Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Some may be able too. Most can't. You cannot quickly lay down the deposits that become chalk for example. Or even shale.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evolution is the only theologically plausible answer
- Thread starter Estro Felino
- Start date
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You do not have a link for your quotemine. That makes it worthless. Remember, the Bible says:
"There is no God."
"There is no God."
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
You can if you have a flood of epic proportions.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
There is no evidence of a global flood of "epic proportions."
Astrophile
Active Member
You copied this from an Answers in Genesis article by Michael J. Oard (9th May 2007) - Are There Half a Million Years in the Sediments of Lake Van? .
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
How? The evidence tells us the opposite. Flood deposits are poorly sorted. The larger the flood the worse the sorting is. And floods do not cause critters like coccolithophores to flourish, you would need to magically increase their rate of reproduction. Floods would tend to have the opposite effect.. And you still have not dealt with varves, unless you want to admit that I disproved the Bible with my quotemine from it.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I checked out an article that they claim that supports them. They did not quote form it, they simply gave the name of the article and no link.
Meanwhile when it came to that specific quote it appears to be just a citation. I cannot find the article associated with it even in Google Scholar.
In other words, it is useless in a debate.
My comment was, "By you or other creationists? First, they don't debate. They merely disagree, and without sound argument or an understanding of the known science."
If they were critical thinkers, they wouldn't be creationists. And you forget how much of that creationist science we see on these threads daily. You've left a little yourself in this thread about what seems impossible to you.
Also, that's not a rebuttal. Actually, it's an example of what I was saying. You didn't rebut, just dissent. Where's your falsifying argument? You have none.
That requires training and discipline to do. One never wants to leave that box EVER when deciding what is true about the world. Empiricism is our tether to reality. There is no other path to knowledge about the world if one's definition of truth or knowledge is to mean more than just what one wants to believe or what one feels is right.
My comment was, "Trees are living things capable of assembling themselves. Houses need designers and builders." Once again, you show that you don't debate. You don't attempt to falsify the arguments you don't like. You just dismiss them, in this case with an ad lapidem fallacy: "The informal fallacy of dismissing an argument as untrue or absurd without explaining why."
No, that's how you believe. The scientific theories are correct. That's why they work. They accurately anticipate outcomes, and that is the evidence they are correct.
No, I didn't. I assume your point was that if I didn't do that, my beliefs are as unfounded as faith-based believers' beliefs, but that is incorrect.
Once again, just because you find yourself in that situation doesn't mean that others are as well. YOU don't have evidence for your beliefs. The empiricist does.
And how odd it is that your chief objection to science is that it is believed by faith. Your worldview is faith-based.
gnostic
The Lost One
Actually, shunyadragon knows what he talking about, certainly more than you and I, as he is a geologist.
I have only studied, only one semester in geology, for my civil engineering course, back in 1985, and that only to be identified rocks that engineers may encounter during construction, not enough to be “expert” in geology, as I never was taught stratigraphy, and certainly nothing about fossils in my curriculum.
I don’t know anything about you, but I do seriously doubt that you are expert in stratigraphy and in sedimentary rocks.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
You don't have to be in order to observe how waterways change and how sediment is laid down.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
Another silly insult. I expect better from you.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Here's another creationist argument that's ridiculously easy to shoot down.
Walk me through the process by which chalk and shale layers form in a global flood.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
See the problem? This is why it's impossible to believe in miracles and evolution at the same time. It's why I don't think Christians who support the idea have really thought it through.
If one genuine miracle happened, ever, (say a man came back from the dead.) your whole theory is blown. You want to believe that everything is a result of an inevitable natural process, fine, that's your choice and that's your religion.
"Somehow or other an extraordinary idea has arisen that the disbelievers in miracles consider them coldly and fairly, while believers in miracles accept them only in connection with some dogma. The fact is quite the other way. The believers in miracles accept them (rightly or wrongly) because they have evidence for them. The disbelievers in miracles deny them (rightly or wrongly) because they have a doctrine against them."
( Chesterton)
"when materialism leads men to complete fatalism (as it generally does), it is quite idle to pretend that it is in any sense a liberating force. It is absurd to say that you are especially advancing freedom when you only use free thought to destroy free will. The determinists come to bind, not to loose. They may well call their law the ‘chain’ of causation. It is the worst chain that ever fettered a human being."
(Chesterton)
"It is absurd for the Evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable for an admittedly unthinkable God to make everything out of nothing, and then pretend that it is more thinkable that nothing should turn itself into everything."
