Geologic Proof of an old earth creation.

[Job 33:6]

Just for the record. I didn’t say there were miracles involved in solving any of those “problems.” I just think your just plain old wrong about them and either are ignoring or don't know the information necessary to make an informed hypothesis on them. You have a bit of a habit of putting words in peoples mouths to construct little straw men that sre easily knocked down.

Well, Steve Austin and Baumgardner, YEC professional scientists attribute a lot of these things to miracles. So, I mean, I guess you're welcome to think that they're wrong about these things too. But if you don't trust what geologists say, whether they're OECs or YECs, ya know, your ideas likely wouldn't get much traction.

But that's fine if that's what you believe, that perhaps there are explanations for these things that do not involve miracles and that we are all wrong.

 

[Job 33:6]

Well, Steve Austin and Baumgardner, YEC professional scientists attribute a lot of these things to miracles. So, I mean, I guess you're welcome to think that they're wrong about these things too. But if you don't trust what geologists say, whether they're OECs or YECs, ya know, your ideas likely wouldn't get much traction.

But that's fine if that's what you believe, that perhaps there are explanations for these things that do not involve miracles and that we are all wrong.

Check this out, from creation.com:

"Whether that particular figure is right or not, there is most likely a severe heat budget issue for any purely natural explanation of what happened during the Flood.1 As such, there is no simple scientific answer to this issue. Indeed, there may not be one. However, this need not be problematic. Why? First, the biblical evidence casts considerable doubt on any notion that Noah’s Flood was a purely natural event." -Shaun Doyle, creation ministries international.

Supernatural events aka miracles. In this case, specifically in association with plate tectonics and the heat they generate while moving around.

From Baumgardner at global flood.org:
"My own view is that it is utterly impossible within the framework of the laws of physics we know to account for (1) the accelerated nuclear decay (most of which occurs in the continental crust and not the mantle), (2) the removal of the huge amount of heat released by such accelerated decay (which would vaporize that crust if not quickly removed), or (3) the removal of heat required to cool the oceanic lithosphere to its current temperature at the end of the Flood cataclysm. It is my own settled conclusion that the miraculous is unavoidably required to account for all three of these phenomena."

Larry Vardiman from the institute of creation research:
For example, if most of the radioactive decay implied by fission tracks or quantities of daughter products occurred over the year of the Flood, the amount of heat generated may have been sufficient to vaporize all the waters of the oceans and melt portions of the earth's crust, given present conditions. (Vardiman 2000: 8)

Valdiman et al (a paper including all the YEC big shots):
"So, the basic hypothesis of this minority view within the RATE group called for supernatural intervention by God to accelerate the decay rate " "He employed some supernatural process which does not occur today or cannot be detected. However, He commonly uses natural law to do His work on earth, and so we believe it may be possible to discover how He did it." "God supernaturally protected Noah and his entourage by rapidly removing the large amount of heat that was produced by some unknown mechanism""
All of these events were supernatural, if not
in kind, at least in terms of energetics and speed. So, it seems possible to us that some, even most, of the daughter products we observe could Have been formed during the early Creation week"
Larry Vardiman, Ph.D.1
Steven A. Austin, Ph.D.2
John R. Baumgardner, Ph.D.3
Steven W. Boyd, Ph.D.4
Eugene F. Chaffin, Ph.D.5
Donald B. DeYoung, Ph.D.6
D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.7
Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D.

Russel Humphreys:
"A simple calculation shows that crustal rocks with their present amount of radioactivity would melt many times over if decay rates were accelerated. However, I would like to emphasize here that all creationist Creation or Flood models I know of have serious problems with heat disposal. (Baumgardner 1986: 211, cited in Humphreys 2000: 369 –70)*

This is like the pinnacle of YEC geology right here. It's the best of the best on their end. And this is what they say themselves in their own words. Erase all physics, replace with the word "miracle".

YEC scientists basically fall into two camps. Camp A. It was a miracle or Camp B: we don't know.

And as an OEC, I would say, Camp A. Is 100% correct that if they want this to fly, they'd need miracles to get past the physics.

Same with the speed of light topic, same with radiometric dating, same with molecular clocks and hyper mutation rates. Etc.

 

[Job 33:6]

Check this out, from creation.com:

"Whether that particular figure is right or not, there is most likely a severe heat budget issue for any purely natural explanation of what happened during the Flood.1 As such, there is no simple scientific answer to this issue. Indeed, there may not be one. However, this need not be problematic. Why? First, the biblical evidence casts considerable doubt on any notion that Noah’s Flood was a purely natural event."

Supernatural events aka miracles. In this case, specifically in association with plate tectonics and the heat they generate while moving around.

