Does a GLOBAL FLOOD truly seem like the BEST explanation for seashells on mountains?

[Loudmouth]

Plate tectonics is the evidence for the global flood.

We have plate tectonics right now and there is no global flood.

Again, what is your theory?

It isn't my theory. It is the consensus theory within the field of geology.

Plate Tectonics: How Do Plates Move?

I hear that evolutionists have hundreds of theories to try to explain the break up of Pangaea.

Nope, just one.

I said that Noah's flood was a shadow of the flood that took place back in the days of the dinosaurs.

Now you need to provide evidence to support the claim. Where is it?

I said that Satan caused the dinosaurs to bite and devour and eat one another.

Now you need to provide evidence to back your claim.

I do not think any of this contradicts science in any way, so it should not be a problem for you at all. The physical evidence supports Creationism.

It is contradicted by the facts. That is a problem.

 

[Joshua0]

So no creationist claims that the global flood occurred about 4,400 years ago and that humanity is about 6,000 years old?

Noah was a real live historical person that lived around 4,400 years ago. Adam was a real live historical person that lived around 6,000 years ago. They teach the story about Adam and Noah to children in Sunday school classes. Then when you grow up and enter into the big people church, the pastor will explain about Adam and Noah and how their story can apply to our lives today.

 

[Joshua0]

We have plate tectonics right now and there is no global flood.

I am not going to keep repeating myself over and over again. Plate tectonics in the beginning was caused by a global flood. They believe it was a global flood that destroyed the dinosaurs. That was back whenever it was that Pangaea was broken up at the beginning of plate tectonics.

 

[freezerman2000]

The breakup of Pangaea started well before the demise of the dinos
The dating in your reasoning is way off..
Pangea (supercontinent) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia
The KT boundary is so full of Iridium..an element that is so rare naturally occurring that it could have come from only one source..outer space.
iridium (Ir) (chemical element) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia
Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There are no remains of dinos in that boundary layer because it is so thin
(see picture in wiki article)
Dino fossils occur only under that boundary..none above.That is where the mammal record really takes off.

 

[Mikecpking]

Plate tectonics is the evidence for the global flood. Again, what is your theory? I hear that evolutionists have hundreds of theories to try to explain the break up of Pangaea. I said that Noah's flood was a shadow of the flood that took place back in the days of the dinosaurs. Perhaps you need to do a study to understand what shadow and types are in the Bible. I said that Satan caused the dinosaurs to bite and devour and eat one another. That is why God destroyed the world at that time. That is what Creationists believe and there is no reason to have to "prove" any of it to anyone. You are free to have your own beliefs for why the dinosaurs were destroyed and why Pangaea was broken up into the nations that we find today. Science tends to give us the facts on WHAT happened. Then we read in the Bible to find out WHY these events happened. So we can learn what God's plan and purpose is in all of this. I do not think any of this contradicts science in any way, so it should not be a problem for you at all. The physical evidence supports Creationism.

Sorry, but as a Christian who studied geology at college, you are mistaken. One can MEASURE continental drift, how plate tectonics shape the world and with every major earth quake how far continents move. You can correlate mountain ranges, rock strata on opposing sides of the Atlantic and realise it must have taken millions of years to get to there current positions. Not only that, there is plenty of evidence that continents collided together BEFORE Pangea formed. Hutton was a christian geologist who realised the earth must have been MUCH older than previously thought when he noted unconformities and the famous one at Siccar point Siccar Point - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you ever do field geology, like I have, what you find is multiple environments that could not be explained by a single flood event. Where I live, we have old red sandstone which basically a widespread fossilised desert with no hint of water sedimentation at all. You can even see the dunes' shape!

 

[createdtoworship]

I have been down this road before. I know exactly where it is going.

You are trying to cite radiometric dating failures as evidence against radiometric dating. You are using the Mt. Ngauruhoe lies that Snelling et al. have told about radiometric dating to support your claims. Perhaps you didn't realize that you were being fed lies, but now you do. The next move is yours.



Why not date rocks that lacks any xenoliths? Why date rocks that are not appropriate for dating the lava flow? The only reason that Snelling is using these rocks is to try and make it look like radiometric dating is untrustworthy. He is being dishonest.

see all this proves the untrustworthyness of the dating method. You claim that the samples must be "pure" and free of zenoliths (intrusions of older rock), however there are no "pure" lava flows. The parent and daughter isotopes present fluctuates throughout an eruption, so technically the date changes. the early flow may have more iron, and the later flows may have more magnesium for example, thus altering the date entirely (parent and daughter isotope fluctiation).

check out more here:

from the university of north carolina at chapel hill:


https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating2.html

 

[createdtoworship]

Sorry, but as a Christian who studied geology at college, you are mistaken. One can MEASURE continental drift, how plate tectonics shape the world and with every major earth quake how far continents move. You can correlate mountain ranges, rock strata on opposing sides of the Atlantic and realise it must have taken millions of years to get to there current positions. Not only that, there is plenty of evidence that continents collided together BEFORE Pangea formed. Hutton was a christian geologist who realised the earth must have been MUCH older than previously thought when he noted unconformities and the famous one at Siccar point Siccar Point - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you ever do field geology, like I have, what you find is multiple environments that could not be explained by a single flood event. Where I live, we have old red sandstone which basically a widespread fossilised desert with no hint of water sedimentation at all. You can even see the dunes' shape!

