Discussion by: JayPii1994I came across this website by the name of “Creation.com”, which appears to present strong-worded and fairly supported articles. One of them is titled, “The Flood, the Ice Age and the age of the Earth”.Throughout it are several statements justifying the ‘young age of the earth’. These are just the tip of the iceberg
- “DNA in “ancient” fossils. DNA extracted from bacteria that are supposed to be 425 million years old brings into question that age, because DNA could not last more than thousands of years.”
- “Dinosaur blood cells, blood vessels, proteins (hemoglobin, osteocalcin, collagen, histones) and DNA are not consistent with their proposed more than 65-million-year age, but make more sense if the remains are thousands of years old (at most).”
They even went as far as to conclude, that “Science is based on observation, and the only reliable means of telling the age of anything is by the testimony of a reliable witness who observed the events. The Bible claims to be the communication of the only One who witnessed the events of Creation: the Creator himself. As such, the Bible is the only reliable means of knowing the age of the earth and the cosmos“.
Now I’m a Jamaican teenager. No longer a Christian, but an Agnostic of the fourth milestone of Agnosticism. Can any of you brilliantly-equipped minds enlighten me on these contradictions?