YEC explanations

[Mallon]

It's one thing to believe the earth is 6,000 years old. It's quite another to believe that such a stance is supported by science. For those who believe the latter, I've always wondered about their explanations of:

1) The layered lycopod forests near Joggins, Nova Scotia, in which the 'trees' are rooted in ancient paleosols. How did these forests grow on top of one another during the Flood?

2) Angular unconformities - how did they form during the Flood?

3) Trace fossils - if the flood was 'catastrophic', how did they come to be? Especially trace fossils left by terrestrial animals.

I've never heard YEC responses to these lines of evidence before. Thought I might give them a shot, here, as I am very interested.

 

[philadiddle]

What are angular unconformities?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

What are angular unconformities?

i am not trained in geology, so:
using google, run 1. ANGULAR UNCONFORMITIES


find:
http://gpc.edu/~pgore/geology/historical_lab/relativedating.htm
a basic freshmen level geology webpage

where it defines:

There are four basic types of unconformities:

1. ANGULAR UNCONFORMITIES

Angular unconformities are characterized by an erosional surface which truncates folded or dipping (tilted) strata. Overlying strata are deposited basically parallel with the erosion surface. The rocks above and below the unconformity are at an angle to one another.

and you ask, is this what you had in mind?

google is your friend, do you realize how much better things are now then just 25 years ago? i don't have to live at the library anymore.

...

 

[Mallon]

Thanks for the figures, rmwilliamsll. That's exactly what I mean. How does a single global flooding event deposit strata as illustrated in those figures? I have yet to hear this explained from a creationist POV. Or better yet: how do they explain karst deposits (erosional dissolution surfaces of rock)?

I sure hope this thread doesn't sink before getting a response. These are some pretty serious lines of evidence to be contended with.

 

[1denomination]

maybe the evidence is allegorical................Its just a matter of interpretation.............

 

[Mallon]

maybe the evidence is allegorical................Its just a matter of interpretation.............

Are you suggesting that the lines of evidence I presented above are seen differently by different people?
C'mon, folks. No cop-outs.

 

[Dannager]

maybe the evidence is allegorical................Its just a matter of interpretation.............

I'm pretty sure the particulars of the interpretation was exactly what Mallon was asking for. But if you don't feel like contributing, that's fine too.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The bible hints strongly that:

The earth was originally created for the angels, perhaps as long ago as science calculates its age.

They 'kept not' (maintained) their estate, instead rebelled with Lucifer.

They were cast (back) to earth. This caused massive destruction, upheaval, etc.

They were consigned to inhabit creatures especially made by God to reflect their wicked nature. This continued for perhaps millions of years until God began his plan of restoration.

During this time the earth continued to suffer flooding, earthquakes, upheavals, etc. from the destructive forces set in motion by the casting down. Generations of these creatures died in the turmoil and were buried in the sediments.

The first stage of the restoration was to destroy that ancient world, by a final worldwide flood.

Genesis 1:2 describes the earth in that flooded condition.

 

[Mallon]

Thanks for the reply, oldwiseguy. But yours is obviously not a YECist interpretation as I asked for; it is a Gap Theorist interpretation.
Interesting, nonetheless.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Thanks for the reply, oldwiseguy. But yours is obviously not a YECist interpretation as I asked for; it is a Gap Theorist interpretation.
Interesting, nonetheless.

Sorry 'bout that, couldn't resist.

 

[shernren]

Notice the intense silence. Looks like a year here hasn't changed anything.

 

[Mallon]

I've noticed. The silence speaks volumes.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Can we officially say that this deafening silence puts an end to the lie that the YEC just interpret the same evidence differently?

 

[1denomination]

Can we officially say that this deafening silence puts an end to the lie that the YEC just interpret the same evidence differently?

Well, since I belive this statement in in reference to what I said, please allow me to infrom you that "IT WAS A JOKE". So please come off of it. I dont post on these boards very often and when I do its usually its a joke. The reason I dont post is because I know that intellectually I have very little to offer, I generally understand very little of the things you people discuss, I just like to see how my brothers and sisters are interacting with eachother. That being said I find it EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE. That you insinuate that I am a liar. You do not know me and if you continue to treat me like that I will conclude that you dont know my father who sent me nor my brother who saved me.

 

[shernren]

Alright, the word "lie" might have been a bit offensive (although I see "the lie of evolution" being tossed around freely - pot, meet kettle?) but the comments on silence had very little to do with you. They have to do with the fact that there has been little to no coherent scientific YEC response here to the questions Mallon posed. And the reason why I said that things haven't changed in a year is because about a year ago this exact same turn of circumstances was what initially convinced me to be a TE.

 

[Dannager]

Well, since I belive this statement in in reference to what I said, please allow me to infrom you that "IT WAS A JOKE". So please come off of it. I dont post on these boards very often and when I do its usually its a joke. The reason I dont post is because I know that intellectually I have very little to offer, I generally understand very little of the things you people discuss, I just like to see how my brothers and sisters are interacting with eachother. That being said I find it EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE. That you insinuate that I am a liar. You do not know me and if you continue to treat me like that I will conclude that you dont know my father who sent me nor my brother who saved me.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that wasn't in reference to you.

 

[RichardT]

I wish I knew how to answer this but I have no idea...

 

[Mallon]

I wish I knew how to answer this but I have no idea...

Thanks for being honest.

Any other takers? The lack of answers to my questions really doesn't surprise me. I hope this goes to show that Young Earth Creationism really isn't a position supported by science -- it's a position of faith (which is fine; just don't pretend it's science).

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Well, since I belive this statement in in reference to what I said, please allow me to infrom you that "IT WAS A JOKE". So please come off of it. I dont post on these boards very often and when I do its usually its a joke. The reason I dont post is because I know that intellectually I have very little to offer, I generally understand very little of the things you people discuss, I just like to see how my brothers and sisters are interacting with eachother. That being said I find it EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE. That you insinuate that I am a liar. You do not know me and if you continue to treat me like that I will conclude that you dont know my father who sent me nor my brother who saved me.

I am sorry to offend you, I didn’t even read your post so I had no idea that someone actually said that line here. I ignored most of the short posts because I knew that the questions could not be answered in just a few lines.

However I will stand by my statement, when creationist organizations say that they are dealing with all evidence and coming to a different conclusion, they are lying. They cause their followers that have not done the research for themselves to unknowingly repeat that lie. AiG and ICR both have published documents that state the fact that they will ignore any evidence that does not support their conclusions.

I did my research and found this to be true and it ripped my heart out. I could not believe that a Christian leader would lie to me like that. I almost lost my faith in Christ because of their lies.

Do not take my disgust for these groups personally, I bear no hard feelings toward people taken in by these groups. I do not blame those who unkowingly repeat lies fed to them, they are not the real problem.

 

[ascribe2thelord]

It's one thing to believe the earth is 6,000 years old. It's quite another to believe that such a stance is supported by science. For those who believe the latter, I've always wondered about their explanations of:

1) The layered lycopod forests near Joggins, Nova Scotia, in which the 'trees' are rooted in ancient paleosols. How did these forests grow on top of one another during the Flood?

2) Angular unconformities - how did they form during the Flood?

3) Trace fossils - if the flood was 'catastrophic', how did they come to be? Especially trace fossils left by terrestrial animals.

I've never heard YEC responses to these lines of evidence before. Thought I might give them a shot, here, as I am very interested.

There were likely earthquakes and volcanism as well during the flood. They may have actually been the cause of it to start with. A lot of the earth's interior is still made of water.