Compelling scientific evidence that creationists have the best arguments

Basic scientific method. Looking for evidence to prove what you want or believe is not science. That is called rhetoric. It is what lawyers, politicians, evangelists, used car salesmen do and many more. More than the scientific method, rhetoric is the backbone of civilization for millennia. BUT it is not science. Science uses a different methodology. In science you test an hypothesis and then you accept the result. You don’t ignore all that evidence of result after result looking for something that seems to support what you want to believe. If you do that, you will always find what you insist on finding. It is in fact a lawyer’s job to do just that. And it is what the Flat Earth society does. It is a valuable tool in the operation of human civilization. But it is not very good at getting to the truth.

So why do we use rhetoric for so many things? Because science has limitations on the kind of questions it can answer – limitations on the hypotheses it can test. If there is no written procedure anyone can follow to determine whether the hypothesis is correct or not then it is not a valid scientific hypothesis. So because of this limitation, many things cannot be determined by science alone and rhetoric is all we have. Whether in the judicial court or in the arena of public opinion, we just have to make our case for what we want people to agree with.

Therefore “creation science” is an oxymoron – a contradiction in terms. It is theology not science and furthermore it is an unreasonable theology because it refuses to accept the scientific conclusions on a question where there are written procedures anyone can follow to get the same results.

2 Likes

“Trees standing straight up in the fossil layers…”

"Some young-earth creationists … were claiming that places like Joggins, where fossilized trees were seen to pass upright though the surrounding sedimentary rocks, provided powerful evidence that the world had been overtaken suddenly by a global flood. I had once believed this to be true. However, after visiting Joggins, I knew first hand that this could not be. The tree stumps lined up along clearly visible, once horizontal, beds.”

— Stephen Godfrey, Paradigms on Pilgrimage: Creationism, Paleontology, and Biblical Interpretation (Toronto: Clements Publishing, 2005)

https://paradigmsonpilgrimage.com/2017/07/24/11-the-tree-stumps-lined-up/

—————

There are also dinosaur footprints found deep in the earth in coal mines with plenty of sedimentary rock beneath and above them. There are also fossilized trees with their roots in situ in such mines as well as fossilized dinosaur prints at the base of the fossilized tree, illustrating that the dinosaur was walking around its base and the tree was buried in situ. And it takes a tree a long time to grow, and the dinosaur walking around its base also demonstrates, along with the tree and its roots, that that is where the level of the land used to be. So all the sediments below and above were not formed in a year by one long flood.

YECs point to the tree trunks uprooted by the volcanic blast at Mt. St. Helens, where the fallen trees later sunk to the bottom of Spirit Lake but some remained vertical in the water. But in that case the trees had no roots since they were cut down at their base by the volcano’s blast, nor can one find tracks around their base.

http://www.allanmccollum.net/allanmcnyc/reprints/Pdfs/peterson.pdf

—————

A Relatively “Dry” Flood

The geologic record contains evidence of a wide variety of ancient environments, including ancient oceans, seas, lakes, rivers, soils and deserts, it is not a record of “a year-long Flood.” There are desert strata, dried out lake beds and dried up river beds, paleosols (soil horizons), layers of rootlets at different horizons in the geologic record, layers of forests at different horizons, fossilized ant nests, termite nests, fragile wasp cocoons, cells from bees nests, dinosaur nests and eggs, reptile nests and eggs (in the Chinle Formation of the Petrified National Forest), bird nests and eggs (of a relative of the flamingo in the Green River Formation in Wyoming), fossilized worm holes, fossilized rodent burrows, tracks, trails and markings left by land-dwelling animals, even animal dung in its original position of deposition as it dried and cracked and hardened on solid ground. The geological evidence is clear that DRY land existed at many different periods throughout the past with land animals continuing to walk around, deposit dung, woo mates, build hives, nests or burrows, lay eggs, hatch those eggs (“empty hatched egg” fossils), then raise their young (then repeat the process), such evidence being found at different horizons in the geologic record. And of course, deserts formed, lakes formed and dried up, rivers formed and dried up, soils formed, layers of small rootlets had time to grow, then be wiped out and grow again at different horizons in the geologic record, even multiple layers of forests had time to grow, die and re-grow. According to young-earth creationists such evidence all accumulated during an alleged “year-long Flood” that kept the earth under water for a year, and whose incomparable violence pulverized rock to fine sediment, then piled that sediment at an average depth of one mile over all the earth that then hardened into solid rock overnight.

—————

“‘Paleosols’ are ancient soils that develop during periods of extensive sub-areal weathering and they are sometimes preserved in the geologic record. The key is that paleosols are found throughout the geologic column and represent periods of Earth history when the region they were found in was not covered by water. ~ Paleosols in the midst of a global flood are not possible.”

—Joseph Meert, “Radiometric Dating, Paleosols and the Geologic Column: Three strikes against Young Earth Creationism”

(Original Verison Fall 1999, Updated July 3, 2002)

http://gondwanaresearch.com/hp/paleosol.htm

—————

Other miracles of the “yearlong Flood” include the formation of layers of limestone and/or chalk many feet thick, which is made up of tiny shelled organisms that require time to reproduce, suck minerals from the water to form their shells, then die and settle. Not to mention layers of “pelletized limestone” many feet thick, which is the result of fish eating tiny shelled organisms, and then excreting them as fecal pellets that settle to the bottom. Try doing any of that in a single year. Trying to explain the entire geological record via a “year-long Flood” is itself a catastrophe of logic.

