Debate: Creationism vs. Evolutionism
Side: creationism

"i don't know if made a typo or you misread but the date the devonian era (when seed bearing plants first appeared) started was 146 million years ago, not 46 million"I don't care what it was; it was without evidence therefore irrelevant. As for the other contributor, I didn't read that post, I am debating you not her. As for the link you sent, I don't want an explanation on the origins of the earth, I want evidence for the dates you listed in your first couple of posts." However this point and some of the specifics, methodology and theory is beyond my comprehension or ability to research"That is fine, all I want is evidence for a couple of discoveries of dinosaurs that you mentioned in your post that dated back a few million/billion/trillion years ago or whatever time period you listed. "If the bible, a book supposedly written by god, can make mistakes, then I don’t believe I can trust it"The bible does not make mistakes, therefore you can trust it."(side note, Science does make mistakes as well, but the difference is that they will admit their mistakes and pursue higher knowledge, because they are not interested in protecting their own ego, but interested in truth. To admit there are mistakes in the bible would mean god could be wrong, and since god can’t be wrong you must go against everything that contradicts the bible if you are to believe its validity). "You seem to have a major issue with your belief that I am afraid to admit being wrong. You mentioned this in your previous post also. In the last 48 hours, a debater here on this site proved me wrong, and I admitted to being wrong and thanked him for setting me right. It was on the matter of God "abhorring" men in the OT; I had previously stated that God did not hate any man, but after this debater sent a post with a verse included from the bible stating that God could hate man, I spent over two hours researching and reading my bible before finally realizing and admitting to being wrong. It is in no way difficult for me to admit being wrong; I believe that the mistakes that I make are my path to success (only if I learn from them obviously). Furthermore, I am the type of person who appreciates being pushed in the right direction as I would hate to be sitting in the wrong seat.The link you sent me below is faulty. I tried deleting the bracket on the end and replacing it with a slash but still had no success. Please send again or tell me what to type into youtube which is probably the better and more likely to work option." Isn’t it more likely that the when the people who wrote this book said sea monsters, they meant things like whales and sharks and giant squids, than dinosaurs"No; in Job, it speaks about the behemoth which is said to be the mightiest of all God's creatures; some scientists say it may have just been an elephant or hippopotamus but both those animals tend to have very thin tails whereas the behemoth had a tail that was likened to a cedar tree. Dinosaurs like the brachiosaurus and the diplodocus had tails that could very easily be compared to a cedar tree. Another fact relating to "sea monsters" is what I said before but I will elaborate here. There was no word in the Hebrew language for "dinosaur" at that time, so they replaced it with "tanniyn" which is translated in generally three ways in our English bibles; sometimes it is "sea monster" or "serpent" but most often it is "dragon"."If god really is god, then why would there be flaws in his world, if god is perfect, why would his work be anything less than perfect either. I mean he created it 100% on his own and there were still mistakes?"This is a whole other debate and to get into it now would leave this current debate unfinished, and I'm not ready to abandon it when we are both so heatedly in the middle of it. But, after this, I would gladly debate it as I admire your debating attitude and your fight is clearly genuine. Besides, if we debate this as well as the other debate, our posts would be miles long and the debate would become difficult to cover all posts/points and time is an issue – plus the quality of our posts would go way down. After this debate, I will gladly debate that topic."For my final remarks what I have to say is that I am atheist not solely because I don’t like a book, a religion is more than that. And I am not atheist in the sense that I know there isn’t a god, because it is impossible to prove or disprove god, god is an unfalsifiable hypothesis, much like the claim that I can fly when no one is looking. But my understanding, and mankind’s collective understanding of the universe is enough on its own for me to explain reality and the world around me. God, to me, is an unnecessary hypothesis and I do not see the need to include him in my world view, and until some real evidence comes along to persuade me otherwise I won’t believe in God any more than I will believe in Zeus, leprechauns or a slim American"I totally understand that, many of my friends believe the same way as you do in that area hence the reason my faith appears as blind faith, as it does to you."PS – just kidding about the Americans, I know they aren’t all fat. And thanks for the comment… as long as you weren’t being sarcastic (I find it tough to distinguish sarcasm in text), and the same to you as well."I wouldn't know if they are fat or skinny, I don't live there. My comment was not sarcastic; I meant it. There are so many debaters that throw the rules out the window or they go over the top with obsession in technicalities which makes debating a bore.P.S. - I know I am supposed to be offended by the "holy crap" remark at the top of your post but I found it rather a clever pun! Lol.P.P.S - The link you sent in the last post was faulty too as I pointed out and you said in this post it had been a faulty link or the wrong page or something and you sent a different one that you had meant to send. It is still not opening up? My internet says the page cannot be opened?