Begin with the big bang. Newtonian physics and thermodynamics. No effect can happen without a cause. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.
It is impossible to form stars in space using gravity alone. Boyle’s gas law. The fact that everything is moving apart from everything else at close to light speed just makes things worse.
It is impossible to form planets using gravity alone in space. It’s like playing pool at thousands of mph and expecting the balls to stick together.
You don’t need radiometric dating to date old cities and other biblical archeology. I would post a link to some of the other methods they use, but I’ve been accused of spamming links already.
Yes I am combative, but I am merely motivated to stop the spread of the pseudo science and misinformation by YECs. This is why I am challenging you. The fact that you are not up to the challenge is unfortunate, because I think in another life, one where you have escaped the cult of YECism, we would actually get along.
As I have said many many times, it is pointless trying to discuss science with someone who does not understand science. Patrick, clearly you do not accept science or understand it properly. You believe that scientists are just blind biased godless fools. Yet somehow you are so brilliant as to be able to find holes in all the work of tens of thousands of scientists across multiple disciplines! (And you think scientists to be arrogant???)
No amount of evidence or argument will impact you, as evidenced by your constant rejection and ignoring of everything everyone here has said to you. I am not prepared to wast time going down that rabbit hole with you until you take the time to learn and understand science properly and stop getting your information solely from the YEC echo-chamber. If you learn the science I will take the time to step you through answers to all those questions at least as far as science can answer them.
Lastly, even if it was the case that science had no answers to those questions, this would be evidence of science not having an answer, and NOT evidence of supernatural agency. This would be just argument from ignorance and god of the gaps thinking.
About YEC flood geology. What good is it? How many oil exploration companies that use flood geology to find oil. I think it is none. There was one that tried and it fizzled.
Flood geology seems useful for convincing Christians who don’t know anything about geology, that the real geologists are fundamentally wrong about geology, and feeding their persecution complex.
News flash. It isn’t just mainstream science that is against YEC. Nature itself is against you. For example, there is no good YEC answer for the Distant Starlight Problem. How can we see objects over 6000 light years away if the light only had 6000 years to travel that distance? We shouldn’t even be able to see most of our own galaxy.
Yes. That’s why it’s so hard for the other side to feel respected in these discussions. It’s not really a “my interpretation of the Bible” vs. “your interpretation of the Bible” issue like with baptism or divorce. Both sides believe the other side believes and promotes lies. Both sides believe the other side is damaging the church’s witness and contributing to ruining the faith of young people. So even though it’s a secondary issue, it’s important. I think you believe lies that destroy faith. I realize you believe the same about what I think. So there we are.
I would say I accept the evidence for that position, rather than deny it.
What if, with more knowledge on the topic, you would no longer ask questions like this? It’s fine not to know or understand something and if you want to have an honest discussion about any of these topics we should start a new thread.
I was thinking of shale, not chalk but chalk doesn’t help your cause. According to AIG chalk was formed during the flood, but these hundreds of feet formed during a chaotic flood and yet somehow escaped having other debris mixed in? Then the chalk has to have other sedimentary rock laid down over the deposits, flint has to form in the chalk, and the deposits have to be lifted. There is no way to compress this into a single year.
The flood was almost a year and a half, but the repercussions lasted decades, probably centuries. The land, which had been one, split apart after the flood and after the animals had a chance to populate all corners of it.
There are a couple of differences. My first argument isn’t to call people in debate rooms heathens and uneducated or brainwashed. But brainwashing is exactly what’s going on since the theory of evolution was proposed. They teach it like a fact not only in schools and colleges, but on children’s TV aimed at preschoolers. If they would only teach the gospel like that, we’d be a stronger nation.
Forget ID. They won’t even teach the hurdles that evolution still hasn’t crossed. And the elite go nuts whenever their theories are even questioned out loud.
Remember “Mysterious Origins of Man”?
How about “Expelled! No Intelligence Allowed”?
“Forbidden Archeology”?
I don’t believe much of them, but they have hard questions about evolution and our past.
Still not enough time. From AIG, what we see today.
