ICR Acts and Facts

[VirOptimus]

Well we will find out who is right in the end won't we! but if I am right (the if is for your benefit) you will have died lost. You can know Jesus now and experience His forgiveness and love!!

If You want to preach there are other parts of CF for that. Your inept, childish threats are humorous but not welcome.

 

[VirOptimus]

Well they have also acted as the falsifiers of evolutionary hypotheses! Showing why the hypotheses fail the scientific method and simply cannot have occurred based on all the empirically proved knowledge we have !

Are you seriously asking science to accept magic as an answer?

 

[nolidad]

How so?

Well let us use the smallest estimates (11-81km in diam) and (1X10 to the 15th to 4.6 X 10 to the 17th kg.)

So an asteroid larger than Manhattan, weighing 10,000,000,000,000,000 kg or 10,000,000,000,000 tons hitting the earth at c. 22,000 mph would cause a nuclear type winter for decades! That size, weight and speed would crack the mantle and cause massive tectonic and volcanic activity! It would spew billions of tons of ejecta into the atmosphere (not including the ash and toxins from the volcanoes it produced). This would be a near global killer! And if chixalub was one of the smaller as you say- then we have had many global killers hit the earth! HArd for evolution to thrive when asteroids are nearly wiping out all the species.

remember them little thecodonts they say we came from could not survive in a hibernatory state long enough for plants and seeds to regrow! It took several years for the flora around Mt. St. Helens to start to regrow and that was a sparkler compared to chixalub.

 

[nolidad]

Huh? I'm not sure what you're talking about. You're again trying to put words in people's mouths. You do that a lot I've noticed. It's a bad habit.

YOu said that she doesn't research anymore because she joined a religious ministry. She said she still researches. So you are accusing her of lying!

If you want I can search your words and quote them here. Granted saying you are calling her a liar is not the most pc way to say it- but you are calling her a liar by your statement.

You're missing the point. A "tail" is not common here in the sense that all aquatic animals have identical tails. The functional design of tails in whales for instance is different than in fish. This corresponds with the difference in undulation with respect to their movement.

So the question is why don't all aquatic animals have the same common design for the same function? They clearly have different designs.

Why don't all land dwellers have the same kind of legs? Common design (legs) for common purpose, different structure (how the common design is used) for different creatures.

Once again even in near identical things that are used for the same reason we can create categories to note differences. But you miss the point that they all use tails for propulsion, there are different styles of tails and different methods of how they cause propulsion but they are still all tails.

Right, and it's the differences that are critical. How does one explain differences with "common design"?

Because you are conflate common and identical!

Its like tires- Mack trucks have tires. Mini coopers have tires- they both have tires (common design for a common purpose- travelling the roads) But the tires are very different from each other to meet the need of each type of car using the same thing- a tire!

 

[nolidad]

The meteor would've sent fiery death raining across the entire planet. It would've covered the Earth in darkness for nearly a decade. It would've filled the atmosphere with toxic gases. It would've had a bigger impact on life than the flood.

And the Bible doesn't say a word about this for...reasons? It mentions the rain, but not the hellfire coming down from the sky and the sun being blotted out for years?

And why would God need to do that in the first place?

Well I don't know if He did! A meteor does make a certain sense.

1. Before moisture can fall as rain it has to condense around a grain of matter.
2. The fountains of the great deep were broken open (probably the cause of the greatest amount of water in the flood)
3. Something had to hurl globally much particulate matter into the atmosphere to start the first rain storm

Yes a huge comet would be a massive fiery ordeal, but with the massive subterranean fountains spewing and a huge deluge taking place- the fires would have been short lived.

Bottom line- it is just a hypothesis in many YEC research papers. Simply because it has an expected cause and effect scenario.

Nope. If the Earth has millions of years to recover, that's fine. If it has only a few hundred years...that's a problem.

Well ELE does not discriminate- it destroys all it comes in contact with. The poisoned atmosphere would kill all that had survived the tectonic, volcanic, impact events. And if any species happened to survive those events ( most likely just fishes and then deep sea fish) they would have had to kick start evolution all over again.

