Add Chris Jones to the list of pro athletes that think the earth is flat

[starkvegasdawg]

Per his twitter earlier this afternoon. Is this like a new fad amongst pros now?

[msstate7]

Pretty sad

[R2Dawg]

What did he say?

[msstate7]

I'm pretty confused by this belief. Do they think satellite pics from space are fakes?

[Jack Lambert]

I'm pretty confused by this belief. Do they think satellite pics from space are fakes?

They think there is a bubble over the sky. My cousin is one and we all have a good time at his expense at family reunions. When I listen to him I think of that Jim Carrey Movie.

[Dawg2003]

They think there is a bubble over the sky. My cousin is one and we all have a good time at his expense at family reunions. When I listen to him I think of that Jim Carrey Movie.

OMG, really? I had no idea. I thought it was all trolling.

[Commercecomet24]

Wow there are just no words

[starkvegasdawg]

What did he say?

Just had an emoji of the earth and then added is flat. Over 450 replies and some were his defending the stance. Most were from KC fans who didn't care what he thought as long as he kept getting sacks.

[ckDOG]

The responses these folks have to basic observations is astounding. For example, ask them why do you see a different set of stars when you travel to the Southern Hemisphere. Their response is that stars are actually quite close to earth and we are simply moving under a different set of stars after traveling a couple thousand miles. But somehow that explanation counts for north south travel and not east west.

I honestly don't know if these folks are truly this dumb or secretly get off on irritating the piss out of people with basic reasoning skills.

[BeardoMSU]

As bad as the flat earth'ers are, the young eath'ers outnumber them by quite a bit, and are equally stupid.

[1bigdawg]

Honestly, it is an embarrassing failure of our educational system, including our great university.

[msstate7]

As bad as the flat earth'ers are, the young eath'ers outnumber them by quite a bit, and are equally stupid.

If you are a creationist like myself, you believe God created a mature man (Adam). I also believe God created a mature universe with a mature Earth in that universe. Did God create Earth 6000 or so years ago? I have no idea bc "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." (2 Peter 3:8). If believing God created us makes me "stupid", so be it

[BeardoMSU]

If you are a creationist like myself, you believe God created a mature man (Adam). I also believe God created a mature universe with a mature Earth in that universe. Did God create Earth 6000 or so years ago? I have no idea bc "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." (2 Peter 3:8). If believing God created us makes me "stupid", so be it

That's a lot of projecting, 7. I never said you were stupid for being a Christian, so don't put words in my mouth. I said it's stupid to think the Earth is "6000" years old, given the mountain of scientific evidence we have pointing to the contrary. That is literally the exact same argument everyone is using against CJ and his Bronze Age nonsense. Being religious isn't a get-out-of-jail-free-card for rational competence.

[R2Dawg]

That's a lot of projecting, 7. I never said you were stupid for being a Christian, so don't put words in my mouth. I said it's stupid to think the Earth is "6000" years old, given the mountain of scientific evidence we have pointing to the contrary. That is literally the exact same argument everyone is using against CJ and his Bronze Age nonsense. Being religious isn't a get-out-of-jail-free-card for rational competence.

Boy too much to unpack in all this but I'll be brief on each.

First, two main Biblical beliefs about earth age. One is it is millions of years old as day in OT Genesis is interpreted as a long period of time. Most Christians believe in the other view of Biblical historical documents - proven if you pull all world history and Biblical geneology together the earth is around 6000 years old. That is not stupid to believe that which is what you said. Flat earth has science and the earth being young has history. Young earth does not go against science either. Carbon dating has been proven unreliable. Living mollusks have dated thousands of years old and many more studies. Carbon dating uses extrapolation of unknown data. Big errors in other places too.


As far as rational competence so for those that don't believe in God, can anyone explain for nothing times nothing equals everything? That is what those that believe evolution believe. It takes more faith to be a non believer than it does a Christian. Science and Christianity are not at odds, they are perfectly aligned.

[dawgs]

Boy too much to unpack in all this but I'll be brief on each.

First, two main Biblical beliefs about earth age. One is it is millions of years old as day in OT Genesis is interpreted as a long period of time. Most Christians believe in the other view of Biblical historical documents - proven if you pull all world history and Biblical geneology together the earth is around 6000 years old. That is not stupid to believe that which is what you said. Flat earth has science and the earth being young has history. Young earth does not go against science either. Carbon dating has been proven unreliable. Living mollusks have dated thousands of years old and many more studies. Carbon dating uses extrapolation of unknown data. Big errors in other places too.


