YECism and the appearance of age vs. history

[Subduction Zone]

The original post about the car with worn tires, etc. does not follow either.

No one has seen a planet form. You assume that forming the earth quickly instead of through natural processes would show illusionary "wear and tear". You also assume that decay of isotopes is "wear and tear".

Adam and Eve were not created with "wear and tear" either although created as full grown adults with intelligence and speech.

Subduction Zone, I wanted to answer your question about where the water came from and disappeared to during the flood. (It has to do with your name). One model from a scientists explains that runaway subduction occurred along the Mid-Atlantic Rift. Bending the seafloor upwards and pushing the ocean water up. It is quite technical and deals with how deep seawater interacts with the subduction among other details.

The water for the flood came from the ocean and then went back into the ocean and lakes we have today. That is the easiest explanation.

Sorry, not good enough. It is easy to show, in fact it has been shown to you that structures like the Grand Canyon, and the various mountain ranges predate the flood. There was no "runaway Subduction" or plate tectonics. We can measure those rates, They left a record. And again, you are proposing releasing an incredible amount of energy in one year if you go that route. That alone would fry the ocean. So where did the 5 miles of water come from? If you want to hear why it would cook the Ark I need to know what you think the source was.

If it came from space it had to come from fairly far out since any close in "ice canopy" would block all sunlight.

In the "water from the deeps" nonsense the writer of the idea forgot that the Earth gets hotter and hotter as you go down deeper and deeper. His concept would have had live steam coming from the ground. Enough water to cover the Earth to a depth of 5 miles that started as live steam would definitely cook the Ark.

The problem with all so called "Creation Geology" is that it falls apart when examined. There is no idea that is constant throughout it. It keeps running into real world features that it cannot explain.

Floods run in braided streams.

If the sediments were soft when carved they would not have made vertical walls.

The fossils are found in order inexplicable by creationists.

There are layers of evaporites, minerals from extremely dry environments, in the middle of marine deposits. Did the flood happen, dry up, and happen again?

The idea of a changing sea level, both up and down, with normal geology is not contradictory at all. It is for the flood.

Deposits forming rocks, being folded and arched by mountain building and then being weathered down and redeposited over by flat lying sediments is no problem for geology. The processes took millions of years. It is a stumper for creationists.

The main problem with creationist geology is a lack of consistency.

 

[Lethe]

If the sediments were soft when carved they would not have made vertical walls.

Thousands of feet of vertical, supposedly soft, rock, and those rocks are straight or even concave.

No bulging under the weight of millions of tons near the bottom.


Sounds totally legit Eternal Dragon.

 

[EternalDragon]

There are layers of evaporites, minerals from extremely dry environments, in the middle of marine deposits. Did the flood happen, dry up, and happen again?

Many other conditions could create those layers and Colorado has such a layer on top of sediment at the surface. They think a sea was there at one time. (Like a world wide flood covered it).

You talk about increased temperatures on the earth from the flood, that the sediments HAVE to be out in the air to dry out and I mention volcanic activity during the flood. Then I find this at the Wiki:

Gypsum is deposited from lake and sea water, as well as in hot springs, from volcanic vapors, and sulfate solutions in veins. Hydrothermal anhydrite in veins is commonly hydrated to gypsum by groundwater in near-surface exposures.

 

[lasthero]

Why did you ignore everything else he posted and focus on that one part?

And, again, why would a global flood cause volcanic activity?

 

[EternalDragon]

Why did you ignore everything else he posted and focus on that one part?

And, again, why would a global flood cause volcanic activity?

Runaway subduction is one scenario. (Horizontal movement of the tectonic plates under the ocean, raising the sea floor temporarily and spilling water onto the continents.)

Do you think that just rain would flood a whole continent?

"In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Genesis 7.11#footnote0that day all http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Genesis 7.11#footnote1the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Genesis 7.11#footnote2windows of heaven were opened."

Many volcanic rocks are interspersed between sediment layers. 70% of what comes out of volcanoes today is water, in the form of steam.

 

[lasthero]

So there was water under the earth? How? And it would come out as steam. Deadly steam.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Many other conditions could create those layers and Colorado has such a layer on top of sediment at the surface. They think a sea was there at one time. (Like a world wide flood covered it).

You talk about increased temperatures on the earth from the flood, that the sediments HAVE to be out in the air to dry out and I mention volcanic activity during the flood. Then I find this at the Wiki:

Gypsum is deposited from lake and sea water, as well as in hot springs, from volcanic vapors, and sulfate solutions in veins. Hydrothermal anhydrite in veins is commonly hydrated to gypsum by groundwater in near-surface exposures.