From Baumgardner at global flood.org:
"My own view is that it is utterly impossible within the framework of the laws of physics we know to account for (1) the accelerated nuclear decay (most of which occurs in the continental crust and not the mantle), (2) the removal of the huge amount of heat released by such accelerated decay (which would vaporize that crust if not quickly removed), or (3) the removal of heat required to cool the oceanic lithosphere to its current temperature at the end of the Flood cataclysm. It is my own settled conclusion that the miraculous is unavoidably required to account for all three of these phenomena."

Larry Vardiman from the institute of creation research:
For example, if most of the radioactive decay implied by fission tracks or quantities of daughter products occurred over the year of the Flood, the amount of heat generated may have been sufficient to vaporize all the waters of the oceans and melt portions of the earth's crust, given present conditions. (Vardiman 2000: 8)

Russel Humphreys:
"A simple calculation shows that crustal rocks with their present amount of radioactivity would melt many times over if decay rates were accelerated. However, I would like to emphasize here that all creationist Creation or Flood models I know of have serious problems with heat disposal. (Baumgardner 1986: 211, cited in Humphreys 2000: 369 –70)*



YEC scientists basically fall into two camps. Camp A. It was a miracle or Camp B: we don't know.

And as an OEC, I would say, Camp A. Is 100% correct that if they want this to fly, they'd need miracles to get past the physics.

Same with the speed of light topic, same with radiometric dating, same with molecular clocks and hyper mutation rates. Etc.

Ok here's my last argument then Ill drop the topic. But this is one of my favorites:

The tadpole galaxy has a tail that stretches behind it as it moves through space. The tail is 280,000 light years long. That means that even while moving at the speed of light, it would take 280,000 years to get from one end to the other.

If the universe were 6,000 years old, we wouldn't expect a tail to be any more than 6,000 light years long if it began stretching out at year 0. Even if the stars of this galaxy tail expanded in both directions at the speed of light, the tail would still only be a mere 12,000 light years long. But here in our telescopes, it's 280,000 light years long, that would require the galaxy to move over 20x the speed of light in both directions, or over 40x the speed of light in a single direction. But when has anyone ever seen any physical matter, let alone an entire galaxy, travel at even 1x the speed of light?

So, not only would the speed of light have to speed up faster than the speed of light to reach earth in 6000 years from galaxies millions of light-years away, but even physical matter, an entire galaxy itself would have to move faster than the speed of light as well, in order for such a tail to form behind it.

And that...you just can't call that anything but a miracle, or an old universe. Physical matter moving dozens of times faster than the speed of light is just unheard of, let alone an entire galaxy.

 

[Job 33:6]

Check this out, from creation.com:

"Whether that particular figure is right or not, there is most likely a severe heat budget issue for any purely natural explanation of what happened during the Flood.1 As such, there is no simple scientific answer to this issue. Indeed, there may not be one. However, this need not be problematic. Why? First, the biblical evidence casts considerable doubt on any notion that Noah’s Flood was a purely natural event." -Shaun Doyle, creation ministries international.

Supernatural events aka miracles. In this case, specifically in association with plate tectonics and the heat they generate while moving around.

From Baumgardner at global flood.org:
"My own view is that it is utterly impossible within the framework of the laws of physics we know to account for (1) the accelerated nuclear decay (most of which occurs in the continental crust and not the mantle), (2) the removal of the huge amount of heat released by such accelerated decay (which would vaporize that crust if not quickly removed), or (3) the removal of heat required to cool the oceanic lithosphere to its current temperature at the end of the Flood cataclysm. It is my own settled conclusion that the miraculous is unavoidably required to account for all three of these phenomena."

Larry Vardiman from the institute of creation research:
For example, if most of the radioactive decay implied by fission tracks or quantities of daughter products occurred over the year of the Flood, the amount of heat generated may have been sufficient to vaporize all the waters of the oceans and melt portions of the earth's crust, given present conditions. (Vardiman 2000: 8)

Valdiman et al (a paper including all the YEC big shots):
"So, the basic hypothesis of this minority view within the RATE group called for supernatural intervention by God to accelerate the decay rate " "He employed some supernatural process which does not occur today or cannot be detected. However, He commonly uses natural law to do His work on earth, and so we believe it may be possible to discover how He did it." "God supernaturally protected Noah and his entourage by rapidly removing the large amount of heat that was produced by some unknown mechanism""
All of these events were supernatural, if not
in kind, at least in terms of energetics and speed. So, it seems possible to us that some, even most, of the daughter products we observe could Have been formed during the early Creation week"
Larry Vardiman, Ph.D.1
Steven A. Austin, Ph.D.2
John R. Baumgardner, Ph.D.3
Steven W. Boyd, Ph.D.4
Eugene F. Chaffin, Ph.D.5
Donald B. DeYoung, Ph.D.6
D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.7
Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D.

