"There is no such thing as a 'transitional fossil'..."

(Tim) #184

The past is now, only a snapshot, no matter how you look at it. Any one saying they have the truth about the past, can only do so through concept. The truth in the evidence is only the evidence. It is not the truth of what happened. That was the point of remembering the past. The truth is not even consistent with the evidence. The truth of the evidence is consistent with your belief system. If it were not, you would reject it as being nonsense like the YEC view.

I have nothing against science. I stress the point that we cannot trust science any more than we can trust the Bible. It was not until recently seeing that myself. If like me, taking everything literally, what we observe, is not always what is real, and may not even be the truth, we obviously have a need to figure out. Having a need to getting to the truth, does not gaurantee we will get to the truth. Jesus’ exchange with Pilate points that out.

Does the method of science get rid of some of our notions that are false? Of course it does, but science can only give us a representative view. It can not give us proof, because God is part of the factor. Saying that God does not have a hand in what happens is as foolish as saying there is no God at all.

Unless, I have it wrong the peer review system is to come to a consensus of common ideology. It is not the means to God who is truth. Nor is saying the Bible is the only truth, the way to go. It hardly covers bits and pieces of history through human thoughts and observations. We still have the need to take into account all of what was left to us, if we want a more complete picture. But even then it is just a picture and may or may not be what actually happened. And in doing this still discern between what is spiritual doctrine and what belongs to the physical.

(Mark D.) #185

But does that mean that the claim of a person who thinks their memory of the morning is the product of a powerful genie and that of a person who thinks their memory is part of a sequence leading back from the present are on the exact same epistemic footing!


You do know of course, of the irony of a tidal wave? If you are on it, in open sea, you will barely notice it. But on shore, many miles away, devastation will reign. Floods always have cataclysmic and milder components. A flash flood in southern california can wash out canyons, paved roads, and move gravel and rocks for hundreds of yards, but yet not overmuch disturb the lake or basin in which it ends up. Hail and torrential downpours can be violent and unpleasant, but under the water, animals will barely notice. Underground springs can add heat to cold water, but fish and other animals can pick their zone of comfort.

Animals can drown in calm water as well as in violent water, while water animals can survive in warm water, cold water, strong currents, and idle pools of water. This is not miraculous even; this is simply natural. The whales and seals that swim from the tropics to the northern icebergs, demonstrate their potential. Penguins have adapted well to a multiplicity of water conditions, and pelicans and sea gulls can handle salt water as well as fresh water.

You have simply not opened your experience and your mind enough to the possibilities. Not speculative possibilities, but real observations within nature itself that demonstrate salmon swimming upstream from salt water to fresh, and frogs hibernating all winter in mud under the frozen ponds and lakes of the temperate zones on the planet. You have forgotten about snakes swimming in the water, and ducks and geese and albatross resting, paddling, sleeping on the water. Remember this is survival, not thriving. Humans do not thrive on mount Everest, but some have made it to the top, and back.

(Chris) #187

I assume that most people here do believe in the miracle of the resurrection. If you believe one miracle in the Bible then why pick and choose which ones you believe in? It is clear that Noah’s Flood was not a natural event.
A God who could create a universe from nothing and raise people from the dead can surely tidy up a few loose ends here and there.

(Phil) #188

The chronology is a little confusing in Genesis but it appears the water covered the mountaintops for about 8 months. That is a long time to tread water. And those frogs in the mud are now covered with thousands of feet of sediment. Now, where the sediment came from is a mystery since the young earth view is that there were no big mountains, and besides, once the earth was covered in water in the first forty days, little erosion would take place in the deep water in the course of 8 or 9 months.
All of which leads me to see it as symbolic and metaphorical since it literally makes no sense.

(Christy Hemphill) #189

The NT gospels are historical narratives. They are also corroborated in other sources like Josephus. Christians believe God is the source of life, so the idea that he can raise his Son to life is within the bounds of the reality we believe in.

The narrative of Noah’s Ark is not obviously a historical record. It is absolutely uncorroborated by archaeology and natural sciences and if taken literally a la AIG, claims innumerable things that are demonstrably impossible given the physical laws of the universe. The ‘miracles’ would require God to act outside of the bounds of the reality we believe in.

Huge difference, at least for me.


Survival for at least 40 days. Considering the YEC flood is supposed to have laid down rock layers at rates not seen before or since, I’m not sure why we should retain ordinary expectations for animal survival. This epic flood seems to want to “have it both ways” – producing unnatural, unlikely, undemonstrated effects of destruction while still allowing for every minute possibility of animal survival. Sounds supernatural to me.

