Here is US Senator John Milkovich speaking to his countrymen on Tuesday March 29th, 2016.
Original video here:
Transcript
Scientific research and developments and advances in the last 100 years — particularly the last 50, 20, 10 years — have validated the biblical story of creation by archaeological discoveries of civilizations in the mid-east that seculars said did not exist and further archaeological research determines are true. There's some research - published research - that an ark or a large boat was found on top of Mt Ararat. And then, in addition, the point that the notion of instantaneous creation has been validated by the scientific study of heliocentric circles in rocks which is consistent with an instantaneous - or I guess I’m asking this: Are you aware that there’s an abundance of recent science that actually confirms the Genesis account of creation?
Let's go through it point-by-point. The Senator's words in black and my comments in red.
Scientific research and developments and advances in the last 100 years — particularly the last 50, 20, 10 years — have validated the biblical story of creation
Completely untrue. Never in all of modern science has there ever been a research paper that includes the bible (or god) as part of the answer. Not one scientific paper has ever "validated" the biblical story of creation. Not one!
advances in the last 100 years ... have validated the biblical story of creation by archaeological discoveries of civilizations in the mid-east
Notice that he starts by talking about "the biblical story of creation" and then suddenly lapses into a discussion about ancient civilizations.
He states that the biblical creation is validated by the existence of civilizations in the mid-east. That's like saying the story of Hansel and Gretel is validated because ice-cream is cold! They are two different things with no connection between them.
... archaeological discoveries of civilizations in the mid-east that seculars said did not exist and further archaeological research determines are true.
I think I know what he is talking about (even if he doesn't).
The bible mentions a tribe of people called the Hittites and for many centuries the seculars (his cute term for non-Christian) had no idea who those Hittites may have been. They didn't fit easily into the historical record and many scholars assumed that maybe the bible had got it wrong; maybe the Hittites never existed.
Then, more than a hundred years ago, the archaeologists discovered that the name Hittite referred to the Hatti tribe that lived in the kingdom of Kheta.
So what is the Senator trying to do here?
He is saying that non-Christians once said that the bible was wrong (about the Hittites) and later the bible was proved to be correct. He then goes on to imply that the wisest course of action would be to assume that the bible is always true and the non-Christians are always wrong.
There's some research - published research - that an ark or a large boat was found on top of Mt Ararat.
Utter codswallop. There is not now, nor has there ever been, an ark perched on top of Mount Ararat. As for "published research"; on a Creationist website perhaps, but not in any peer reviewed scientific journal.
And then, in addition, the point that the notion of instantaneous creation has been validated
Firstly, as mentioned above, the notion of instantaneous creation has NOT been validated.
So why is the Senator harking back to his earlier claim about the biblical creation story and why is he now trying to trying to combine it with the just mentioned "published research"?
He is trying to convince his audience that scientists with expertise in completely unrelated areas all agree that the bible is true. He is suggesting that there is evidence piled upon evidence and all of it attesting to the truth of the bible, where-as, in fact, the Senator is merely telling lies for Jesus.
... has been validated by the scientific study of heliocentric circles in rocks
This is complete and utter piffle.
Our solar system is "heliocentric" and the word cannot be sensibly used in any other context. There is no such thing as "heliocentric circles in rocks". Once again the Senator is telling lies for Jesus. He doesn't know what heliocentric means - but it sounds clever - so he chucks it into the conversation for no other reason than to make himself sound important.
... heliocentric circles in rocks which is consistent with an instantaneous...
An instantaneous what? He probably meant "instantaneous creation" but he stopped in mid-sentence so we can't be sure.
Or I guess I’m asking this: Are you aware that there’s an abundance of recent science that actually confirms the Genesis account of creation?
He seems to be working on the principle that if he says it often enough then it will become true. All I can do is repeat myself and tell you that it is not true. Science has NOT "validated the Genesis account of creation".
There's not even a debate about it. Every reputable scientist on the planet agrees that the "Genesis account of creation" is nothing more than myth and legend. Even scientists who have accepted Christ as their saviour agree that the Genesis story is pure legend.
No comments:
Post a Comment