Russel Humphreys:
"A simple calculation shows that crustal rocks with their present amount of radioactivity would melt many times over if decay rates were accelerated. However, I would like to emphasize here that all creationist Creation or Flood models I know of have serious problems with heat disposal. (Baumgardner 1986: 211, cited in Humphreys 2000: 369 –70)*

This is like the pinnacle of YEC geology right here. It's the best of the best on their end. And this is what they say themselves in their own words. Erase all physics, replace with the word "miracle".

YEC scientists basically fall into two camps. Camp A. It was a miracle or Camp B: we don't know.

And as an OEC, I would say, Camp A. Is 100% correct that if they want this to fly, they'd need miracles to get past the physics.

Same with the speed of light topic, same with radiometric dating, same with molecular clocks and hyper mutation rates. Etc.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

I've read so many of these style claims over the years, all of these sedimentary phenomena that is supposedly impossible to occur over young time, and there is almost always evidence in nature throwing that certainty into doubt.

Old-earth/deep-time believers are always trying to claim scientific certainty about things they really do not know. (I think in the last couple years, many people have come to realize that those groups claiming the loudest to come in the name of 'science', instead have far more ideological motives)

One of the most famous recent examples of how little old-earth/deep-time believers understand about natural processes are the surviving dinosaur protein/organic elements that were just a generation ago scoffed at as an impossibility. Now with improved technology and the regular confirmation of their existence in dinosaur remains, old-earth/deep-time believers have simply shifted their ideas about how organic molecules can be preserved for such great lengths of time. Instead of letting the evidence steer them away from a belief in an old-earth, they reconfigure their ideas about how nature itself operates, in order to preserve their belief in an old earth. (But they'd still love to show you other things found in nature (e.g. lithification scenarios, distorted fossils, etc. ) that supposedly irrefutably disprove the Biblical flood.)

Again, it was only a generation or two ago that old-earth geologists generally rejected the idea that large-scale catastrophism played a dominant role in shaping the surface of the earth. They fought against such interpretations aggressively. A gradualist uniformitarian worldview dominated conventional geology, as a natural result of the uniformitarian principle "the present is the key to the past".

Your worldview forces you to look at rock layers and see long ages, and all the data that comes before your eyes will always be shoehorned back into that worldview. Uniformity/Evolutionary Deep-Time is a metaphysical philosophy, a way of looking at the world, that is not swayed by evidence. It is a great faith tradition that goes back thousands of years, with an invisible god of nature, or nature as a god-like creative force. This faith has been resurrected in modern times and instituted as official state-sponsored cosmology.


The main difference between us is that Bible-believers admit our belief-system and faith up front. We don't constantly mask it under the pretense of science.

We are certain of the global flood because we believe in faith that Genesis is the revealed truth from God and we trust God's word. There was a human genealogy recorded that led to a man named Noah who eventually ended up forming a covenant with God in which God promised to never again destroy every living creature from off the face of the earth as He had done with the flood. (The Bible could not communicate any more clearly that this flood was worldwide in scope.)

Yep, the fact of the matter is that “science” is every bit as corrupt as politics and religion. Conservatives have been shouting that from the rooftops for generations. Few listened though and had to learn the hard way as this generation is now doing with Covid, man made global warming and gender propaganda.
Like the meme stated.” I tried to follow the science but it keeps leading me back to the money.” I would add. “Then the money led me to the political power to control it.”

 

[Job 33:6]

Yep, the fact of the matter is that “science” is every bit as corrupt as politics and religion. Conservatives have been shouting that from the rooftops for generations. Few listened though and had to learn the hard way as this generation is now doing with Covid, man made global warming and gender propaganda.
Like the meme stated.” I tried to follow the science but it keeps leading me back to the money.” I would add. “Then the money led me to the political power to control it.”

I'm a scientist, but I was never paid to publish on things like paleontology and evolution.

Most scientists are just regular everyday people like myself. And many are Christian as well of course.

 

[lifepsyop]

Studies have demonstrated that DNA can last millions of years under ideal conditions of preservation. So the question of if any sort of organic molecules can last millions, is a simple and easy "yes of course".

I think the record shows that old-earth/evolutionists were shocked about the level of preservation of organic molecules that have been found in these animal remains over the last couple of decades. Strangely, you will now claim that this new data only strengthens the case of the old-earth position, and to me that is just more confirmation that your conclusion about the age of the earth is not contingent on data or evidence. We are dealing with overarching philosophical worldviews. Ideology.

This begs the question though, if dinosaurs really did die just a few hundred years ago or a few thousand, why haven't YECs been able to sequence their genomes as scientists have done with pleistocene species such as whooly mammoths or sabertooths or neanderthals?

Because they are younger? I think it is almost universally accepted among YEC researchers that the Pleistocene layers were deposited in major catastrophes sometime after the global flood.