And we have not had millions of years!

You dont know that. The Bible doesn't say that. Science doesn't say that. Nothing says that. There is not a single shred of evidence you can present to support that. It's literally just something you made up, probably on the spot, without even thinking about for more than two seconds.

And it's silly. Why would man sinning causes millions of rocks to appear in space? That does not logically follow.

Well if God caused it to happen because of mans rebellion it is not silly- no matter how silly you think it is!

Rom. 8:
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

The
word creature and creation here is the same-Ktisis and should be translated as creation!

simple reason is that animals will not be restored. And God said He will create a new heaven and new earth.

 

[nolidad]

The only terrestrial impact crater that is certainly larger than Chicxulub (note the spelling) is the Vredefort crater in South Africa, which had an original diameter of more than 300 kilometres. However, it is about 2023 million years old; this means that it was formed during the Early Proterozoic era, about 1400 or 1500 million years before the evolution of multi-cellular organisms with hard parts that could be easily fossilised. If the Vredefort impact caused a mass extinction it would have affected only the micro-organisms that lived at the time, and it would be very difficult for geologists to find the extinction horizon, particularly after all the tectonic activity and erosion during later Proterozoic and Phanerozoic time.

The Sudbury crater in Ontario may be larger than Chicxulub; authorities quote diameters between 140 and 250 km, whereas the diameter of Chicxulub is about 150 km. However, Sudbury was formed 1849 million years ago, again during the Early Proterozoic era, so there would be the same difficulties in detecting an associated mass extinction.

The only other craters that are similar in size to Chicxulub are the Manicouagan crater in Quebec and Popigai in Siberia; both are about 100 km in diameter. There is no mass extinction associated with the Manicouagan impact, but Popigai has been linked to the Eocene-Oligocene boundary extinctions 33.9 million years ago.

thanks for the info! I was just re quoting someone else who said there werew bigger but did not include the supposed evolutionary time scales.

 

[nolidad]

Do you know what meteors actually are? According to The Oxford Dictionary of Astronomy, a meteor is 'a brief streak of light in the Earth's upper atmosphere ... produced by the high-speed entry of a small fragment of interplanetary debris (a meteoroid).' On a clear night one can see about ten meteors per hour. They are pretty things, and completely harmless; they come from the ablation of dust particles derived from the break-up of comets.

Meteor showers, such as the Lyrids, the Perseids, the Leonids and the Geminids, happen at intervals during the year, when the Earth crosses the orbit of the stream of debris left by a comet. Usually they produce rates of between 10 and 100 meteors per hour, but on rare occasions tens of thousands of meteors can appear in an hour. These showers are interesting to watch, and again they are completely harmless.

Meteorites are quite different. They are stones that have fallen to Earth from interplanetary space, and they are derived from asteroids rather than from comets. Some of them produce spectacular fireballs and detonations in their passage through the atmosphere, but others, such as the Glatton meteorite of 1991, arrive without these dramatic accompaniments. Most meteorites are small, weighing only a few kilograms, but they are of great interest as a source of information about asteroids and the early history of the solar system.

Which of these different phenomena do you think are the result of God's curse on creation, and how do you think that this curse made them come into existence?

All of them are the result of God cursing the universe, just like supernovae! How God started the process? don't know. I could speculate but it is just speculation, or if I was a scientist it wold be relabeled a hypothesis.

I do know thqat god ordered the natural laws and all things function according o to those laws. So a meteor will be attracted by gravity and be pulled into the object that is pulling on it! etc.etc.

 

[VirOptimus]

-snip-

I do know thqat god ordered the natural laws and all things function according o to those laws. So a meteor will be attracted by gravity and be pulled into the object that is pulling on it! etc.etc.

You do not ”know” that. You may belive it, but that is all it is, a belief.

 

[Speedwell]

As so many on your side say- they are a bunch of illiterate goat herders. Well they sure are adept writers for goat herders.

