The world is only 6 thousand years old ...

[TX-Beau]

Yup , there's the peeve. Asking questions you can't possibly answer in any rational way.

If you have compelling reasons for you belief in God, at least enlighten the rest of the people in here.

Astonish them. WHY are you a Christian and not a Hindu?

 

[mightbe]

This completely misses the point. The claim is that because they can't prove there was a planter, then there was none.

No, the claim is that because they cannot distinguish between a planted one and a naturally germinated one, it is much simpler to say the latter. It requires nothing more than pre-existing natural trees (an analogue to the natural laws) to come into existence. Even if it was planted, it is no different than any others. Trying to explain the tree's existence by use of a planter magically creating it from scratch is much more difficult. It makes no difference to the insects (analogous to us) how the tree came about if it can be explained using purely natural tools. And besides, the timeline of the tree is irrelevant. Eventually, a tree could've spawned there and thus the possibility is necessarry. It would simply be different insects.

 

[FirmaFan]

This completely misses the point. The claim is that because they can't prove there was a planter, then there was none.

This is the same kind of dishonesty you use when saying atheists claim that no god exists - it strawmans the position to one of faith in order to put it on level with the god-claim so you don't have to justify your own faith reasoning, you can simply point and say "well, you have a faith-based belief too."

The intellectually honest would not say "because no planter can be proved then there was none", they would say "because no planter can be proved, there is no reason to believe there is one until such time as one can be demonstrated."