Carboniferous coal measures contain no flowering plants or grasses

[Nitron]

And when I viewed the slide show it was set up like a children's book.

Jesus is getting MARRIED!

(dad, you're the author of lovecreates and hedidit, right?)

 

[dad]

I bet. What, did you wander into the natural history museum and see them behind some glass?

Did you walk into the rock store and someone showed you a fossil?
You wouldn't know a brachiopod from bryozoan.

Now now. Tut tut.

WHICH ones do you see?

Any ones I look at, and you?

Because you don't know what a systematic paleontology is, perhaps?

POology aside, what about the actual record if anything do you think precludes a migration from Eden? I understand you like to try to sound intelligent, and blow up your own balloon, and all, but it is time to focus.

 

[dad]

Jesus is getting MARRIED!

Of course He is getting married. Sometimes seemingly simple truths can be deep as deep can be.

 

[dad]

I don't know, maybe by looking it up.
From here
[/color]
Hey, look at that! Still no Carbon!

No diamonds came up in kimberlites?
" Kimberlite occurs in the Earth's crust in vertical structures known as kimberlite pipes. Kimberlite pipes are the most important source of mined diamonds today. The general consensus reached on kimberlites is that they are formed deep within the mantle, at between 150 and 450 kilometres depth, from anomalously enriched exotic mantle compositions, and are erupted rapidly and violently, often with considerable carbon dioxide and other volatile components. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberlite

Heck you have no real idea of what is actually down there.

So, then you admit that without any radiometric decay it would be impossible for one element to change to the next.

Now, yes. But Adam, if you recall was created a long time ago.

Actually, dead is the issue as we're discussing radiometric dating and nothing living can be dated.

But dead still doesn't matter, all that matters is that dead or alive, it be in this universe.

Scripture?

God had to set a guard over the tree of life, lest man eat it after the fall, and live forever. That means we had to be in the eternal state, cause we can't live forever in this one, and even our sun can't.

Ge 3:22 -And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Adam, after he sinned, still lived over nine centuries! That was in the fallen state, where God said he would die, if he ate the fruit. If he did not eat, therefore, he would not die.
A Saviour was promised right there after the fall, and they started sacrificing lambs as a picture of that promise. The Saviour came, and we again have everlasting life! That's what it's all about.

I never said it was hot air, I just stated that we humans have been able to bring the dead back to life.

Well, we do a lot of things God does, that's OK. We just don't do them as well! We fly in the sky, but we have nothing like the great UFO wheels of God mentioned in Ezekiel.

I did, way back when I informed you of background radiation. Which, naturally, you just waved away. And when I tried to explain it to you, you just ignored the explanation.

Well, I think most know about that. No need to explain it. It represents a change in the universe.

It's well known because it's not detected? Do you also believe in pixies? They are well known. Just look at the beliefs of ancient society, but they are out of the bounds of science so they must be true. Scientists are just lying when they say that they don't exist.
Provide evidence. At this point I'm willing to deal with scripture.

OK, and what point would you like evidence for, exactly? The migration?

Hey! You are almost supporting your position. Too bad when I tried to open the PDF file it crashed. And when I viewed the slide show it was set up like a children's book. It cited no studies nor scripture. In short, your source fails.

Really?? Hold on, I'm going to download it. (runs off to download http://geocities.com/lovecreates/split.zip) Funny it worked fine for me!! It must be your computer.

The slide show was about heaven, and not meant to be related to the past universe state. In short, there is a good bible case there.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Really?? Hold on, I'm going to download it. (runs off to download http://geocities.com/lovecreates/split.zip) Funny it worked fine for me!! It must be your computer.

Agreed. The .pdf downloaded fine for me (or maybe you linked him to it via a different means?).

I'm not such if this is your work or not, dad, but I'm not impressed. Incorrect grammar, misuse of scientific terminology, and the whole thing rests upon a literal interpretation of the Bible (for instance, the bit about light on page 3 assumes that Re 21:23 "And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it," literally means that light itself will change after this 'merge').

But even if this is all an accurate depiction of the future as described by the Bible, it isn't exactly a probable series of events. Personally, I find Pastafarianism to be more probable (pirates prevent global warming, for instance).

The slide show was about heaven, and not meant to be related to the past universe state. In short, there is a good bible case there.

Too bad there's not a good case for the Bible.

 

[Vene]

No diamonds came up in kimberlites?
" Kimberlite occurs in the Earth's crust in vertical structures known as kimberlite pipes. Kimberlite pipes are the most important source of mined diamonds today. The general consensus reached on kimberlites is that they are formed deep within the mantle, at between 150 and 450 kilometres depth, from anomalously enriched exotic mantle compositions, and are erupted rapidly and violently, often with considerable carbon dioxide and other volatile components. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberlite

Heck you have no real idea of what is actually down there.

That is probably the most plausible rock you found for us. Of course, this is the rock in it's present state and there's no way to know for sure that it was exactly the same 6000 years ago. Right?

Now, yes. But Adam, if you recall was created a long time ago.

Only in your fairy tale where the universe is 6000 years old. I point you again to the background radiation, which was predicted as a result of uniformitarianism and of a universe that is almost 14 billion years old.

But dead still doesn't matter, all that matters is that dead or alive, it be in this universe.

I never said it wasn't in this universe.

God had to set a guard over the tree of life, lest man eat it after the fall, and live forever. That means we had to be in the eternal state, cause we can't live forever in this one, and even our sun can't.

Ge 3:22 -And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Adam, after he sinned, still lived over nine centuries! That was in the fallen state, where God said he would die, if he ate the fruit. If he did not eat, therefore, he would not die.
A Saviour was promised right there after the fall, and they started sacrificing lambs as a picture of that promise. The Saviour came, and we again have everlasting life! That's what it's all about.

Then I need evidence of the afterlife to confirm this. Because in no way do people live forever physically.

Well, we do a lot of things God does, that's OK. We just don't do them as well! We fly in the sky, but we have nothing like the great UFO wheels of God mentioned in Ezekiel.

And flight is not special either. I'm just pointing out that acts that would have been considered miraculous really aren't.

Well, I think most know about that. No need to explain it. It represents a change in the universe.

It represents a steady expansion over ~14 billion years. That was how it was predicted and it matches quite well to the predicted values.

OK, and what point would you like evidence for, exactly? The migration?

I would like evidence for every point that you make. I would like evidence of a flood layer. I would like evidence that all organisms were created at the same time. Or, if you're one of those that think there was no dead until the fall, I would like to see fossils of organisms starting at the same point in time where there are, let's say, trilobites (a very common fossil from the Cambrian period) and any mammal in the same strata. I would like to see you propose a mechanism that would explain why radiometric dating says old earth, but how the rates have changed over time. (not started to decay after the fall or flood, at a constant rate scientists would then find evidence of a young earth). I would like to see evidence that the spiritual existed in all chemicals. Or even in some. I would like to know why Carboniferous coal has not flowering plant fossils in it.

Really?? Hold on, I'm going to download it. (runs off to download http://geocities.com/lovecreates/split.zip) Funny it worked fine for me!! It must be your computer.

It could be my computer. They don't always work as they should. I'll let Wiccan_Child handle that.

The slide show was about heaven, and not meant to be related to the past universe state. In short, there is a good bible case there.

Really? It looked like childish, oversimplified drivel to me. But that is still irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Nitron]

The slideshow reminds me of mormonism.

 

[Naraoia]

Now now. Tut tut.

I love these... substantial answers of dad's. I also notice he doesn't deny any of thaumaturgy's allegations... perhaps thaumaturgy's just hit a few nails hard on the head?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Of course He is getting married. Sometimes seemingly simple truths can be deep as deep can be.

So he is marrying Marilyn Monroe or do you still expect to spend eternity boinking her and other famous beauties as you claimed on a previous thread?

I thought the city was supposed to be transparent gold. It didn't look transparent to me.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

The slideshow reminds me of mormonism.

Leave out the second "m" and you've got it nailed.

 

[Nitron]

I love these... substantial answers of dad's. I also notice he doesn't deny any of thaumaturgy's allegations... perhaps thaumaturgy's just hit a few nails hard on the head?

I'm still certain Dad's a comedian.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I'm still certain Dad's a comedian.

He definitely provides comic relief for the board but I am not so sure he intends to. For his first few thousand posts I really thought he might be an "evolutionist" making up the most absurd version of YEC he could conceive of and doing a great job of making YEC look really ridiculous. He is still doing that but after more than 11,000 posts on this board and lots of posts on other boards I have come to think that he really believes his bizarre delusions about a "different past". I have never heard of a troll working that hard before.

 

[Naraoia]

I'm still certain Dad's a comedian.

If he is, he's doing a very good job. I can't keep a straight face while reading his posts.

On the other hand, if that's what he believes... sad.

 

[thaumaturgy]

I love these... substantial answers of dad's. I also notice he doesn't deny any of thaumaturgy's allegations... perhaps thaumaturgy's just hit a few nails hard on the head?

Dad is doing what a "true believer" needs to do. Note how he demands others to "focus" and "make a point" in the threads. Obviously you and I and every one of the scientists like Frumious and Fish and just everyone on here has posted, in our years on here, a ton of scientific information in direct response to Dad. But when the science gets too hot, Dad retreats to his "unknowable unknown" and hides behind the great wall of ignorance.

The holy of holies in any of these anti-science debates is the great altar of ignorance, hidden behind the veil of confusion.

I am fascinated that Dad often will start out a thread, himself, in which he posts a link to a science story. Of course he immediately goes off the rails and tries to forcefit it into his own strange theories, but he's starting off down the right path of referencing science.

But when people bring science to bear from a solid background, suddenly Dad is no longer interested in what the scientists say or know. Because Dad knows that science can't "know" anything if unobserved.

It is a strange game and Dad is not the only one playing it. It betrays a deep-seated belief among creationists and "true believers" that they know science has inherent value, and they'd like you believe they have science on their side. Until it's shown they aren't familiar enough with the field, then that science suddenly becomes "strangely unnecessary" or "extraneous".

I'll be the first to admit that not everyone needs to be or should be a scientist. Just like I'm sure theres' something that Dad does that I couldn't do in real life (at least statistically speaking that is likely). But what torques me is that he (and others) come on here pontificating against science and can't substantively defend their points when real scientists come back and push back.

But, again, we all kind of know the truth behind it. All you need do is read their posts to see both their desperation to align science with their beliefs and their hopes that their use of randomly strewn scientific and technical terms will lend credence to their weak grasp of the science.

I'll also be honest enough to admit that I do that same thing too. I've been in situations where I'm new to a field of study and I'll try to expand out into it and put my foot firmly in my mouth. Every scientist on this board has had it happen to them.

But most of us learn that when that happens we walk back in shame, sit on the sidelines and watch and learn a bit more before we speak again.

I don't begrudge Dad or others the opportunity to express their ignorance, what I do begrudge them is the constant, willful, almost agressive active defense of their own ignorance as a virtue.

So, I'm OK that Dad has probably never actually set foot in a paleontology class. I'm OK that Dad couldn't keep up in a geochem class. We are not all supposed to be the same person. But what I wish was that Dad and others would acquiesce that sometimes someone may know more than they do.

But that would break their pride. And we are all human and pride is the tastiest of mortal sins.

 

[thaumaturgy]

He definitely provides comic relief for the board but I am not so sure he intends to. For his first few thousand posts I really thought he might be an "evolutionist" making up the most absurd version of YEC he could conceive of and doing a great job of making YEC look really ridiculous. He is still doing that but after more than 11,000 posts on this board and lots of posts on other boards I have come to think that he really believes his bizarre delusions about a "different past". I have never heard of a troll working that hard before.

