If the Genesis Flood, as described in Genesis 7 and 8, really occurred, what evidence would we expect to find? After noting in Genesis 7 that all the high hills and the mountains were covered by water and that all air-breathing life on the land was swept away and perished, it should be obvious what evidence we would expect to find.
Wouldn’t we expect to find rock layers all over the earth filled with billions of dead animals and plants that were buried rapidly and fossilized in sand, mud, and lime? Of course, and that’s exactly what we find. Furthermore, even though the catastrophic geologic activity of the Flood would have waned in the immediate post-Flood period, ongoing mini-catastrophes would still have produced localized fossil deposits.
Countless billions of plant and animal fossils are found in extensive “graveyards” where they had to be buried rapidly on a massive scale. Often the fine details of the creatures are exquisitely preserved.
For example, billions of straight-shelled, chambered nautiloids are found fossilized with other marine creatures in a 7 foot (2 m) thick layer within the Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon. This fossil graveyard stretches for 180 miles (290 km) across northern Arizona and into southern Nevada, covering an area of at least 10,500 square miles (30,000 km2). These squid-like fossils are all different sizes, from small, young nautiloids to their bigger, older relatives.
To form such a vast fossil graveyard required 24 cubic miles (100 km3) of lime sand and silt, flowing in a thick, soup-like slurry at more than 16 feet (5 m) per second (more than 11 mph [18 km/h]) to catastrophically overwhelm and bury this huge, living population of nautiloids.
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 10 Mar 2008 16:25
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 1408
Join Date: Jul 2007
where's Pak when you need him? __________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted: 10 Mar 2008 16:32
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
If I keep posting stuff like this, one of our liberal atheistic friends will stop by. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 03 Jun 2008 17:51
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Out of boredom, I did indeed stop by just to see what ws up here.
I can't imagine why vast amounts of water would create vast layers of rock. Can't help ya there-sorry.
Quote: If I keep posting stuff like this, one of our liberal atheistic friends will stop by.
Maybe so, but we were limited in quantity in the first place. Don't expect a big showing. If more 'liberal atheists' show up they'll probably leave just as quick, as the arguing gets dull and repetitive.
You and preacher man can go back to the occasional agreeing with each other you have been doing since I left.
See ya on the supe board Tim. Be well Preacherman. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 03 Jun 2008 21:18
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
__________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 05 Jun 2008 04:18
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 1408
Join Date: Jul 2007
Pak, I had a feeling you were still reading.. we actually need more people like you and Danny on the site. __________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted: 05 Jun 2008 18:20
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 1408
Join Date: Jul 2007
From Thomas Heinze
Quote: "Evolution is science, so the schools must teach it. Creationism and Intelligent Design (ID) are religion, so they must not be taught!" We have been hearing this kind of rubbish a lot more since President Bush said he thinks intelligent design should be taught in public schools in addition to evolution so the students can understand what the debate is all about.
Mark Bergin in World Magazine lists some of the criticisms: "The Philadelphia Daily News said widespread acceptance of ID could undermine the scientific method. The Washington Post suggested that the president was 'indulging quackery' for political gain. The Los Angeles Times called the comments 'one more example of the extreme right's attempt to create a Taliban-like society." (Mark Bergin, Mad scientists, World Magazine, 8/05,) Evolutionists, who say that Bush wants religion and what they want is science, use a special definition of science that eliminates creation: "Science is the search for natural solutions." Creation by an intelligent Designer is a supernatural rather than a natural solution. By this contrived definition, to be "scientific," you have to be an atheist.
Consider this: The heads of some of America's most famous presidents have been carved from solid rock at Mount Rushmore. If a visiting evolutionist science professor applied the "search for natural solutions definition to these heads, he would have to conclude that they were formed by something natural like weathering and erosion rather than by intelligent design. If he suggested this, he would be laughed out of the classroom.
But he does not hesitate to teach his students that the heads of the real presidents who inspired the statues evolved by accident through the blind forces of nature. Is he right when he claims that the real heads of real presidents had no designer?
