 Answers