It is an etiology. It also anthropomorphizes a snake (though I would doubt that as demons have been historically known to possess animals.

And a study of Biblical history would show that prior to writing things down on vellum, papyri, skins or stiels, many accounts passed down were done with a cadence as it is easier to remember (so much for just blurting out boring mundane facts eh?)

So any things done in sing song fashion you consider outside the realm of history?? And what puns are you referring to ?

Yes I am pre mil, pre trib, 5 point , literal hermeneutic, dispensation fundamental believer. I think I got all the tags they confer on me that can be written publicly without censoring.

It occurred to me you might be. I wonder if creationists are not generally. As I understand the Dispensationalist religion, it depends on the Bible being a complete and accurate history of the world from Creation to the Last Trump. That would explain the creationists' preoccupation with a literal Genesis.

So are you a covenantal allegorical believer then?

LOL! I'm not even a Protestant.

 

[lasthero]

Well I don't know if He did! A meteor does make a certain sense.

1. Before moisture can fall as rain it has to condense around a grain of matter.
2. The fountains of the great deep were broken open (probably the cause of the greatest amount of water in the flood)
3. Something had to hurl globally much particulate matter into the atmosphere to start the first rain storm

Rain doesn’t require meteors. Don’t know where that comes from.

Yes a huge comet would be a massive fiery ordeal, but with the massive subterranean fountains spewing and a huge deluge taking place- the fires would have been short lived.

Comets aren’t meteors and water wouldn’t mean much to the heat we’re taking about. And you’re ignoring the other effects. Can Noah breathe toxic ash?

Bottom line- it is just a hypothesis in many YEC research papers. Simply because it has an expected cause and effect scenario.

It’s an ad hoc idea pulled from nowhere simply to try and make your myth fit the evidence.

Well ELE does not discriminate- it destroys all it comes in contact with. The poisoned atmosphere would kill all that had survived the tectonic, volcanic, impact events. And if any species happened to survive those events ( most likely just fishes and then deep sea fish) they would have had to kick start evolution all over again.

As was pointed out, life wasn’t complex all the time.

And we have not had millions of years!

The evidence disagrees.

Well if God caused it to happen because of mans rebellion it is not silly- no matter how silly you think it is!

Why would man’s rebellion make that happen? You’re just asserting that it did. You’re providing no reasoning.

Rom. 8:
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

The
word creature and creation here is the same-Ktisis and should be translated as creation!

simple reason is that animals will not be restored. And God said He will create a new heaven and new earth.

None of that explains why there are millions of rocks floating around in space.

 

[lasthero]

All of them are the result of God cursing the universe, just like supernovae!

You don’t know that. You just made that up.

 

[pitabread]

well as I see no link to the romanov study in the above mentioned article or their linked footnotes- I don't know why you are using that to make accusations against ICR.

Or are you just making a strawman and accusing ICR of making a strawman.

The ICR article you linked quotes an article published in Science ( Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock.) That is the article I am referring to.

IRC quote-mined it.

 

[pitabread]

Every word? No. Their statement on methodology? yes.

I still don't believe you considering you've only fixated on one of the studies in question.

 

[pitabread]

So warning people of the certain consequences of continuing to follow a certain path is a threat to you?

So you would consider it a threat if a person was standing on a side road and told you the bridge is out and if you went down that road you would drown?

In the case of a bridge, I know that bridges and rivers exist. And we have demonstrable examples of the consequences of drowning.

In the case of warning a person about spending eternity in a lake of fire, we have no such similar evidence. So yes, I view your attempts to convert people as a coercive threat on that basis.

If you want to be a good witness for Christ don't resort to such tactics.

 

[pitabread]

Well your simple little statement underlies your extreme benightedness as to creationism and what and the level of research they do!

I've read quite a bit of creationist literature over the years.

The vast of majority of such literature is set on disproving things that contradict their beliefs (e.g. evolution, 4.5 billion year old Earth, etc), and then assuming their beliefs are true by default. When things they suggest run contrary to reality (such as the problem of energy release and Noah's flood), they're not above invoking arbitrary miracles to explain away the problems.

