Evolution disproved

Alright, let’s expand on this.
Here ya go:
Best definition: an expanse

Keep in mind verses translated in the KJV like ‘thou shall not kill’ are better understood/translated as ‘ Thou shall not murder’ ( Big difference)…,likewise with the Raqia, once translated ‘firmament’ is better understood as an expanse.

Let me ask you a question. Where was heaven originally? Garden of Eden on earth?
In Genesis chapter 1 the first four times the Hebrew word Raqia is used it is ‘solo.’
Last four times it speaks of ‘Raqia **of the heavens **…an additional phrase (where the stars are)
In other words, two different expenses were created.
The first expanse divided the waters above, from the waters below, subterranean chambers of water which would be the source of the global flood. Genesis 7:11 ‘the fountains of the deep burst open’
Also, genesis 1:20 tells us the birds ‘fly across the face of the heaven’ Earth crust makes sense.

Randy Alcorn goes quite in-depth into this subject and builds on the idea of heaven on earth. Not the typical cultural idea of heaven who knows where else .Check it out? A good read.

The Hebrew word shamayim is used for ‘heavens.’

Yes, sure, some YEC have identified it as a ‘problem’ these unresolved problems have been solved and observed as COLD re-packing.
Again, just because we lack knowledge compared to God, if he reveals the age of the earth is 6000 years we should not doubt it. The problem always lies with our lack of understanding not with the historical framework given to us.

E=mc^2. Why that equation falsifies your above statement is left as an exercise for the reader.


Your hand-waving at the “problem” is no solution. The Pacific Plate moving at miles per hour, not centimeters a year is going to cause friction that will boil away the oceans, at least at the friction point, and steam to death any life on a string of islands that runs over 2500 miles from Hawaii to the Aleutians. To create a “cooling device” does not solve the problem, because there is a global issue and a local issue. A global cooling device (especially one that is imaginary) does not solve the local problem.

But He doesn’t. You do.

1 Like

Hello @Helloandgoodbye,

Thanks for providing a reference to supercritical water.

The scenario you described is not possible because you stated that the pressure on the earth’s crust would have been converted into crustal fractures. What you did not account for is that fractures would release any water from underneath the crust, which in turn would nullify your hypothesis.

Even if this fantastical process were not absurd, you still haven’t shown any calculations about how much work (in the physics sense) would be required to apply enough pressure to a crust with only 3% quartz to cause all the radioactive formations to accelerate their decay rate by many orders of magnitude. Nor have you shown how the tremendous heat that would be generated, both by the “fluttering” itself and by the accelerated radioactivity, would not have vaporized the earth.

Bear in mind that the RATE project, which considered only the radioactivity and not the fluttering crust idea, conceded that the temperature of the earth would have risen far above the temperature on the surface of the sun. Twelve years ago they expressed optimism that this “little” problem would be solved, but it has scarcely been addressed, much less solved.

Chris Falter

1 Like

Hi Matt,

Welcome! I’m glad you’re here.

Every summer my family would bundle ourselves into a station wagon and head to Delphos, Ohio (“America’s friendliest city”) to visit relatives. We would spend a good bit of time in tiny Landeck, and occasionally visit cousins in the the mighty metropolises of Troy and Findlay. So what parts of NW Ohio are you most familiar with?

I have shared a bit of my faith journey in this recent post to the Biologos forum, if you are interested.


1 Like

Thanks for the link to your post. I’m enjoying getting to know more about the people here.

It’s simply incredible that I would ever come across someone on this forum who has been to Delphos! I was born and raised right up the road in Elida, though my family and I now live in Columbus Grove, up in Putnam Co. I work in Van Wert, so I drive through Delphos every day of the week!

And you aren’t kidding, Findlay really IS the “mighty metropolis” to us little village-dwelling country folk! Lima used to be “the big city,” but it’s really declined lately.

Yes, they are conclusions drawn from incorrectly measuring things. And the atheists feed off this as a reason for rejecting scripture and what he has revealed with the historic timeline in Genesis chapter 5 and 11 and Luke 3.( and a list of other compatibility issues from my very first post on this thread)

According to yourself maybe.
Your measurement consists of an underlying assumption that these plates had friction. The same friction in the past, as the present, U see?

The Hydroplate theory expands on the idea of hydroplaning, nearly frictionless plates.

Another quick example is how evolutionists observe the present day flesh eating and assume that in the past the same standard of measurement has been consistent.
( just like radioactive decay rates, Assuming the present day rates have always been the same in the past)

It seems to me this is based on worldly thinking not godly thinking. Not based on what God has revealed.

Such limited knowledge of the universe and I am supposed to take any one (or group) human beings Word?
I gotta go with the ‘science of the day’ and morality of the day and culture should not be imposed on scripture.

I’m going to stick with the historical timeline the Bible plainly lays out as my foundation., no solid reason or measurement not to do so, see what unfolds.

If you think that the measurements are incorrect, you need to demonstrate exactly where the flaws are. In so doing, you need to address exactly what scientists do in reality, and not some garbled misunderstanding of it. You need to explain exactly why they are fallacies, and present evidence that they really are fallacies as you claim them to be. And you need to show your working.

And one other thing. You need to lay off the accusations of “atheism.” And stop using the word “evolutionist” as a derogatory slur against any and every scientific finding that you don’t like. These things just tell everyone that you hate science for the sake of hating science.


This is from the Bible? I must have missed that verse on my last read through Genesis.


