That’s not a biblical timeline, it’s one based on ignorance about ancient literature.
You really need to actually study the scriptures – and reading cross-references does not qualify; what qualifies is learning the culture and worldview and literary types so you can grasp what the writer had in mind.
Perhaps. AiG - What Was the Pre-Flood Population Like?
Some people believe the population was relatively low. The Bible explains that people were extremely corrupt and violent prior to the Flood. It is not hard to imagine the world being filled with wars, diseases, and other factors that would keep the population in check.
Others believe that Earth’s population was much higher. If the growth rate in the pre-Flood world was equal to the growth rate in 2000 (0.012), there could have been about 750 million people at the time of the Flood. However, given the extremely long lifespans prior to the Flood, the growth rate could have been much higher. Increasing the rate by just 0.001 would put the population at close to four billion at the Flood.
The problem is NO modern mammals have been found buried with dinosaurs, which leads to your next assertion…
Pine forests were around when the dinosaurs roamed, so no surprise there. What is your citation for the rest?
You have regurgitated this from Calvin Smith of AiG, who appears to have no scientific or technical credentials of any sort. While a layperson such as he might compensate with committed self study, it is apparent that he feels no need to inform himself.
Joel Duff has done us all a favor in handling Smith’s inane article.
As always, YEC is about rhetoric, and has no credible science or evidence at all.
It’s not so much of an inherent dilemma to YEC, but a dilemma for claims that propose dinosaurs overlapping with humans significantly pre- or post-flood. Which are claims that I have seen on this forum.
Some of those are kind of wrong–the ducks are mostly weird screamer-looking ones, if I’m remembering correctly; the “beavers” are probably Castorocauda which looks sort of like a beaver, but the teeth are all wrong (no giant incisors is the most obvious); the date ranges I find for true squirrels and true badgers are more like late Eocene to recent, so those are probably ecologically and gross-morphologically similar groups in the Cretaceous. Otherwise, I’m not really sure what difference they make. The fact that they even have definable stratigraphic ranges is suggestive of the entire stratigraphic column not being from a single catastrophic global flood.
Given that coelacanths seem to have become very rare with the K-T boundary, and the fact that we simply don’t yet have any fossils of them from the Cenozoic, it’s just a “guess none have preserved where we’ve looked so far” issue.
Why then do we find so many ancient fossils? For just one species, there are quadrillions,
Whales may dive to 700 meters, but spend most of their time near the surface. They are air breathers after all. Coelacanths live in deep water. You are also assuming the animals both lived in the same range.
Pine trees are as old as the dinosaurs, though common names are confusing. The Wollemi Pine is closer to the kauri pines, monkey puzzle, etc. than to true northern hemisphere pines. But the forms found with dinosaurs are noticeably different from modern ones, and those with older dinosaurs are evolutionary intermediates.
Living coelacanths have mostly cartilage skeletons and so would not preserve well. They live in deeper water, around volcanic islands, in tropical regions. Deeper water means that their fossils are largely under water. Volcanic islands do not provide good settings for getting buried and preserved. Tropical means that there hasn’t been as much study as in places extensively populated by academic researchers.
OK, let’s do that. YEC’s claim that a literal reading of the Bible is a reliable source for a scientific understanding of the universe. A literal reading of the Bible claims that the Earth is flat, and that the Sun moves about the Earth. Both of these features of the Earth and Universe were accepted as true by many Christians and Jews at the time of the writing of the New Testament. The fact that YEC’s don’t accept a flat Earth or Geocentrism shows that YEC is pseudotheology because it picks and chooses which scientific claims (according to YEC theology) will be accepted within YEC.
To many YECers actually having an education is a sign of lack of faith. I’ve heard people flat-out say that seminary-trained pastors can’t be trusted!
Maybe I should remember to ask if they prefer doctors who never went to college . . .
WRT the video it occurs to me that YECists really don’t grasp how large the world is, the way they expect any ocean creatures to effectively be neighbors.
Love the point that dinosaurs were supposedly hunt to extinction but humans never made use of any bones!
One further note I should make on Petuch, 2004:
All statements of his about Virginia and the Carolinas are poorly-grounded speculation on his part (no first-hand experience with them), and fail spectacularly in most cases (his ratio of accurate to inaccurate statements in those sections is on the order of 1:10 to 1: 20).
Yes, I’ve encountered that attitude too. I even ended up getting caught up in it myself, with disastrous consequences.
I don’t think it’s a specifically YEC thing though. Rather, it’s a misunderstanding and misapplication of passages such as 1 Corinthians 1:18-31. People read about God choosing the foolish things of the world to shame the wise and try to appropriate it for themselves, by dropping out of school or university, dumbing things down, or whatever. But they completely miss the point of these verses. They are talking about people who lost out on a good education due to discrimination, poverty, war, illness, neurodiversity, or other factors beyond their control. Consciously and deliberately lowering one’s intellectual standards by choice on the other hand is not just foolishness; it is laziness, recklessness, slovenliness and dishonesty.
Just heard a sermon in which the speaker said that the only difference between Bible scholars and us is they get paid to argue.
He then went on to assert that his own interpretation of a Psalm was certainly only messianic.
Another speaker I hear frequently says that it’s always the simplest interpretation that is the right one. I think that his belief is that God would only make things simple for His children to understand. The problem may arise, though, that the one we agree with is usually the one we see most easily–of course, the other person’s interpretation could be “more complicated,” because it requires refutation.
To be fair, that’s Occam’s Razor.
The only problem is that Occam’s Razor does have its limits. You can only simplify things as far as possible while remaining consistent with reality. There’s a reason why we don’t think about the Grand National in terms of spherical horses racing in a vacuum.
It is of good intent. God should preserve the word to bring it well to us, right?
I think the main difficulty has been the foisting, unintentionally, of an American English interpretation, rather than one taking ancient near east culture…in this case, anyway.
It is well intended
Besides being disrespectful to the One Who gave us brains to use.
My first college biology professor told us from the start that God gave us brains, so he expected that we would use them.
I don’t think that what the prophet said was, “Come now, let us dumb things down together”.
The amusing thing is that withouth scholars we wouldn’t even be able to read the Bible in English. Good luck learning Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek lol. If we need translators for those ancient languages, it makes sense we also need “cultural translators”.
Those people should also refuse their kids to go to primary school. Because the majority of the apostles would have been illiterate. Who needs to read and write anyway? Perhaps Biologos can add the option to use audio messages on this forum. 
Most people who don’t think it necessary to study the cultures, worldviews, and literary types of literature in another language fail to recognize that different languages entail different ways of thinking.
A book that I keep wanting to read, but keep putting it off.
If you get a chance, “How to Talk to a Science Denier” is great, too. The author reviews reasons and patterns for anti intellectualism across some spectra of the US
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
“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.