(Chesterton)
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
Incredibly naive thinking. The people who believed that the Earth was the center of the universe also accepted popular thought by faith in the popular thinkers of the time.
gnostic
The Lost One
There were no single “flood of epic proportions”, as described and narrated in Genesis 6 to 8, no Noah living in the 3rd millennium BCE, no Genesis until the 6th century BCE when hostages of Jews lived in Babylon.
No portions of Genesis as a work of literature exist in the Bronze Age (c 3100 - c 1050 BCE), as there were no Hebrew alphabet existing until the Iron Age.
But there are long history of writing existing in Babylonia during the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE, eg Akkadian cuneiform writing system, and before that in Sumer in 3rd millennium BCE, where the earlier Sumerian cuneiform predated Old Babylonian period.
In Sumerian poem about Gilgamesh, specifically that narrated the “Death of Bilgames” are allusions to “Ziusudra” and to the “flood”, and some surviving fragmented tablets of the “Eridu Genesis”, which narrated Ziusudra’s story.
If you don’t know Ziusudra was the original name of the hero in Mesopotamian flood myth, while Bilgames is transliteration of Gilgamesh’s name in Sumerian (Gilgames or Gilgamesh is the Akkadian and Babylonian & Assyrian transliterated spelling).
During the Old and Middle Babylonian periods of the 2nd millennium BCE, Ziusudra was replaced with Atrahasis, eg Epic of Atrahasis, and with Utnapishtim, eg Epic of Gilgamesh.
The Epic of Gilgamesh was so popular in the mid-2nd millennium BCE, during the early part of the second dynasty in Babylon, that some tablets were found as far west in the cities of -
- Amarna (a city built in Egypt during 14th centuries BCE, during the 18th dynasty reign of Atenaten),
- Hattusa (a Hittite capital in what is now located in central Turkey),
- Ugarit (ancient city in northwest Syria, now known as Ras Shamra)
- Megiddo, an ancient Canaanite city, not Tell Megiddo in Israel.
The part about constructing vessel large enough to house the hero’s family and animals existed all versions of Mesopotamian myths, as do the smell of blood sacrifices reaching the gods; the part about releasing birds to find lands, survived in the Epic of Atrahasis and Epic of Gilgamesh.
Clearly, the Genesis version was copied from the Epic of Gilgamesh, and adapted to suit Hebrew readers.
The biggest differences between the Mesopotamian versions and the Hebrew version, is that in the Eridu Genesis and the later Epic of Atrahasis, it only described a river flood, the Epic of Gilgamesh described a sea flood. Whoever wrote Genesis exaggerated even further, with water covering “the high mountains”.
Beside all that, there are geologically and archaeologically, no physical evidence of single flood destroying all life, whether it be global flood or localized flood.
Plus, the post-Flood chapter on the Table of Nations, Genesis 10, the descendants of Noah, is a piece of pseudo-history, with no basis in reality, especially in regarding to Egypt (or Mazraim) and Nimrod in Babylonia (Shinar, eg Erech or Uruk) and Assyria (eg Nineveh & Calneh).
Uruk have been been dated as back as 5000 BCE, while Babylon have only existed as early as 2300 BCE. The earliest settlement in Nineveh been dated to around 6000 BCE, while Calneh, or Kalhu was a Babylonian city built during the reign of Shalmaneser I (began in 1265 BCE).
It isn’t possible that Nimrod to build any of these cities, unless Nimrod lived for several thousands of years; so Nimrod is fictional character, just like Noah.
Last edited:
I am a Geologist with over 50 years experience. That is how by the objective verifiable evidence how the layers of sedimentary tocks of the earth form.
That is true to all the scriptures of the Bible and the scriptures of all the ancient religion scriptures . They believed by 'faith' not science how the universe, the earth and life formed. Today we have hundreds of years of science that determine how the universe, the earth and life formed.
Last edited:
You have to back up your statements with 'science,' which you have consistently failed to do. The sedimentary tocks are laid down in descrere orderly patterns based on the evidence at the time they were laid down Yes, there are thousands of feet of sedimentary tocks world wide that represent billions of years of the progressive geologic story of life.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
As long as you accept the paradigm, you will continue to see evidence in the light of what you have been taught.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
True, but I doubt if you have ever done that in a meaningful way. You do realize by now that your poor attempt at refuting varves
It sure helps though. It allows one to understand what cannot be laid down quickly and why. You are ready to believe the lies that any creationist source tells you. You wont bother to check them out and see if they are being honest to you or not.