Good point! Well this should spicen some of the conversation up a bit, good job. And we haven't even got into the problems of erosion and the "billions of years", remember North america can erode entirely in less than 100 million years. More like 10-50million, but even the worst case scenario 100 is still a problem for evolutionists. The current rate of erosion would erode america in 10 million years, but take away the human elements involved and other factors of modern age and you may have 50-100 million at worst. Thats a lot less that 4.5 billion thats for sure. I think that is one of my favorite problems to address with evolution.

thanks for the input

 

[Herman Hedning]

Good point! Well this should spicen some of the conversation up a bit, good job. And we haven't even got into the problems of erosion and the "billions of years", remember North america can erode entirely in less than 100 million years. More like 10-50million, but even the worst case scenario 100 is still a problem for evolutionists. The current rate of erosion would erode america in 10 million years, but take away the human elements involved and other factors of modern age and you may have 50-100 million at worst. Thats a lot less that 4.5 billion thats for sure. I think that is one of my favorite problems to address with evolution.

thanks for the input

Well, if erosion rate is of interest to you, maybe you'd care to explain why it is a problem to evolution? Or even what erosion and evolution have to do with each other, except of course that both starts with an E.

As for the "erode entirely" argument - you do realise that tectonic actions will create uplift that pushes up new land to replace the eroded parts, right?

 

[freezerman2000]

grady, wanna rethink your rate of erosion?
And these mountains are still tough to climb!Appalachian Mountains - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JoyfulExegesis]

Good point! Well this should spicen some of the conversation up a bit, good job. And we haven't even got into the problems of erosion and the "billions of years", remember North america can erode entirely in less than 100 million years. More like 10-50million, but even the worst case scenario 100 is still a problem for evolutionists. The current rate of erosion would erode america in 10 million years, but take away the human elements involved and other factors of modern age and you may have 50-100 million at worst. Thats a lot less that 4.5 billion thats for sure. I think that is one of my favorite problems to address with evolution.

Why do you presume that there are no forces operating OPPOSITE of erosion? Are you unaware of the forces which CREATE geologic formations which erosion slowly tears down? Why do you assume that a one-way erosion process is the only force at work?

For now I'll ignore the question of why you think your misunderstanding of basic geology is a problem for evolution.

 

[JoyfulExegesis]

see all this proves the untrustworthyness of the dating method. You claim that the samples must be "pure" and free of zenoliths (intrusions of older rock), however there are no "pure" lava flows. The parent and daughter isotopes present fluctuates throughout an eruption, so technically the date changes. the early flow may have more iron, and the later flows may have more magnesium for example, thus altering the date entirely (parent and daughter isotope fluctiation).

check out more here:

from the university of north carolina at chapel hill:


https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating2.html

Instead of trying to deceive readers into thinking that these ideas come with the authority of "the university of north carolina at chapel hill" [sic], why don't you simply admit to readers that you are quoting a computer science professor there who happens to post his creationist geology nonsense on the university website? His personal opinions about a topic unrelated to his teaching duties there are in NO WAY reflective of the university.

Your dishonesty continues to amaze me! And as a follower of Christ, I'm saddened that you so continually endeavor to associate such tactics with an alleged Christian agenda.

Sadly, one maxim we can always assume: never trust your citations and links to support what you claim for them.

 

[Joshua0]

why don't you simply admit to readers that you are quoting a computer science professor there who happens to post his creationist geology nonsense on the university website?

The "nonsense" your referring to happens to be a text book: "The Earth: An Introduction to Physical Geology by Tarbuck & Lutgens, pp. 55-57"

If you can not depend on a text book to contain accurate information, then there really is not much of anything (other then the Bible) that we can depend on.

 

[JoyfulExegesis]

The "nonsense" your referring to happens to be a text book: "The Earth: An Introduction to Physical Geology by Tarbuck & Lutgens, pp. 55-57"

If you can not depend on a text book to contain accurate information, then there really is not much of anything (other then the Bible) that we can depend on.

Dodging to mislead the reader won't work.

Why did you lie and post an attribution to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill if you ACTUALLY meant to attribute it to the textbook you are citing now? (Should we believe you NOW or believe your PREVIOUS POST?)

Do you EVER tell a consistent and truthful story? Most people quote their source, honestly cite it, and don't backtrack and change it later while insisting that they didn't. But you appear to have a habit of doing that repeatedly.

Very disconcerting. Your pattern has become extremely predictable.

 

[KWCrazy]

If you can not depend on a text book to contain accurate information, then there really is not much of anything (other then the Bible) that we can depend on.

