Did bones actually become fossilized in the sediments of "ancient" epeiric (inland) seas on continents?

[rsewell (RON SEWELL)]

@donpartain

40 fossilized– almost complete –whale skeletons are found together in the Atacama desert in Chile.

About those.

If catastrophically buried by tsunami, why would most of these whales be found oriented belly up? A tsunami with the power to override mountain ranges and roll over continents would disperse entrained animals, not bury them so they are within a few meters of each other or in direct contact.

Bigger question, why are there no modern species found? If this happened just 4500 years ago, contemporary with ancient history, why are all the fossil whale species extinct?

Repeated mass strandings of Miocene marine mammals from Atacama Region of Chile point to sudden death at sea

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

@donpartain

In fact, Old-earth’rs are having to scramble a bit to try to figure out how the Colorado River managed to climb over the uplifted Kaibib Plateau (several thousand feet higher than the river) in order to erode it.

Nonsense. Watch the 11 second video clip.

 
ETA: …and get hold of a copy of this, a beautiful book, of the eleven contributing authors nine are evangelical* Christians (and at least one contributes here – hey @Joel_Duff ; - )…

The Grand Canyon | Monument to an Ancient Earth

 
(It’s not available digitally, I expect partly because of the gorgeous photography which cannot be appreciated on a small screen… but my public library bought one at my request.)
 

---

*A qualifier many are reluctant to claim anymore, and with good reason.

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

Lather, rinse, repeat… and repeat and repeat and repeat…

To not waste any more shampoo maybe this could be closed down, @moderators?

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

I’m in the process of listening to a sermon that mentions Ezekiel 34, talking about religious leaders who cloak themselves in the words of God as shepherds but are false. That also resonates as religious leaders who cloak themselves in the words of science not understanding it, fooling themselves and thinking they are being faithful shepherds. Oh yeah, and exploiting their followers for personal gain… do any YEC ‘ministries’ come to mind? “‘Shepherds’ in title but thieves and robbers at heart.”

[jammycakes (James McKay)]

@Dale

To not waste any more shampoo maybe this could be closed down, @moderators?

I second this. This discussion consists of nearly six hundred posts of the same argument being made over and over and over again, and the same refutations being posted in response and then not addressed.

@donpartain If you want to challenge a scientific theory, you need to account for all the evidence and not just a cherry-picked subset of it. And if someone is telling you that you aren’t getting your facts straight, you need to bring something new to the table to address the reasons why they tell you that you aren’t getting your facts straight. Just repeating the same old thing over and over again isn’t going to cut it.

@donpartain

So, you guys who are the professional scientists should be helping the rest of us discover this evidence. Again, Peter–by guidance of the Holy Spirit–says that evidence of this Flood does exist. And it can, and should, be discovered (in fact, Peter, here, connects rejection of the historical Flood with rejection of the coming Christ, to judge the world).

One does not simply “discover” evidence. The evidence has to exist in reality and not just on paper. It has to be of satisfactory quality. And it has to go beyond supporting whatever you are claiming that it supports, and to actively contradict the alternatives.

The problem, Don, is that not only do we not have any evidence for a young earth, and not only do we not have any evidence that the Flood extended beyond the Middle East, we have mountains (literally) of evidence that actively contradicts such a scenario. This has been more than adequately explained to you over and over again throughout this thread and I see no need to rehash the reasoning. This being the case, you are demanding that we “discover” something that quite clearly does not exist. Such a demand is tantamount to demanding that we be prepared to preach falsehood and scientific misinformation if your doctrine demands it. Furthermore, to equate a rejection of falsehood and misinformation with a rejection of Christ is almost blasphemous.

As Christians, we need to be honest about this. However important you think a young earth and a global Flood may be doctrinally, the Bible has far, far, far, far more to say about the need for honesty and factual accuracy than about the age of the earth or evolution. And as for your accusations of “mocking” and “scoffing” — I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: it’s one thing to be mocked or scoffed at for preaching the Gospel. It is a completely different matter to complain about being “mocked” or “scoffed at” for preaching falsehood and scientific misinformation.