__________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted: 05 Jun 2008 18:44
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
You would think scientists would be more interested in knowing the truth vs something that fits neatly into their own atheistic world view. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 23 Jun 2008 20:53
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
]
Quote: we actually need more people like you and Danny on the site.
Apparently.
Quote: President Bush said he thinks intelligent design should be taught in public schools in addition to evolution so the students can understand what the debate is all about.
Leave faith based pursuits in church and to the parents that want their children taught such foolishness and away from other people's children. Debate over. As far as Bush's opinion on anything is concerned, I wouldn't follow him across the street at this point.
Quote: The Philadelphia Daily News said widespread acceptance of ID could undermine the scientific method
More foolishness. Opinion doesn't alter fact. Proponents of ID would love for it to undermine scientific method almost as much as they'd like it to conform to scientific method. Thankfully, neither is in danger of really happening except in the imaginations of so called reporters such as this one you've quoted.
Quote: By this contrived definition, to be "scientific," you have to be an atheist.
This guy is a real prize. To be scientific is to use scientific means in various pursuits and has nothing to do with their 'spirituality' or lack thereof. The story of creation presented in Genesis has absolutely no scientific value to it-regardless of the amounts of spin and BS anyone tries to heap on in a desperate attempt to conform/transform reality to their beliefs.
Quote: If a visiting evolutionist science professor applied the "search for natural solutions definition to these heads,
He would need his head examined for not knowing beforehand that it is a carving and not a natural occurance.
Quote: evolved by accident through the blind forces of nature
Absolutely nothing about evolution involves accidents. Perhaps Mr Heinze should find out what evolution is before deciding it's wrong. Another critic who doesn't watch or read what they criticize-how disaappointing...
Quote: Is he right when he claims that the real heads of real presidents had no designer?
To the best of our knowledge....yes.
Quote: You would think scientists would be more interested in knowing the truth
I would. I do and so do they.
Quote: something that fits neatly into their own atheistic world view.
I like how anyone who doesn't fall in with the ID crowd is now an atheist as it means our numbers just jumped like all get out. Thanks for the membership drive Timmy. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 24 Jun 2008 04:53
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
As it turns out, we have an already impressive membership....including the dearly departed Christopher Reeve....believe it or not.
__________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 24 Jun 2008 16:06
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote: Leave faith based pursuits in church
Intelligent design may be pursued in part due to religious faith but it makes sense to look for a designer much more so than to assume everything is created by an impossible cosmic coincidence.
Quote: Absolutely nothing about evolution involves accidents.
If there isn't a designer then how could it be anything else but an accident? Some intelligent force would have to be involved for any occurrence to be planned. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 24 Jun 2008 17:06
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote: Intelligent design may be pursued in part due to religious faith
ID is ENTIRELY religious in nature and belongs in a faith based institution or that faith based home, not in secular schools.
Quote: If there isn't a designer then how could it be anything else but an accident? Some intelligent force would have to be involved for any occurrence to be planned.
So when you say you might have watched that evolution primer the answer you meant to say was no instead of you might have. Watch them for your answer. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 24 Jun 2008 17:10
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote: ID is ENTIRELY religious in nature and belongs in a faith based institution or that faith based home, not in secular schools
So you are telling me that anytime someone says an intelligence may have been involved in the creation of the universe it must be religious by nature automatically? __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 24 Jun 2008 17:15
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Anytime someone uses the supernatural as an explaination for something I immediately disqualify it as science until it can be proven through scientific method. ID is a poor attempt at trying to put that particular piece of fiction through scientific method and when that fails trying to alter science to comply with the fiction-creationism with a public relations spin to it. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 26 Jun 2008 14:39
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 1408
Join Date: Jul 2007
There is a difference between forming your theory based on evidence and interpreting evidence in light of your theory. The reality is that when evolutionist find anything that indicates a crack in their bleesed theory, they either ignore it, or circle the wagons and denounce those silly creationists. After all, anyone who doesn't toe the party line can't be a 'real scientist', if they were somehow the authority on who can and cannot be a scientist. __________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted: 26 Jun 2008 16:39
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote: Anytime someone uses the supernatural as an explaination for something I immediately disqualify it as science
I'd still like to know where those supernatural gases came from that created that big bang. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 27 Jun 2008 01:54
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote: The reality is that when evolutionist find anything that indicates a crack in their bleesed theory
Evolutionists are not a group-scientists accept the theory by Darwin as the best possible truth we have available in accordance with available data, technique and tools.