Ironically, if you search atheist websites and actually speak to atheists, you will find that it is the YEC position that causes them to reject scripture. It is the ability to see past a literal reading of scripture, that does not need to be read literally, that will allow a non-believer to consider the veracity of the scriptures.

I would bet that you can’t find a single atheist who rejects scripture because someone like me says that one does not adhere to a literal six-day creation narrative.


We used this in Bible study a few years ago. It was interesting.–more of a continuation of work, etc.
some conjecture there. Thanks.

1 Like

But problem is that He hasn’t in any way, shape or form told us that the earth or universe by specific number straight from the horses mouth (that is, the Holy Bible, the Word of the LORD) that the earth is 6,000 years old. It was logical thinking like this along with the issue of the dinosaurs, the Flood (as in terms of dinosaur bones not being mixed with human or animal bones as you would expect in a major deluge of the Flood but packed neatly in columns by age group as over the spans of millions of years) and the age of the earth with our modern dating systems that shows the earth is more then 6,000 years old. The only thing that the Bible states is that the universe was made by the Lord and LORD alone. It (Genesis) doesn’t give us anything about a date of the earth or universe. One can trust the Bible as the Word of God while also trusting in science for the age of the earth.


Even though I was until very recently a YEC, even I dismissed certain theories based on the ridiculousness of their assertions. Hydroplate theory posits a near frictionless environment for the earth’s crust, based on your own explanation of the theory. However, if the continental plates were truly in a near frictionless environment for 1,656 years from creation to the flood, it would result in one major planetary game of pinball, with plates bouncing off of one another all over the place. That simply doesn’t make logical sense.

Let me ask you this simple question, @Helloandgoodbye - if the earth is only 6,000 years old, how does YEC explain tectonic fossil deformation? Tectonic fossil deformation occurs when sedimentary rock layers are subjected to tectonic or metamorphic processes that literally deform the permineralized fossils contained therein. These fossils require decades to form, and the rock layers require a great deal more time to fold as a result of tectonic stresses. How would these fossils exist if the earth were as young as you assert it to be? Besides this, how do you explain fossils contained in the gravel that comprises breccia and conglomerate rock formations?


Stepping away from science for a minute, I have a hypothetical question for you. Say someone comes up to you and says “Hey, I know you’re a Christian, and I’m interested in learning more about this Jesus thing. But you should know, I just can’t buy into the young earth stuff.” How would you go about mentoring him? Would you send him away because he holds atheistic beliefs? I ask because it seems you hold the belief that one is dangerously close to atheism if they can’t accept a literalist acceptance of Genesis.


Hey, @Totti Isn’t this pretty much what happened to you when you were first checking out Christianity?


Sort of, I just directly bought into the YEC beliefs because i was under the impression that every single Christian held these views. And that it was impossible not to, lest you are a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”.


If it isn’t too personal, may I ask how old you were when you first “checked out Christianity”? Also, what religious beliefs -if any- did you have before that?


I was about 12-13 when i first began looking into all of it. I was an atheist prior to it and i remember scoffing and making fun of the parables in religion class and catechisms.

I was raised around Catholicism. But since nobody i know is devout, And religion is not viewed as beneficial and more of a bad thing here in Belgium. So it’s not easy to be a believer!


The one thing about this “fight” is no one seems to define the range of Young. While disconcerting this Strawman fight is metaphorical to getting rid of an idea before it gains hold. Would Young not be up to 500,000 years? This issue regardless of gaps is YEC should be FEC. 6000 years is not even to birth yet. Obviously we tend to overlook the point that God created a mature universe, not a baby big bang. Both sides want to view the beginning in some type of anthropomorphic womb without any creator at all. Then both sides try to use science to argue this wrong assumption all are ignoring.

Genesis does not state the universe started from a small “big bang” to it present size. Nor does Genesis even imply that the universe was created 6000 years ago, because it leaves out thousands of years of history. Not the years, but every detail that has happened over the last 500,000 years. Which is still YEC. Even half a million years is only a minute time interval in a universe that is allegedly 14 billion years. I understand the need for flat earthers to rebel against both sides and their irreconcilable head butting. It tends towards being a combination of historical thinking and modern simulation theories. The ancients viewed God in religious terms. With the advent of mass Exodus from religion; having a more science fiction God, goes hand in hand with our understanding of culture and human imagination. Religion was as much human imagination as current technology and it’s science fiction imaginations. No matter how one tries, one cannot escape culture and the evolution of human thinking and imagination.

One reason given about Genesis and the point of a mature universe is God was leaving us in the dark with deception. No, a thousand times no. It is Faith. A creator who set it up so humanity was God on earth, perhaps even 500,000 years ago. Where perfection was the rule. Perfection of humanity with God, not geological stability. Nor were animals and plant life elevated like they are today with a status sometimes more important than humanity itself. Not that humanity itself felt the need to be in charge, but because God lived in this universe through the image of humanity. This would not rule out that humanity itself was capable of terraforming the earth. The death and life of plants and animals was natural not the definition of death and destruction of value we have today. It is all in the interpretation of the data, not the data itself.

Faith happened due to the Fall of Adam and separation from God. There was separation, because we have a brief account of a before and after. Faith not imagination is God’s intent. Imagination leads to deception. The reason for the Flood being literal is that it was the historical record of a loss in human history. Any detail of humanity was lost to those after the Flood. It was not the transforming geological event, as much as a new history of human kind and any history before has been removed from current understanding. For the main reason that it was the end of God’s image on earth, and Faith in full effect.

“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6

This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.