A little more than that, maybe.Humanity has made it 6,000 years without it
A little more than that, maybe.Humanity has made it 6,000 years without it
Irrelevant to the statement he was making, maybe.A little more than that, maybe.
It's useful in some cases, but the recent and rapid development of ai is starting to creep me out a bit. I'd always thought ai could never be that intelligent, but Ive been seeing some lately, some that are usable by the general public even, that are getting way too intelligent for my liking lmao. In the past I've ruled out a lot as impossible, but with the insane development of tech in general since the 80s/90s, I'm beginning to think a lot more is possible than before, like, if sentient ai were to pop up now I wouldn't even be that surprised, and I don't know whether to like or hate thatBecause AI needs to be stopped, it has no reason to exist
Decided to do a bit of internet research and this article just says about 6,000:A little more than that, maybe.
ironically this just helps chevy's point b/c humanity has gone through so much longer w/o AIA little more than that, maybe.
Duude, Answers in Genesis is the bestthere are theologians who seek to find a biblical interpretation that is both faithful to the scripture and doesn't contradict academic consensus.
I don't know a lot about theology, but this site seems to have some resources https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/old-earth/
i post this only because i think it might be interesting to both the religious and non-religious folk here. Not seeking to disagree with anyone on anything.
hope u all have a wonderful day
I'll never understand the fetishization of religion of using pseudo-science in attempts to validate their theories. If it's a matter of faith just say it's a matter of faith instead of trying to find something to call evidence.Decided to do a bit of internet research and this article just says about 6,000:
.The Fullness of Time: The Timeline between Adam and Jesus
How many years passed between Adam and Jesus? Does the Bible really support that the earth is only 6000 years old?www.blogos.org
But this timeline leads me to believe that it hasn't even been 6,000 years, more like 5,997:
TIMELINE FROM GENESIS TO JESUS | biblechristiansofgod
www.biblechristiansofgod.com
There was a time period between the factories and the advent of ai, it's called the 1900's, and not to mention the 1000's of years that the most advanced technology was a wagonBless the days where most people had to work themselves to death in cramped factories while underage screwing parts.
Healthy is the only really valid one there, and people have brains, they can figure it outWho needs algorithms consistently improving our quality of life doing calculations on what's the most comfortable, healthy, or efficient way to create a products, medicines, or safety measures.
Yeah because we didn't have the missles then eitherTimes were better when we didn't have automated anti-missile defenses to keep us safe from wars able to erase entire continents.
Not lying, but misinformed. The site that Ragnarokio linked is part of a great organization that really lays out how science backs up the Biblical accounts, but it's been a while since I've studied their stuff so I can't pull anything off the top of my head atm.Do you truly believe all archeologists and historians around the world, that deal with evidence of ancient times on a daily basis, with physical fossils and objects, are lying? All linguists? All biologists? Every single machine that is able to make carbon measurements?
Probably best not turn this into a religion debate, if it’s going there.I'll never understand the fetishization of religion of using pseudo-science in attempts to validate their theories. If it's a matter of faith just say it's a matter of faith instead of trying to find something to call evidence.
Even people of faith in a high religious hierarchy make sure to often voice that, specially the Genesis, are parables and metaphors; so I really don't understand why some people still take it so literally.
This site is literally not about that.there are theologians who seek to find a biblical interpretation that is both faithful to the scripture and doesn't contradict academic consensus.
I don't know a lot about theology, but this site seems to have some resources https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/old-earth/
i post this only because i think it might be interesting to both the religious and non-religious folk here. Not seeking to disagree with anyone on anything.
hope u all have a wonderful day
Not lying, but misinformed. The site that Ragnarokio linked is part of a great organization that really lays out how science backs up the Biblical accounts, but it's been a while since I've studied their stuff so I can't pull anything off the top of my head atm.