—————

In 1938 Harold Clark (a disciple of the Flood geologist, George Macready Price) was invited by a student to visit the oil fields of Oklahoma and northern Texas, where Mr. Clark saw with his own eyes why geologists believed as they did. Observations of deep drilling and conversations with practical geologists gave Clark a real shock that permanently erased any confidence he had left in Priceʼs vision of a topsy-turvy fossil record. Clark wrote to Price:

“The rocks do lie in a much more definite sequence than we have ever allowed. The statements made in your book, The New Geology, do not harmonize with the conditions in the field. All over the Midwest the rocks lie in great sheets extending over hundreds of miles, in regular order. Thousands of well cores prove this. In East Texas alone are 25,000 deep wells. Probably well over 100,000 wells in the Midwest give data that has been studied and correlated. The science has become a very exact one. Millions of dollars are spent in drilling, with the paleontological findings of the company geologists taken as the basis for the work. The sequence of the microscopic fossils in the strata is remarkably uniform. The same sequence is found in America, Europe, and anywhere that detailed studies have been made. This oil geology has opened up the depths of the earth in a way that we never dreamed of twenty years ago.” [see, The Creationists by Ronald L. Numbers]

—————

https://skepticalinquirer.org/2018/03/twenty-one_reasons_noahs_worldwide_flood_never_happened

and

7 Likes

Thank you for taking the time share so many insights and sources!

4 Likes

Bill…I am not sure if this resolves anything to anyone’s satisfaction, but there is an article from May 24, 2018 edition of ancient origins.net…dinosaurs that may have existed 22,000 years ago? Well…I did find it online by googling “dinosaurs and humans in same geological strata”…so take a look…not sure how sound the whole thing might be but…

And the first thing I found was on AIG.

Doesn’t look like they haven’t seen any evidence that shows they have been found together.

I assume you are thinking of the triceratops horn that was “controversially dated to around 33,500 years”. This appears to be another example of contamination and C-14 dating. I did notice one mention of a dating that was done using the minerals in the horn to avoid the contamination and the results were not 33,500 years old. Of course the YEC folks argue that it is the test that is contaminated, but didn’t explain how that could happen. C-14 contamination is now well know and well studied and the labs know how to avoid it. I couldn’t find any recent mention of the triceratops horn dating.

2 Likes

Hi Bill…well, no one said life was easy…I did find a reference to that ancient.origins. net by googling and I shall get back to it later…May 24, 2018…sounded a bit unusual…maybe I will take some time to get back to it. But no idea who puts out ancient origins or that website…

Tried to find something on that fossilized bag of flour and the cowboy hat…that one is difficult.

Try “did they find dinosaurs and humans in the same strata?”…and ancient origins is the publication…yes, does refer to triceratops horn that you mentione…there is more in it about C-14 dating and the fact, they noted,that it will date things in the thousands of years that elsewhere have been dated as much older…

Well…all for now…

Ancient origins is one of those conspiracy theory nutjob websites.

I think AIG would be more credible (and that’s saying a lot coming from me :laughing:)

“How to Be A Noble Roman”"…“From Fish to Human: How Humans Lost their Tails”…great article titles, anyway!! Those are from the Sept 2018 edition, which you can find online.

The dinosaur article described various attempts to date it via C 14 and coming up with dating much more recent…and so on…

At any rate, that is a source of info! …Nice artwork in the magazine too.

Have a good night’s sleep…and happy Fall everyone

2 Likes

Sorry but any publication that pushes the Angkor Wat stegosaurus carving is not to be trusted.

Here is the catch-22. The horn might date to 35,000 years ago, but that is much older than the YEC model allows. So are you going to keep the 35,000 years and throw out Genesis? Another problem, the strata where the horn, or any other fossil, is found can be dated using a method other than C-14. When that gives you the millions of years what do you do? You can argue radiometric dating in general is wrong but that would throw out the C-14 date you want to keep.

What to do? It is really getting caught on the horns of a dilemma.

Ahh…but doncha love a little controversy!!

Had a guy working on my sink a couple years ago and he was all into these ancient petroglyphs and etc showing UFO invasions and etc Who needs dinosaurs? It is helpful, at least, to know where people get their ideas. Ancient Origins? Now I know it exists…and may check it out sometime.

I just hiked a petroglyph trail in Wyoming on vacation and thought about that guy’s UFO ideas…but I stick with the more tradiitonal explanations, and I will bet you do too.

And yes, the 35K would be difficult for YEC in the pure sense…but I am not beholden to 6,000 or 10,000 years and, in a pinch, maybe YEC people would accept this younger dating. And I would not, in any case, throw out Genesis? It is one of the books of the Bible that brought me to faith — in spite of everything else…As for getting caught on the horns of a dilemma, I suppose we would then have to date the horns!!

1 Like

A friend of mine some years back went into her backyard and found spider webs EVERYWHERE. She called a pest control guy, and he came out and said it was from chem trails. :laughing: In reality, it was a mass spider hatching.

3 Likes

THAT would be scary!! “Invasion of the…”

1 Like

I find it a shame that people still insist on setting Science against the bible, just to try and hold onto a literal or inerrant view of Scripture and early Genesis in particular. Even the most unscientific must see that the details given in Genesis 1 do not match what we see around us. So maybe that is not the point of the writing? Genesis 1 establishes God as the creator who is in charge of creation rather than a spectator who lights the blue touch paper and retires immediately. And, of course, the establishment of the Sabbath.
As for “proofs” Science may not claim proof for the complete Evolution from single cell to Humanity, but it can prove the existence of the mechanisms involved in Evolution, from the method of change too the survival of the fittest. The problem comes when scientists extrapolate beyond the evidence. Despite what is claimed, Time cannot accomplish some of the changes that TOE postulates. But God can use Evolution to diversify and populate His World. Theistic Evolution, seems to me, to be the logical combination of Faith and Science.

Richard