As far as rational competence so for those that don't believe in God, can anyone explain for nothing times nothing equals everything? That is what those that believe evolution believe. It takes more faith to be a non believer than it does a Christian. Science and Christianity are not at odds, they are perfectly aligned.

I don't rule out some kinda force, energy, spirit, whatever, something that's out there that created the universe and what's even outside the universe that we are expanding into. But that's not the same thing as believing any one religion is the one that got god right, which is what anyone who claims to be religious believes. Everyone believes they are the right religion and the others are the wrong religion with no more evidence than the book they were told to believe when they were kids. As far as where the universe came from, obviously there was some kinda force. Whether that was god in the concept that religion tends to view god that caused the Big Bang or there's some scientific explanation we still haven't figured out that we just call "god", who knows, but I'm plenty fine assuming none of humanity's various religions have gotten it right about whatever god is out there pulling the strings. Just be kind to others and treat them how you want to be treated and it'll all work out in the end.

[R2Dawg]

I don't rule out some kinda force, energy, spirit, whatever, something that's out there that created the universe and what's even outside the universe that we are expanding into. But that's not the same thing as believing any one religion is the one that got god right, which is what anyone who claims to be religious believes. Everyone believes they are the right religion and the others are the wrong religion with no more evidence than the book they were told to believe when they were kids. As far as where the universe came from, obviously there was some kinda force. Whether that was god in the concept that religion tends to view god that caused the Big Bang or there's some scientific explanation we still haven't figured out that we just call "god", who knows, but I'm plenty fine assuming none of humanity's various religions have gotten it right about whatever god is out there pulling the strings. Just be kind to others and treat them how you want to be treated and it'll all work out in the end.

You are correct to a degree but that is where you have to really look at the details of religion. The Koran was written around 800AD and repeats much of the Bible origins with some changes however the Bibilical original manuscripts are the oldest writing of any religion. Look at the prophecies of the Bible that have been proven and it will blow your mind. Look up Daniel 24 9-10 prophecy if you want a glimpse. There is not one contradiction in the Bible either even though men recorded it guided by God over thousands of years. Pretty amazing. Look at Isreal (God's chosen people). Humanity tried to destroy them for 2000 years (Hitler) and then they found themselves back in the land God promised 6000 years ago just as God said.

There is one major difference in Biblical Christianity and every other religion. Every other religion has a list of things you must do or not do to be right before God. Biblical Christianity requires nothing, salvation is the free gift of God - God's grace. The Bible answers every question of origin, our problems and our redemption.


I don't understand all about God, no one does but He does tell us what we need to know in His Word - Bible. It would be worth everyone's best interest to seek out the truth of God before that time. I would encourage you all to read it for yourself and don't let bad philosophy from the world turn you away. God sent His son Jesus to take on the sins of mankind so we could have faith in Him and be seen as righteous before a Holy God.

[BeardoMSU]

Young earth does not go against science either. Carbon dating has been proven unreliable. Living mollusks have dated thousands of years old and many more studies. Carbon dating uses extrapolation of unknown data. Big errors in other places too.

You couldn't be more wrong here, in literally every statement.

1. Carbon Dating....does it have limitations? Sure, almost all chemical analyses do, but C14 dating has improved dramatically in it's precision over the last 50 years. The calibrations have been finessed and are constantly checked and rechecked against standards. Many of the dates generated in its early days have been corrected.

2. Not sure why you'd even bring this up in a discussion about the Earth's age. It may come as a surprise to you, but C14 is not used to date the really really old materials from millions of years ago, i.e., fossils, volcanic eruptions, stratigraphy, etc.; different methods are used for that, such as Potassium-Argon, Lead Isotopes, Uranium Isotopes. The reason for this is because C14 dating has an age threshold of ca. 50-60 thousand years, and this limitation is pretty essential to our understanding of how Carbon 14 decays and it's ratio with C13.

3. What is this "proof" you speak of?

4. "Carbon dating uses extrapolation of unknown data"....what are you talking about here? C14 dating as a method and concept is actually pretty straight forward, and the "data" are certainly not "unknown".

5a. "Living mollusks have been dated to thousands of years old and many more studies"....ok, wth are you talking about here? Yeah, there are mollusks living today that, when their growth bands are counted, show that they've been alive for thousands of years....What does that have to do with C14 or the age of the Earth?

5b. There is a species of mollusk called Exogyra costata that went extinct at the end of the Cretaceous Period (60 million years ago), and you can find it's remains in abundance on and around MSU's campus, if you're so inclined (check the bluffs out by the disc golf course...can literally pick them up off the ground).