You're posting that to someone who doesn't believe in the Bible as written.

 

[JoyfulExegesis]

You're posting that to someone who doesn't believe in the Bible as written.

You're posting that to someone who believes the Bible more than you EVER will. Yes, I read it in the original Hebrew and Greek (as it truly WAS written) and don't accept your tradition-based corruptions of it. I hate to break it to you, but your English Bible is not what was originally written.

But on some level you do know that. And that is why you show so much fear whenever I correct your errors.

 

[freezerman2000]

You're posting that to someone who believes the Bible more than you EVER will. And that is why you show so much fear whenever I correct your errors.

 

[KWCrazy]

You're posting that to someone who believes the Bible more than you EVER will. And that is why you show so much fear whenever I correct your errors.

Your statement is a falsehood. Not only have you ROUTINELY said that specific miracles in the Bible were false, when asked to post passages from the Bible that supported your beliefs you could never, NEVER produce one. Not ONE SINGLE TIME did you ever post anything that SUPPORTED the Bible, or even a passage or verse you agreed with.

Everyone who reads this knows who supports their arguments with the Bible and who spends their time attacking the Bible. Lying now won't change anything. You can't deny what everyone else has already seen many times over.

Aren't you the one who in post 231 claimed that The Bible said the seventh day was never completed?

Aren't you the one who in post 237 claimed that Adam and Eve had PARENTS?

Aren't you the one who supposedly has me on ignore?

 

[Joshua0]

You can correlate mountain ranges, rock strata on opposing sides of the Atlantic and realise it must have taken millions of years to get to there current positions.

Yes, it took millions of years. I am talking about the BEGINNING when Pangaea was all one land mass. It was WATER that broke Pangaea up into the continents that we have today. Then STEP TWO God FROZE THE WATER. He then left the earth frozen for MANY MILLIONS of years.

The floodgates of the heavens are opened,
the foundations of the earth shake.
19 The earth is broken up,
the earth is split asunder,
the earth is violently shaken.
20 The earth reels like a drunkard,
it sways like a hut in the wind;
so heavy upon it is the guilt of its rebellion
that it falls—never to rise again.

After millions of years passed God breathed on the Earth and He melted the Ice. This as I am sure you know, began around 18,000 year ago. This was the beginning of the end of the Holocene and they call this the Holocene extinction. Then the neolithic period began around 12,900. I use that date because I use the nanodiamond layer on the Greenland ice samples as a marker. A day is 1,000 years.

IF Pangaea was NOT destroyed by a flood, then what is your theory for the actual force that destroyed Pangaea? Esp in light of the fact that it is now water that separates the Pangaea land mass.

Yes, I understand that Kurt Wise is a YEC. I am not a YEC, right now I am presenting GAP. But the basic facts remain the same, even if Kurt Wise and I do not agree on the time frame for WHEN this all happened.

Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: A Global Flood Model of Earth History by Steven A. Austin, Ph.D., John R. Baumgardner, Ph.D., Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D., Larry Vardiman, Ph.D., and Kurt P. Wise, Ph.D.

I am going to repeat this a SECOND time. Dr Kurt Wise and I do not agree on WHEN the flood happened. I am just talking about what happened. He says 4,300 years ago. I say Noah's flood 4,300 years ago was a TYPE of the flood that destroyed the world at the end of the dinosaur age back 64 million years (according to science for WHEN this happened). The REASON God destroyed the earth is because the animals were devouring each other and that was not God's plan or purpose. We know when we receive a new earth the animals will no longer devour each other. "They shall not hurt nor destroy" It was NEVER God's plan for animals or people to be at enmity with each other. THAT is the work of Satan. The day will come when Satan will be thrown into the bottomless pit for 1,000 years.

“The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb,
The leopard shall lie down with the young goat,
The calf and the young lion and the fatling together;
And a little child shall lead them.
7 The cow and the bear shall graze;
Their young ones shall lie down together;
And the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
8 The nursing child shall play by the cobra’s hole,
And the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper’s den.
9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain,
For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord
As the waters cover the sea.

1And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 3And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

 

[JoyfulExegesis]

Not only have you ROUTINELY said that specific miracles in the Bible were false......

I have NEVER "said that specific miracles in the Bible were false." I have never denied ANY miracle in the Bible. (Are you imagining things or simply lying? Don't know and don't care.)

{By the way, your posts are so full of falsehoods that from now on I'm only reading as far as the first one and then stopping......if I bother to read your posts at all. I'm heading the advice given in the Proverbs. So the above represents your new one-falsehood-per-post quota. In other words, I don't expect to get past the first line in most cases.}

 

[JoyfulExegesis]

The REASON God destroyed the earth is because the animals were devouring each other and that was not God's plan or purpose.

Poe.

(Yes, dinosaur-on-dinosaur crime is what the Bible cites as the reason for the flood. Someone has a future as a writer. Those blood-thirsty dinosaurs!)

(I really ought to end my day but this stuff is priceless. I haven't laughed so hard in ages.)