(George Brooks) #191


But not a single whale drowned with any of the dinosaurs… but giant marine reptiles all drowned before COWS drowned. Not a single goat drowned until all the sea creatures who lived with the marine reptiles drowned first … and not until the tallest dinosaurs ever known drowned first.

You have lost your bearings…

(Tim) #192

I see no reason why every human should just be a separate cog in a machine that takes away each individual’s own cognitive reasoning, even if it removed all error and evil in the world.

Nor do I see evolution as a path to or from that point. We make claims all the time. It is part of the process of knowledge. Do we have to accept or believe every claim, because we are all supposed to have the same epistemic footing? I think the biggest issue is just understanding one another. But I do not see that as a requirement to change who we are, and force an equality that may never happen.

(Tim) #193

Why would everything we see today as taking millions of years have to happen all even in the lifetime of Noah after the Flood? Trying to fit it all in, in a year, will never work. According to research done in the Mediterranean seabed, the Mediterranean emptied and filled back up 7 times. That does not have to be big news if you live through it, and it happens once every few decades.

Genesis 10:25 To ‘Ever were born two sons. One was given the name Peleg [division], because during his lifetime the earth was divided. His brother’s name was Yoktan.

Someone named their son after the phenomenon is all we get. The only objection is the dating shows that it did not happen then, but yet they lived through it. It was something all were accustomed to, except for that one year it was drastic enough to name your son as a memorial.

Do we have all the answers and reasons? Do we want the answers and reasons? I say never settle, but keep moving forward or evolving in our thought processes.

(James McKay) #194

Well yes. But there is a big difference between the Resurrection and a global flood. Believing that Noah’s Flood was global in extent requires you to believe in the creation of evidence for a false history. Believing in the Resurrection does not.


A - Look at the dirty dishes in the sink. Obviously somebody put them there after using them.
B - That was the devil.


A - Look at the dirty dishes in the sink. Obviously somebody put them there after using them.
B - They’re not really there.


A - Look at the dirty dishes in the sink. Obviously somebody put them there after using them.
B - They have nothing to do with the breakfast.


A - Look at the dirty dishes in the sink. Obviously somebody put them there after using them.
B - They were put there after the breakfast was made, but they’re the result of lunch.


The chronology is not really confusing; the water covered the mountains for 184 days, six months, from the time the rain ceased, to the time the mountains appeared. It took about 40 days for the mountains to be covered. (Maybe more.) The waters began receding 150 days after the rains began. The springs of the deep stopped at that time, and the waters began to recede. It took another 2.5 months before the mountain tops showed.

Treading water is not the same for water animals, as it is for humans or dogs. So it is a kind of silly way to think about it. If an animal can survive well in water for a month, then two months will not make a difference, except possibly in reproduction, laying eggs, or giving birth.

Yes, some frogs were covered with thousands of feet of mud, possibly. But not all. Some would simply have been swimming around in the water, along with the turtles, alligators, manatees, and dolphins, until the sediments had settled… then possibly burrowing in the mud, or laying frog eggs in shallower water… there would have been shallower water as well as deep water.

Your view that only mountains create sediment is incorrect. The deserts in southern California and Arizona attest to much erosion on relatively flat ground, with numerous gullies everywhere. The amounts of water and the movement of it would have destroyed previous river valleys, moved some of the plateaus, assuming there were some of those, slumped cliff sides, etc. Think of Mt. St. Helen’s also, just a tiny example of the dramatic effects of melting snow creating mud slides which destroyed forests, and raised the bottom of a lake. A mountain and volcano was the cause of it in that case, but it was not a slow simple erosion by wind, but rather a movement of existing loose material by water. So, no mystery.
When the water receded, it did not just soak into the ground or evaporate into the air. It receded. Water levels went down. So during this time, whether the oceans deepened to absorb the water, and/or whether mountains arose at the same time, the water was travelling, draining through underwater cavities, or at surface water channels, and in the process more erosion taking place. When the fountains of the deep were active, it is likely sediment also was generated at that time. And, while rocks and larger soil particles would settles relatively quickly, it would take weeks perhaps months for the finer clay particles to settle. It was a complex and amazing process.

It makes no sense to you. But it does make sense. There is also symbolism involved, but metaphoricallllllll… probably not.