[R2Dawg]

You couldn't be more wrong here, in literally every statement.

1. Carbon Dating....does it have limitations? Sure, almost all chemical analyses do, but C14 dating has improved dramatically in it's precision over the last 50 years. The calibrations have been finessed and are constantly checked and rechecked against standards. Many of the dates generated in its early days have been corrected.

2. Not sure why you'd even bring this up in a discussion about the Earth's age. It may come as a surprise to you, but C14 is not used to date the really really old materials from millions of years ago, i.e., fossils, volcanic eruptions, stratigraphy, etc.; different methods are used for that, such as Potassium-Argon, Lead Isotopes, Uranium Isotopes. The reason for this is because C14 dating has an age threshold of ca. 50-60 thousand years, and this limitation is pretty essential to our understanding of how Carbon 14 decays and it's ratio with C13.

3. What is this "proof" you speak of?

4. "Carbon dating uses extrapolation of unknown data"....what are you talking about here? C14 dating as a method and concept is actually pretty straight forward, and the "data" are certainly not "unknown".

5a. "Living mollusks have been dated to thousands of years old and many more studies"....ok, wth are you talking about here? Yeah, there are mollusks living today that, when their growth bands are counted, show that they've been alive for thousands of years....What does that have to do with C14 or the age of the Earth?

5b. There is a species of mollusk called Exogyra costata that went extinct at the end of the Cretaceous Period (60 million years ago), and you can find it's remains in abundance on and around MSU's campus, if you're so inclined (check the bluffs out by the disc golf course...can literally pick them up off the ground).

Since all your points contain C14, I'll try and explain what I said/meant. In the end, you need to study the evidence of God, Bible, etc. for yourself. I can't convince you of any truth until you discover it for yourself. Now back to your counter points.

C14 dating is about the only science we have to date something but it is not accurate past 25-30,000 years. It was only invented in 1947, by Willard Libby. C14 is measures the % of unstable carbon 14 isotopes in once living objects. The half life of C14 is only 5730 years so in 5 half lives (29,000 years) very little C14 remains. Here are a few examples of known C14 dating discrepancies: Since C14 has only been around for 70 years, the rates over thousands of years is assumed constant which in real science is not really science at all when you extrapolate that far.

Mollushs living test dated at 2300 years old (dead) yet they were alive?, Mortar from an English castle known less than 800 years old tested at 7370 years old, Fresh seal skins dated 1300 years old. There is more but moving on.

There are several factors that can alter C14 decay rates such as volcanic activity, burning, solar activity, cosmic radiation, meteors, Point is if conditions on earth were different in the past, then C14 dating is not reliable beyond about 5000 years.

I am not an expert on C14 dating but the above came from scientific research on the subject from books I have. I did graduate in engineering from Mississippi State University, one of the best engineering schools in the country. You can chose to believe or not. When science is done right, it aligns perfectly with the Bible because God created science too.

From math nothing times anything = nothing so evolution can't be true. So what is true? I believe God's Word has all the truth necessary. Creation and big bang theory just don't mix either. Two rocks hit together and create a higher order and then non living matter into living matter. Where is the energy source?? If that is how it happened, it came from God. This is the second law of thermodynamics, chaos is the normal direction not order and it takes an external energy to bring order from chaos. Does your car get naturally cleaner or dirtier? To get clean we must put energy into it.

Another question about big bang, who created the rocks? Can anyone answer these questions on evolution? They can't because there is only one answer that makes sense - God, Creator, Sustainer.

[preachermatt83]

That's a lot of projecting, 7. I never said you were stupid for being a Christian, so don't put words in my mouth. I said it's stupid to think the Earth is "6000" years old, given the mountain of scientific evidence we have pointing to the contrary. That is literally the exact same argument everyone is using against CJ and his Bronze Age nonsense. Being religious isn't a get-out-of-jail-free-card for rational competence.

It?s possible to be a creationist and still be rational. I think far too many Christians try to put God in a box. Research the Gap Theory. It is a wonderful theory of creation, followed by re-creation. It takes into account ?old earth?. Basically we just simply believe that ?in the beginning? and ?on the first day? are two separate events.

[IMAREBL2 AND A DAWG]

If you are a creationist like myself, you believe God created a mature man (Adam). I also believe God created a mature universe with a mature Earth in that universe. Did God create Earth 6000 or so years ago? I have no idea bc "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." (2 Peter 3:8). If believing God created us makes me "stupid", so be it

https://images.app.goo.gl/h7dsnfKbQNRFzEuY8