01 Aug 15
Originally posted by sonhouseonce we reach a certain age, we do become more rigid in our thinking. you have an example of it right next to your post
Then there is Ender's Game, where kids were found to be better at commanding space ships against a common enemy. They were geniuses who were duped into conducting a real war.
02 Aug 15
Mount St. Helens: Explosive Evidence for Young Earth Creation
(Rapid Forming of Strada)
The empirical scientific evidence in support of the biblical account of creation and the flood is so vast and encompasses every area of science. The only way you could believe in macro evolution and deep time atheism, is if you want to exclude God from your thinking really really badly.
02 Aug 15
3 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsMount St Helens is often quoted to solve the "problem" of rapidly forming strata, which is not a problem for anybody at all.
[b]Mount St. Helens: Explosive Evidence for Young Earth Creation
(Rapid Forming of Strada)
The empirical scientific evidence in support of the biblical account of creation and the flood is so vast and encompasses every area of science. The only way you could believe in macro evolution and deep time atheism, is if you want to exclude God from your thinking really really badly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0f4URsDWy0[/b]
Every geologist knows that volcanic eruptions form strata, either by molten lava, or loose debri called Tuff. This happens very rapidly, in real time like hours or days, as in MSH.
However, what the YECs never mention, is that the sedimentary layer so formed does not and cannot form hard rocks in short periods, and certainly cannot be transformed to metamorphic rocks, like schists and gneisses and sills and dykes, all of which take millions of years.
And you don't have to be a genius, even a near one, to know this - merely a moderately intelligent high school student.
02 Aug 15
1 edit
Originally posted by CalJustYes I know it is not a problem for the closed minded atheists and evolutionists.
Mount St Helens is often quoted to solve the "problem" of rapidly forming strata, which is not a problem for anybody at all.
Every geologist knows that volcanic eruptions form strata, either by molten lava, or loose debri called Tuff. This happens very rapidly, in real time like hours or days, as in MSH.
However, what the YECs never mention, is that th ...[text shortened]... e a genius, even a near one, to know this - merely a moderately intelligent high school student.
After Mount St Helens every geologist should know that it does not take long times for many layers of strada to form as had been the claim of the evolutionists and was taught in many universities.
This is presented by YECs to give more credibility to the fact that a worldwide flood as reported by Genesis could have cut the Grand Canyon and laid down strada containing many dead things that fossilized because of quick burial in mud. It does not require millions of years of uniformitarianism, but can be caused by catastrophic events.
02 Aug 15
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsYou constantly refer to "closed minded atheists and evolutionists", but shun proper debate yourself. Are you prepared to seriously investigate your assertion re MSH just a little deeper? Especially seeing that it is "August-no-insults-month"!
Yes I know it is not a problem for the closed minded atheists and evolutionists. This is presented by YECs to give more credibility to the fact that a worldwide flood as reported by Genesis could have cut the Grand Canyon and laid down strada containing many dead things that fossilized because of quick burial in mud.
Nobody denies that a stream of water can cut pretty rapidly through a soft and recent deposit of sand and ash. Any kid playing on a beach will tell you that. But the "canyon" so formed will be soft, like the original sand, which is certainly not the case with the GC, which is made up of pretty hard sandstone. So I obviously agree that a rapid gully can be cut through soft mud, nobody disputes that.
However, sandstone (like the GC rock) is made up of broken, eroded particles of previous rocks, in this case the clastic sandstone comprises basalts and granites, that were previously eroded by water into fine particles, then deposited in a huge lake. The MSH "canyon" base material was the ash from the volcano. The difference between the two structures is therefore that we know the GC material must have been much, much older than the MSH material, because it had to be ground down, transported and deposited.
Secondly, it is true that there were animals trapped in the MSH deposit. These were local animals (rodents, insects, ect) that could not escape and that will, (I totally agree) one day be fossilised and maybe found by future geologists. However, the fossils found in the GC are all marine fossils found in the bottom of oceans. So they must have lived in the sea, died and been buried there, and THEN through huge geological forces uplifted several thousand feet and only AFTER that, eroded by wind, water and ice to be revealed to you and me today.
To try to submit that the GC could have been deposited by a huge flood, and then eroded rapidly to reveal the layers and the dead creatures, and all this within a few thousand years, does not tie up with three simple demonstrable facts:
1. The particles of the GC sandstone are themselves eroded particles of a much older volcanic rock that had been eroded over huge lengths of time
2. The rock was compacted by high pressure and temperature to become very hard, which could only have occurred over long periods, and was therefore not comparable in any way with the MSH structure
3. The animal remains found in the GC were all marine creatures. If these animals had died during the Flood, it still does not explain how they got to be at the top of the canyon, and not at the bottom, unless it is part of YEC doctrine that the geological upheavals to raise the seabed level so high ALSO occurred during the past few thousand years or so.
Are you prepard for a discussion on the realities of the situation, all measurable and touchable, no "beliefs" or agnostic speculation involved, just observable facts?
02 Aug 15
Originally posted by CalJustLook at what this tsunami can do and try to imagine a worlwide sunami that covered the whole earth.
You constantly refer to "closed minded atheists and evolutionists", but shun proper debate yourself. Are you prepared to seriously investigate your assertion re MSH just a little deeper? Especially seeing that it is "August-no-insults-month"!
Nobody denies that a stream of water can cut pretty rapidly through a soft and recent deposit of sand and ash. Any ...[text shortened]... measurable and touchable, no "beliefs" or agnostic speculation involved, just observable facts?
02 Aug 15
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsOK, so three questions were too much for you, I'm sorry.
Look at what this tsunami can do and try to imagine a worlwide sunami that covered the whole earth.
[youtube.]JGOb3zSc-U4[/youtube]
How about just one: Let's assume that the Grand Canyon was carved out by the Great Flood. How did the marine fossils end up on the mountains of the Grand Canyon?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29254
02 Aug 15
Originally posted by CalJustI don't think he can find a youtube clip to explain that one.
OK, so three questions were too much for you, I'm sorry.
How about just one: Let's assume that the Grand Canyon was carved out by the Great Flood. How did the marine fossils end up on the mountains of the Grand Canyon?
02 Aug 15
Originally posted by CalJust"You constantly refer to "closed minded atheists and evolutionists", but shun proper debate yourself"
You constantly refer to "closed minded atheists and evolutionists", but shun proper debate yourself. Are you prepared to seriously investigate your assertion re MSH just a little deeper? Especially seeing that it is "August-no-insults-month"!
Nobody denies that a stream of water can cut pretty rapidly through a soft and recent deposit of sand and ash. Any ...[text shortened]... measurable and touchable, no "beliefs" or agnostic speculation involved, just observable facts?
does this still surprise you?
02 Aug 15
1 edit
Originally posted by CalJustWe creationists speculate that the ocean waters that flooded over the earth swept back and forth like a tsunami carring billions of sea creatures, which were then buried in the sediments these ocean waters deposited. This is how billions of dead marine creatures were buried in rock layers high above sea level all over the earth.
OK, so three questions were too much for you, I'm sorry.
How about just one: Let's assume that the Grand Canyon was carved out by the Great Flood. How did the marine fossils end up on the mountains of the Grand Canyon?
The topmost layer in the sequence, the Kaibab Limestone, exposed at the rim of the canyon must have been deposited beneath ocean waters loaded with lime sediment that swept over northern Arizona and beyond.
Other rock layers, such as the Redwall Limestone, exposed in Grand Canyon also contain large numbers of marine fossils. Obviously, these marine creatures were catastrophically destroyed and buried in this lime sediment.
Nautiloids - Evidence for a Catastrophic Occurrence