No, sedimentary rocks do not have to be out in the air to "dry". Don't you think that a thousand feet of sediments might be have enough pressure to squeeze all excess water out of those sediments?

Now please. Bring up your foolish claims one at a time, otherwise they can all be debunked by debunking one. Gish Gallops are not allowed in debates.

 

[EternalDragon]

No, sedimentary rocks do not have to be out in the air to "dry". Don't you think that a thousand feet of sediments might be have enough pressure to squeeze all excess water out of those sediments?

Now please. Bring up your foolish claims one at a time, otherwise they can all be debunked by debunking one. Gish Gallops are not allowed in debates.

I didn't ask how the dry sediment got there, you did. You asked if the flood happened, dried up and then happened again.

Subduction Zone: "There are layers of evaporites, minerals from extremely dry environments, in the middle of marine deposits. Did the flood happen, dry up, and happen again?"

Now you tell me sediment rocks can dry if compressed with pressure and then say I am being foolish. Get it together man. You are all over the place.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I didn't ask how the dry sediment got there, you did. You asked if the flood happened, dried up and then happened again.

Subduction Zone: "There are layers of evaporites, minerals from extremely dry environments, in the middle of marine deposits. Did the flood happen, dry up, and happen again?"

Now you tell me sediment rocks can dry if compressed with pressure and then say I am being foolish. Get it together man. You are all over the place.

Did I say "dry". I don't think so.

Using strawman arguments is a form of false witness. You should strive to avoid these.

 

[EternalDragon]

Did I say "dry". I don't think so.

Using strawman arguments is a form of false witness. You should strive to avoid these.

Yes, you did. You said sedimentary rock do not have to be out in the air to "dry". You then proceeded to explain pressure squeezing out all access water.

 

[Loudmouth]

No one has seen a planet form.

We see rocks and geologic formations forming all around us. It is from this knowledge that we came to understand that the Earth was very ancient.

You assume that forming the earth quickly instead of through natural processes would show illusionary "wear and tear".

Why would a quickly formed Earth need uranium radiohaloes or hundreds of thousands of annual ice layers? Why would a quickly formed Earth need hundreds of thousands of annual varves?

You also assume that decay of isotopes is "wear and tear".

The decay of isotopes is a natural process, as is the accumulation of daughter product in rocks. Why would a quickly formed Earth need zircons with Pb in them? Can you explain? What is it about the trace amounts of Pb in zircons that is required by a planet?

Adam and Eve were not created with "wear and tear" either although created as full grown adults with intelligence and speech.

And yet you argue that the Earth was created with a fake history.

Subduction Zone, I wanted to answer your question about where the water came from and disappeared to during the flood. (It has to do with your name). One model from a scientists explains that runaway subduction occurred along the Mid-Atlantic Rift. Bending the seafloor upwards and pushing the ocean water up. It is quite technical and deals with how deep seawater interacts with the subduction among other details.

Those models are baloney, and they are directly contradicted by the facts.

The water for the flood came from the ocean and then went back into the ocean and lakes we have today. That is the easiest explanation.

It is contradicted by the facts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, you did. You said sedimentary rock do not have to be out in the air to "dry". You then proceeded to explain pressure squeezing out all access water.

Yes, please note that I never said that they dry out.

Reading comprehension always is a problem for creationists.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm asking AV not to reply to this thread or I'll have the mods close it.

Okay if I reply now?

 

[SinnerInTheHands]

I agree, God would not be deceptive like that for no reason.

"Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me. Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding." [Job 38:2-4]

 

[crjmurray]

Okay if I reply now?

Nooooooooooooooooo!

 

[Strathos]

"Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me. Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding." [Job 38:2-4]

Is this supposed to be relevant somehow?

 

[AV1611VET]

Nooooooooooooooooo!

-- Nuts!

 

[SkyWriting]

I agree, God would not be deceptive like that for no reason.

There are good reasons. If Jesus actually did cause a blind man to see
the eyeball of an embryo wouldn't fit.

Lame man, leprosy, and all the other incidents around Jesus say that
appropriate creation is to be expected over "Science approved" creation.

The miracles are described in the Bible's New Testament and are listed more or less in chronological order.

 

[SkyWriting]

Presuppositionalist noise.

How about another scenario: provide evidence for gods first.

Science says nothing can come from nothing.
Science says everything must come from a larger and more complex source.

These conclude that the Creator is not part of the natural system we live in.

 

[SkyWriting]

IF the earth is only 6000 -10000 years old, is there any other theory besides literal translation of the first 12 chapters of Genesis that works?

There were fruiting trees creation week and days before stars.
So "Literal" was not "normal" anyway.