Scientists are always looking for a better explaination to nature than evolution, for their own personal gain-should someone be able to discount Darwin's findings they would be the wealthiest scientist ever.
ID/creationism provides absolutely no cracks in evolution theory.
If new evidence shows up, it becomes the duty of the scientific community to discover the best truth they can on it.
Quote: I'd still like to know where those supernatural gases came from that created that big bang.
Gases are not supernatural and open a scince book or find a video explaining the big bang.
------------------------------------------------
I'm working on being as rational and thoughtful in my responses and not resorting to typical net behavior like using ad hominems and avoiding the topics. How am I doing? __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 27 Jun 2008 13:10
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 1408
Join Date: Jul 2007
Pak, I am, for one, proud of your responses , no matter how much I may disagree with them.
Quote: If new evidence shows up, it becomes the duty of the scientific community to discover the best truth they can on it.
There is a trend in the scientific community to ignore evidence that doesn't fit into a pre-conceived theory. I'm probably not being fair by saying it's a science thing, I actually think it's a human nature thing. And this is not just limited to the creation/evolution debate (notice I didn't say ID/evolution, I agree with you it's a bit of a cop out)the world is full of scientists who have problems getting funding or publication or even peer review not because of flaky work, but because their theories don't match the majority view. I'm talking about fields of research ranging from alternative theories to the big bang to studies on inconsistencies in radioactivce particle half-lives.
I personally know particle physicists who are blacklisted because they are creationists, although their creationists views aren't mentioned at all in their papers. I'll agree that it's hars to prove why they aren't being published, but I have seen them attach other 9non-creationist)scientists' names to their papers (as co-authors and contributors) and seen the reaction change nthe community when it comes to peer review and things like that.
See, human beings on both sides of the fence are perfectly capable of having intellectual blindspots and from my perspective, what I see happen in the debate is some thing like this...
EVOLUTIONIST: There's no proof for the earth being young
CREATIONIST: What about this proof? And this? And this? Or this item?
EVOLUTIONIST: Those don't count. Your evidence is tainted by your religion, and besides, I've decided you're not even a real scientist.
CREATIONIST: But I went to the same schools you did! And you didn't even look at the evidence I was trying to show you.
EVOLUTIONIST: Bah.
OK, that's an oversimplification, but you get the point. __________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted: 27 Jun 2008 15:06
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote: There is a trend in the scientific community to ignore evidence that doesn't fit into a pre-conceived theory
I would actually say that this was a greater trend in the creationist camp.
It can't be denied that people in power(meaning those who control distribution of money mainly) will automatically jump to the offensive when they hear something that doesn't automatically jibe with what they already 'know' and go so far as to find someone to back who's something more of a conformist (pardon this) 'kiss-ass'.
New ideas in the scientific realm absolutely demand scrutiny, especially when refuting something long held as 'all-inclusive TRUTH'. It's the power broker who decides their own longevity in that position if they base their judgements on the scientist over the science itself. Imagine if people ignored Einstein's theory of relativity just because he dressed, spoke or smelled funny as unfortunately most people are seemingly hardwired to do. It's the power broker who looks past what everyone else is focusing on(Einy's oddness) and what he should be looking at (Einy's theory) that solidifies his own standing.