This when there is not a chaotic global flood raging. A global flood would be churning up these deposits and it would take even longer to get up to 100’s of feet.
Of course, they are not deposits until deposited. And they are not sediments until eroded from the respective rocks or produced by the entities that live die and leave their skeletons. That is a lot of erosion to happen in 150 days, especially when you consider that erosion happens at the surface to a large extent, as deeply submerged areas have little in the way of current or churning to erode. It is interesting in our local lake system that was dammed in the 1930-50 era to see on ultrasonic fish finders, trees standing where submerged 70 years ago, largely intact in the anoxic zone, despite floods that have ravaged the waterway many times at the surface.
This is a great example of where attacks on science from the platform of religious belief start with absurdity and get worse from there. This is all just counting angels on the head of a pin at this point.
The idea of the biblical global flood is so utterly ridiculous and completely untenable scientifically and so obviously allegorical in origin that it is laughable that it is even being discussed or debated.
I am not sure what challenge you are referring to?
Also responding to your arguments is problematic. Firstly, to be called arguments they at least need to be formed into a syllogism. Eg. Premise 1, Premise 2, conclusion. Plus the argument needs to be sound, meaning that it needs to be based on actual evidence and not just wild assertions. The argument needs to be valid and not circular. Now everything I have seen from you so far fails these basic requirements, so you cannot claim that I am not responding to your arguments because in my view, you are yet to make one.
Secondly Patrick, my observations of your modus operandi with regards to points related to science, is that your lack of valid and sound argumentation (due mostly to false premises and lack of evidence) coupled with dismissing and or ignoring anything that you disagree with, and tending to fire back with yet more poor argumentation and unsubstantiated claims, means that not only attempting to respond to your faulty arguments is pointless because they are bad arguments, but the response to any response by me will result in more of the same. All of these problems come back to three things 1. Your commitment to YEC no matter what the evidence against it. 2. Your lack of understanding of science, and 3. Your need to be a good soldier for your faith and not give ground to the opposition.
If you only had an open mind and a preparedness to change your mind in the face of the vast evidence against you, and a preparedness to learn real science and how to put a valid and sound argument together, then we might be able to have a productive conversation.
One type of geologic formation that seems odd to find under a single, global flood deposition system is one with indications of repeated significant changes in sea level. Such a set of formations is abundantly clear from the marine faunas of the southeastern United States.
The specific points of evidence for repeated changes in sea level are the fact that most of the formations, or subunits of them, have indurated or leached upper sections (or are completely indurated or leached). Induration and leaching both require at minimum a few decades of fresh groundwater percolating through the layer. Thus, we can observe a sequence of layers that require many changes from above sea level to significantly below and back. In addition, each layer must have lasted long enough for large bivalves and corals to grow, and then their shells/skeletons to sit on the ocean floor with other things living on them (at minimum, about a century, given the lifespans of the organisms involved).
The Waccamaw Formation (which is among the shorter-duration ones) alone gives an absolute minimum total depositional time of about a thousand years, given the four separate indurated layers (ignoring sedimentation and erosion rates). This estimate makes some rather unrealistically high assumptions about how densely you could pack the organisms in life, thus the actual time is much longer.
Given the abrupt faunal changes, like Ecphora and Chesapecten disappearing between immediately overlying formations (most sites have significant unconformities, though), there is very little mixing of the formations, and, if the timescale is only a few thousand years, unreasonably rapid faunal turnover (i.e. a typical species goes extinct within 50 generations). |
There is also the problem of globally equivalent planktonic microfossil sequences, and globally equivalent stable isotope ratio sequences . Both require a few thousand years, at absolute minimum, to equalize around the globe.
Another example is formations made up of fossils. I don’t mean sediments with fossils here and there, but sediments that are mostly fossils. For example:
That’s 2,000 feet of disarticulated body plates from this animal:
There are enough crinoid bits from this one geologic formation to cover the entire Earth to 1/4 of an inch. How in the world does a flood produce that much life?
You can read about more of these types of deposits in Glenn Morton’s wonderful essay:
