YEC and Fossil Fuels

[Hespera]

Time needed to make oil is different from the age of the source rock. You should not mix the two.

Oil made in formation as young as Pleistocene is possible.

Oil right at the surface is possible, and common. So what? Nobody who knows anything at all thinks the source of oil and the formation its in have much to do with each other.

Coal on the other hand cant be anywhere but in the rock in which it was formed. And it cant be any younger or older than that rock.

Do you btw know anything about what sort of plants make up the coal deposits?

..........oh and have you ever taken a historical geology course, or read a text?

 

[AV1611VET]

You would think we would find a lot more coal if it was created by a global flood, but coal is only found in certain locations.

Good post --- but this is assuming the Flood created all that coal.

What if, for instance, God created the earth with Anthracite embedded in it here and there?

 

[BananaSlug]

Then that would be more than just "embedded age." That would imply a history.

 

[AV1611VET]

So he doesn't believe that the earth is younger than 6,000 years old, yet in another thread he mentions the earth was created in 4004 B.C. I'm confused.

QV please.

 

[TheBear]

So he doesn't believe that the earth is younger than 6,000 years old, yet in another thread he mentions the earth was created in 4004 B.C. I'm confused.

Well, you'll stay confused as long as you keep feeding into him by replying to him.

 

[AV1611VET]

Good post --- but this is assuming the Flood created all that coal.

What if, for instance, God created the earth with Anthracite embedded in it here and there?

Then that would be more than just "embedded age." That would imply a history.

The key word here is imply.

When a scientist sees Anthracite in the ground, he automatically thinks "time", because he's trained to.

But if God inserted that Anthracite in there ahead of time, then there's no age [due to passage of time] beyond 6100 years.

Does that make sense?

 

[BananaSlug]

I like to feed creationists. Their belief system gets more twisted the more facts you throw at them. This allows undecided lurkers to see how crazy creationism really is. "Suffer the lurkers."

 

[BananaSlug]

The key word here is imply.

When a scientist sees Anthracite in the ground, he automatically thinks "time", because he's trained to.

But if God inserted that Anthracite in there ahead of time, then there's no age [due to passage of time] beyond 6100 years.

Does that make sense?

No, because coal is made from plant material. Coal inserted "ahead of time" still shows there is a history because it shows that plants were around to make the coal. How would you explain fossils being found in anthracite coal seams? Did God put them there?

 

[Hespera]

I like to feed creationists. Their belief system gets more twisted the more facts you throw at them. This allows undecided lurkers to see how crazy creationism really is. "Suffer the lurkers."

Suffer the rest of us too tho. It is like you throw facts at a dead cat.

I wonder if there could be a separate thread for this sos an attempt to actually discuss something would not get immediately flooded with this particular brand of nonsense? Even in ig half of it shows up in the responses.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, because coal is made from plant material.

Not if God put it there ex nihilo.

Right here is where the problem lies.

Until you learn that everything you see wasn't necessarily formed (called creatio ex materia), we're going to have this paradox.

We all need to learn the difference between what was formed into existence (creatio ex materia), and what was spoken into existence (creatio ex materia).

 

[BananaSlug]

But the fact that coal is formed from plant material automatically implies that plants were around for it to form. There in lies the problem. You still have not answered why fossils have been found in anthracite coal. Fossils in coal definitely show a history.

 

[AV1611VET]

But the fact that coal is formed from plant material automatically implies that plants were around for it to form. There in lies the problem. You still have not answered why fossils have been found in anthracite coal. Fossils in coal definitely show a history.

Goodbye ---

 

[Nathan Poe]

Not if God put it there ex nihilo.

Right here is where the problem lies.

Until you learn that everything you see wasn't necessarily formed (called creatio ex materia), we're going to have this paradox.

We all need to learn the difference between what was formed into existence (creatio ex materia), and what was spoken into existence (creatio ex materia).

So because God is the source of these paradoxes, He is the author of confusion.

 

[Split Rock]

You still have not answered why fossils have been found in anthracite coal. Fossils in coal definitely show a history.

BINGO!
Nailed him right on the head. Coal seams show fossilized leaves and other plant material, confirming what they were made out of. How does AVET respond?

Goodbye ---

By closing his eyes and running away. Everytime his "embedded age not history" idea is shown to be wrong, he does the same thing. sad...

 

[BananaSlug]

BINGO!
Nailed him right on the head. Coal seams show fossilized leaves and other plant material, confirming what they were made out of. How does AVET respond?
By closing his eyes and running away. Everytime his "embedded age not history" idea is shown to be wrong, he does the same thing. sad...

This is why I refuse to ignore what they say. It may be easier to put them on ignore, but in the long run, is it the right thing to do? The more facts you throw at a dead cat means more people can see how rotten it is.

 

[Hespera]

I kind of like that. Throwing facts at a dead cat. Im glad to see you use it.
TFADC

 

[Split Rock]

This is why I refuse to ignore what they say. It may be easier to put them on ignore, but in the long run, is it the right thing to do? The more facts you throw at a dead cat means more people can see how rotten it is.

How much do you want to bet that AVET continues to complain that others call him "omphalous" and that he is "hated" because of who he is rather than what he posts?

 

[Lord Emsworth]

So he doesn't believe that the earth is younger than 6,000 years old, yet in another thread he mentions the earth was created in 4004 B.C. I'm confused.

It is an dumb word game based on the opinion that "has an age of" and "is old" means two different things. You could easily do the same things with, say tallness and height, and assert that a given person has a height of 6 feet (from toe to head) but at the same time is 30 feet tall.

I do think however, that if you were caught for speeding, you'd still get to pay the ticket even if you tried to assert that, well, your speed was only the allowed 50mp/h, but had an embedded velocity of 100mp/h (or somesuch nonsense).

 

[Skaloop]

How much do you want to bet that AVET continues to complain that others call him "omphalous" and that he is "hated" because of who he is rather than what he posts?

If he didn't, I would figure that someone had hijacked his account.

 

[Cabal]

I kind of like that. Throwing facts at a dead cat. Im glad to see you use it.
TFADC

AKEDDECs

DON'T TFADC​

This public service announcement was brought to you by the Cabal