{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by TunnelSnakesRule:
1/28/2015 9:05:33 PM
10
Relative to what? The Universe? The Milky Way? Sol?
Edit: Your definition of a "young earth" is a complete misrepresentation of comparative words such young, old, big, small......etc as these are qualitative statements which have no quantitive basis because they are always in comparison (I.e relative) to something
English
-
"Young earth" is a very common term used to describe a biblical world.
-
I did not know that, but the use of "old earth" didn't help provide any context clues
-
That makes sense
-
"as the terms are commonly understood to mean". You're being either wilfully ignorant or genuinely ignorant. You're complaining that a "sea horse" has no legs.
-
ooooooohhhhhhhh shooooottttssss fiiiirrrreeeedddd!!!!!
-
Well if we're going start throwing "ignorant" out their then I might as well throw it at you. It's not really complaining as its just clearing something up. We say that things are big for all different sizes just like we say things are old for all different ages. Ex: Oh that's a big house & that's a big person are both correct uses of big as the implied comparison is of the average house and the average person. Knowing what it's compared to in space is much trickier because the average age of all planets is not known and we need a relative subject to make a comparison when using words like old. Your example about seahorses is completely unrelated as the species is defined by its name. Horses are defined by its name as well. They are considered nouns not descriptive terms.
-
As is "young earth". You already knew that, though. You're just being obtuse.
-
Edited by Bullets Bukakke: 1/28/2015 11:35:13 PMBy young earth he means what many (not all) creationist believe
-
I didn't know that's the date creationist believe.
-
Not my definition.