Not nearly as supernatural as evolution. Creating new beings against incredible odds. Expecting life from nothing. Not finding transitional species, until the word is redefined to mean that all species are transitional. The Cambrian explosion in the fossil record. Stress creating new species, while the old species continue to exist in spite of the stress. Evolution(common descent) is miraculous, or would be, if it was real.

The geological record does not show the same amount of sediment in every place on earth. In general, different layers are found in different places. There is variety of sediment, both in type and depth. The flood killed many many animals, because it was very destructive. Yet, fish survived, not taken on the ark. Maybe only one percent, or one tenth of one percent survived. But they did. And in the same way, only a very small number needed to survive of ducks (which may actually have been on the ark anyway), and of seals, whales, dolphins, etc. The flood doesn’t want anything. Floods just always have a variety of conditions to them, and survival for water animals is possible. Even for 180 days.


You just don’t know that. You are claiming things for which you have no evidence. The fossil record is imperfect- you know that. You know that animals can drown without leaving fossils. Fossils may demonstrate some previous existence, but they do not prove lack of existence. Your bearings are taking you in the wrong direction.

Whales would not be expected generally to die due to flooding. They would welcome the water. And they can swim for thousands of miles, finding the spots they like. So why would you find them with dinosaurs which are susceptible to drowning? Rather, you should explain how so many water loving clams died/drowned, and were fossilized on mountain tops in such vast numbers.

And recently they have found fossils of mammals eating dinosaurs, and fossil of a dog living with dinosaurs. Your fixation on large animals is interesting, but is built on a lot of presumptions.

[quote=“jammycakes, post:194, topic:40301”]
to believe in the creation of evidence for a false history. Believing in the Resurrection does not.
[/quote] They only allow 3 consecutive posts, so I am adding this one here instead of in a separate post.

Not the creation of evidence, but the interpretation of evidence. The flood was under God’s control, but that does not mean that the flood was not under the influence of natural laws, also created by God. God used natural means, perhaps miraculously originated, to destroy the earth. He could have simply spoken, and people would have vanished… but he chose to use natural means. Water, drowning, springs of the deep, rain, an ark that took a hundred years to build. All natural things. But at the same time, also somewhat miraculous. Like an earthquake or a volcano or a hurricane or a tidal wave.

Believing in the resurrection, is believing in a miracle, but natural means were used by God, under the power of the holy Spirit, to spread the gospel. Witnessing by people, witness of the martyrs, writing of the gospels, prayer, singing songs, explaining Jesus. Jesus was crucified in natural way, and died in a natural way, which was all part of the power of the resurrection, and part of man’s redemption. God created the universe, and the laws within it. And He planned the Messiah’s appearance and sacrifice from the beginning. All of it to teach us things, and to have a relationship with him.

There is no false history. There is a misinterpretation of the evidence.

(Chris) #199

Nothing like putting the meaning ‘whale’ into a name to push the idea that it was some sort of whale ancestor. Never mind that almost no one looking at such a creature would ever call it a whale.

Where are the normal diagnostic criteria for cetaceans, such as powerful swimming tail, preferably with horizontal flukes, a blow hole, obligate aquatic body design, and middle and inner ears in a cavity outside the skull not inside it as with terrestrial mammals? And it had a well-developed shoulder and hip girdle attached to its spinal column, with well-developed legs. Its feet even had hooves, so it could walk on land.

(James McKay) #200

No John, it doesn’t work like that. You can’t just cry “interpretation” as if it were some kind of magic shibboleth that lets you argue your way out of anything. Interpretations of evidence have to obey the rules of mathematics and measurement.

Old-earth, local Flood interpretations obey the rules. Young-earth, global Flood interpretations do not.


Abiogenesis is not evolution, so that’s a completely different subject. Evolution is going on all the time. There is far more evidence for evolutionary processes and its historical progress than there is for a global flood. A global flood would produce chaos not shown in the fossil record.

I guess I don’t see much point in speculating about what might be “possible” in a global flood when there isn’t evidence for one. It’s fine to chalk it up to supernatural intervention, but at that point it’s outside the realm of science and pretty much functions however it needs to depending on what kind of evidence it’s being used to explain.


But why did all of the marine dinosaurs die first? Couldn’t they have survived just as well as the whales? Why do animals that are dying naturally all manage to die in exactly the same order everywhere around the world where their fossils are found?

(Matthew Pevarnik) #203

Nice. Let’s explain away all intermediate forms despite their correct temporal sequence and intermediate characteristics. Also, these guys could swim and swam fairly long distances which is part of the signifance that anti-science writers downplay.