I think you are correct. I think Dad has enough smarts to latch onto one of the stronger points for creationism: the unobserved past.

What is kind of entertaining (and frustrating) with Dad is that it's like he made it 3 weeks into a philosophy class, learned about David Hume and Empricism and then walked out and never came back, but now he's armed with one fraction of a philosophical stance that is very hard to debate against.

His weaknesses show up when he tries to extrapolate from that first three weeks of class. When he is called upon to delineate exactly how far back the "Difference" goes in the "Different Past" model. Because Dad realizes that if he levels an accusation against the unobserved past that it might come back around to bite his points.

So rather than taking the time for 11,000 posts to think through or learn more of the philosophy or develop a stronger game plan, he simply chooses the weaker expedient of ignoring + special pleading.

It might work in his backwoods fundamentalist pentecostal church groups, but sadly on the internet he meets people who stuck around for the whole philosophy class and who also make a living as scientists.

But I'm always amazed that Dad never seems to learn from any encounters. But fundamentalism in all its forms, even the bizarre extremes, thrives where learning is extinguished. Where thought is ossified and fossilized.

Even Dad's bizarre arabesques of hypotheses, which one would normally assume require some thought just to generate, seem to show he's taking the path of least resistance to come up with this schtick.

 

[Bombila]

Dad's retrofitted universe theology reminds me of certain neo-pseudo-pagan 'religions', where one guy makes up a lot of vaguely intellectual/spiritual sounding stuff, apponts himself leader of a new 'spiritual path', and then rambles off down the Newcult Road with a feeling of superiority and a tendency to attract gullible young things.

Sorry, dad, even with the Christian flavouring, your theories are very difficult to swallow.

 

[Nitron]

If he is, he's doing a very good job. I can't keep a straight face while reading his posts.

On the other hand, if that's what he believes... sad.

Oh, it was even crazier when I first came here.

 

[dad]

Agreed. The .pdf downloaded fine for me (or maybe you linked him to it via a different means?).

I'm not such if this is your work or not, dad, but I'm not impressed. Incorrect grammar, misuse of scientific terminology, and the whole thing rests upon a literal interpretation of the Bible (for instance, the bit about light on page 3 assumes that Re 21:23 "And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it," literally means that light itself will change after this 'merge').

But even if this is all an accurate depiction of the future as described by the Bible, it isn't exactly a probable series of events. Personally, I find Pastafarianism to be more probable (pirates prevent global warming, for instance).

Since you are not the judge of probable, that doesn't matter.

Too bad there's not a good case for the Bible.

Get out more.

 

[dad]

Dad's retrofitted universe theology reminds me of certain neo-pseudo-pagan 'religions', where one guy makes up a lot of vaguely intellectual/spiritual sounding stuff, apponts himself leader of a new 'spiritual path', and then rambles off down the Newcult Road with a feeling of superiority and a tendency to attract gullible young things.

Sorry, dad, even with the Christian flavouring, your theories are very difficult to swallow.

I know, I have difficulty with some of them myself.

 

[dad]

That is probably the most plausible rock you found for us. Of course, this is the rock in it's present state and there's no way to know for sure that it was exactly the same 6000 years ago. Right?

If a diamond was made from carbon, I see no reason to assume there was no carbon around. Do you??

Only in your fairy tale where the universe is 6000 years old. I point you again to the background radiation, which was predicted as a result of uniformitarianism and of a universe that is almost 14 billion years old.

It is predicted for that fantasy, because a universe change was involved. It therefore is also predicted in the merged universe separation as well.

I never said it wasn't in this universe.

Great, that is ahat counts if we are talking about being in a state of decay.

Then I need evidence of the afterlife to confirm this. Because in no way do people live forever physically.

If you speak of the future sun burning out, we need evidence. You have none. We do have a world of spiritual evidences, start with them.

And flight is not special either. I'm just pointing out that acts that would have been considered miraculous really aren't.

Once you learn how the spiritual works, we might say the same thing for miracles.



-gotta run, will try to look at the rest of the post later