I have to paraphrase as I don't recall the actual thing you said Preach, but I believe you told me to argue with the argument and not the arguer. Scientists and evangelicals should be doing the same and the smart, self-interested and forward thinking ones will be. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 27 Jun 2008 16:02
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Which leaves us with the question. Is there intelligence in the design of the universe or can anything of order come from disorder or chaos?
Aren't humans much more complicated than the best computers out there today? Yet you would never believe it if someone said a computer evolved from a single test tube.
Sounds like a good comic book story, but nobody would believe it. Gee, maybe that's how the transformers came to be. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 27 Jun 2008 16:59
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Not even worth a response Tim. Sorry. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 27 Jun 2008 21:52
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
I know I'm good but come one surely you can do better than that. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 19:27
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 1408
Join Date: Jul 2007
Tim,I have to admit that although I am on your side on this issue, your defenses of your position have a tendency to resort to 1980's TV shows and 'what would Andy and Barney do?' It's a very curious way of trying to build your case. __________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 19:31
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 1408
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote: I would actually say that this was a greater trend in the creationist camp.
You absolutely have a good point. I will very rarely point to other Christians to bolster my point. I would never throw up a list of 'great people' who also happen to agree with me because frankly, in the creationist camp there as an many flakes as you could ever hope to find. I'm probably one of the flakiest. But in the same way that a goofball doing math doesn't make the laws of mathematics goofy by association, neither does creation. It's true simply because it is, not because some really smart people figured it out. __________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted: 29 Jun 2008 21:22
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote: It's true simply because it is
This is where someone says 'is not' and the other guy says 'is too' and they go back and forth....
Truth relies on a burden of proof, regardless of the source. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 30 Jun 2008 16:51
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote: Truth relies on a burden of proof, regardless of the source.
Sounds great. Now where's the proof an explosion can occur at of nothing at all? Where in nature does an explosion create vs destroy? __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 30 Jun 2008 17:22
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote: Where in nature does an explosion create vs destroy
If I thought you wanted some sort of real answer to this I'd say study up on the 'big bang theory'. I know you won't do this and I'm even fairly sure you didn't want any sort of answer at all and this is just some attempt at outsmarting science somehow.
I am not a scientist, just a cab driver and in my best estimation an explosion has never created something instead of destroying it. I believe you're being misled as to what the big bang was and I guess I have to revert back to telling you to study up on the big bang theory anyways which you probably won't do.
I wanted to say 'no response' but couldn't give you the idea that this was for lack of an answer.
In a nutshell:
For any question regarding science and it's many branches(all subjects really-but science is the prevalent one here); When you hear something scientific that is beyond your grasp or understanding, find some sort of explaination of that science (in layman terms) by someone qualified to explain it and compare it to what someone who opposes it is qualifying it as and why they are against it. Then use your own ability to think critically, for yourself, before deciding a side is 'right' or 'wrong'.
Whoever has informed you that the big bang was an explosion that put things in order, essentially shoveled shit in your ear. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 30 Jun 2008 21:35
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Now pak if you really believe in the big bang theory I'd assume you would have at least some sort of understanding of it to defend it. After all that's what we do I stand up for my side and you yours. You can't expect me to do your research. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 30 Jun 2008 23:35
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
This far in, I can't expect you to do any research unless it's on the 3 stooges or Chuck Norris. If you want to know the particulars of something, you should be doing the research yourself for your own knowledge, if you really want to know. __________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 01 Jul 2008 15:31
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
I know what I believe and why I believe it. I've done a lot of research on creationism, as well as being indoctrinated on evolution every time I watch any scientific documentary on TV these days. If it's got dinosaurs or planets evolution will get mentioned in there somewhere.
As far as the millions of years go. The earth was created with a sense of age. That I know as Adam and Eve weren't created as babies either.
I do believe a lot of the dating methods evolutionist use are based on the idea that the earth is older than it is. Remember how we talked about the time they misread the age of rocks newly formed after Mt. St. Helens?
The Bible does give a basic idea on how old the Earth is by it's genealogy. The main point is from the Bible that dino and Fred lived here the exact same time. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