That's not science.

If you want an example, look at the Institute for Creation Research's RATE project: https://www.icr.org/i/pdf/technical/RATE2-Summary.pdf

A primary piece of Biblical evidence that heat was not a problem is the fact that Noah and his family made it through the year of the Genesis Flood without being cooked! Sometimes we forget the obvious. Or, we choose to ignore the statements of Scripture which can guide our technical considerations. From the simple fact that Noah, his family, and the animals survived and left the Ark at the end of the Genesis Flood we can infer at least one of several possibilities:

• no accelerated decay occurred;
• no large amount of heat was generated by the accelerated decay; and
• God supernaturally protected Noah and his entourage by rapidly removing the large amount of heat that was produced by some unknown mechanism
​

Not only are they effectively starting with a conclusion (namely assuming that Noah's flood is literally true and not just religious mythology), they are not above invoking miracles to explain away discrepancies with reality.

They in fact to go on to conclude that they believe there was accelerated radioactive decay and heat generation, but they don't know how to otherwise account for it. They again state, "Of course, God was directly involved in all of these events, so it is possible that He employed some supernatural process which does not occur today or cannot be detected."

Once again, this is not science.

 

[pitabread]

Well they have also acted as the falsifiers of evolutionary hypotheses! Showing why the hypotheses fail the scientific method and simply cannot have occurred based on all the empirically proved knowledge we have !

I have no idea what the above is supposed to mean. Since miracles are outside of scientific investigation, therefore cannot by definition falsify scientific hypotheses.

 

[pitabread]

If you want I can search your words and quote them here. Granted saying you are calling her a liar is not the most pc way to say it- but you are calling her a liar by your statement.

Yes, I think you should quote what I said. Because right now you appear to be twisting things to put words in my mouth.

Why don't all land dwellers have the same kind of legs? Common design (legs) for common purpose, different structure (how the common design is used) for different creatures.

Different structures are different designs though. That's what I'm getting at.

If you want to use the whale and fish tail examples, yes, you can label them both tails if you want. However, the underlying anatomy is structurally different. For example, fish tails are supported by a bony structure. Whale tails lack the same type of bony structure; instead they have flukes that are made of soft tissue.

Once again even in near identical things that are used for the same reason we can create categories to note differences. But you miss the point that they all use tails for propulsion, there are different styles of tails and different methods of how they cause propulsion but they are still all tails.

Because you are conflate common and identical!

Its like tires- Mack trucks have tires. Mini coopers have tires- they both have tires (common design for a common purpose- travelling the roads) But the tires are very different from each other to meet the need of each type of car using the same thing- a tire!

This isn't a good analogy because the underlying anatomy of mini cooper and mack truck wheels are basically the same, rubber tires mounted on metal rims connected to an axle. They're just physically different sizes.

The underlying anatomy of fish and whale tails are not the same. A better analogy would be like comparing the tires on a mack truck with the treads on a tank. They both serve the same function (locomotion), but the structural anatomy and therefore design is different.

That's just one example though. If you want a more obvious example, the fact whales breath air via lungs versus fish that use gills is better. The function is the same (provide oxygen to the blood), but they are completely different organs for the same purpose.

"Common design" doesn't explain that any more than it explains the structural differences of whale and fish tails.

 

[nolidad]

If You want to preach there are other parts of CF for that. Your inept, childish threats are humorous but not welcome.

This is a creation forum thread and you can't talk about creation without the Creator!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This is a creation forum thread and you can't talk about creation without the Creator!

But you're just quoting Bible verses. There are forums for that. This isn't one of them.

 

[nolidad]

Are you seriously asking science to accept magic as an answer?

Well if you bothered to read ICR reports, papers and even acts and facts written for the common man without extensive scientific jargon expertise- you would know they show by science why evolution is more magic than creation! See they use the scientific method to debunk so much of evolutionary mythology!