DNA has a 521-year half-life - Nature

The team predicts that even in a bone at an ideal preservation temperature of −5 ºC, effectively every bond would be destroyed after a maximum of 6.8 million years. The DNA would cease to be readable much earlier — perhaps after roughly 1.5 million years, when the remaining strands would be too short to give meaningful information.

This was published ten years ago. It was controversial when things like this were first identified, but the data is what it is.

The whole topic of organic molecules, in my opinion, is just another clear reason that the earth is old for this reason.

Here is an abstract from a study on Carbon-14 found in dinsosaur remains:

Measurable amounts of radiocarbon have been consistently detected within carbonaceous materials across Phanerozoic strata. Under uniformitarian assumptions, these should no longer contain measurable amounts of radiocarbon. Secularists have asserted that these challenging finds originate from systematic contamination, but the hypothesis of endogenous radiocarbon should be considered. Assuming these strata were largely deposited by the Noahic Flood occurring within the time range of radiocarbon’s detectability with modern equipment under uniformitarian assumptions, we hypothesized that fossils from all three erathems, including dinosaur fossils, should also contain measurable amounts of radiocarbon. Consistent with this hypothesis, we report detectable amounts of radiocarbon in all 16 of our samples. Attempts to falsify our hypothesis failed, including a comparison of our data with previously published carbon-dated fossils. We conclude that fossils and other carbonaceous materials found throughout Phanerozoic strata contain measurable amounts of radiocarbon that is most probably endogenous.
Carbon-14 Found in Dinosaur Bone – CEH (crev.info)

Like you, I can post data and evidence all day for Biblical history and a young earth. It's not going to have any effect on you. Any conclusions you don't like will be labeled as 'contamination' or some other error. (to an evolutionist, any research that does not presuppose evolutionary ages is already in error) We are dealing with foundational philosophical worldviews which are not based on evidence but belief.

 

[Job 33:6]

"Because they are younger? I think it is almost universally accepted among YEC researchers that the Pleistocene layers were deposited in major catastrophes sometime after the global flood"

Genomes come from animals, not rocks. The animals themselves of course, according to YECs, are all less than 6,000 years old. Yet if DNA can last millions, where is all the sequenceable DNA?

Also, according to answers in Genesis, dinosaurs were on the ark. Where'd they all go? If they survived the flood, shouldn't we have their DNA given that it can last millions of years?

So if dinosaurs were on the ark, given that the pleistocene is post-flood (according to you, but not all YECs would agree there).
A. Where are all the pleistocene dinosaurs? And;
B. Where are the dinosaur genomes?

I'll try to keep us on topic here.

If the earth is old, this is easy. Dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago, DNA can only last roughly 7 million years. Therefore no dinosaur DNA has been sequenced and there's no contradiction with the evidence and data. And things like degraded organic molecules permineralized in dinosaur bones are no issue because there is no such research in existence to suggest that such a thing shouldn't be possible, as there is with respect to DNA.

Meanwhile it's a head scratcher for YECs why, as noted above:

So if dinosaurs were on the ark, given that the pleistocene is post-flood (according to you, but not all YECs would agree there).
A. Where are all the pleistocene dinosaurs? And;
B. Where are the dinosaur genomes?

Whooly mammoths went extinct in the pleistocene, and we find their bodies. But we don't find dinosaur bodies in the pleistocene despite according to YECs that being the time in which they died off. (Well, though some YECs might think dinosaurs are still alive too, but that's another subject all together).

 

[lifepsyop]

Genomes come from animals, not rocks. The animals themselves of course, according to YECs, are all less than 6,000 years old. Yet if DNA can last millions, where is all the sequenceable DNA?

I would conclude from this that it is possible that DNA is not preserved or detectable beyond a certain level of exposure and time.

You don't even know what a million years on earth looks like, much less that DNA could last through it. You don't know that a million earth years has ever existed. These are the assumptions you are trying to make arguments for. It's basically the same argument as radiometric 'dating' generally where you are assuming the uniformity and constancy of decay rates over time.

YEC's have found numerous natural 'clocks' that suggest the earth is very young. (e.g. the consistent pattern of carbon14 found in dinosaur remains) ... and you would assume this is due to some kind of contamination as you would all dating-related data that does not conform to old-earth beliefs.

Also, according to answers in Genesis, dinosaurs were on the ark. Where'd they all go? If they survived the flood, shouldn't we have their DNA given that it can last millions of years?

So if dinosaurs were on the ark, given that the pleistocene is post-flood (according to you, but not all YECs would agree there).
A. Where are all the pleistocene dinosaurs? And;
B. Where are the dinosaur genomes?

I'll try to keep us on topic here.

If the earth is old, this is easy. Dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago, DNA can only last roughly 7 million years. Therefore no dinosaur DNA has been sequenced and there's no contradiction with the evidence and data. And things like degraded organic molecules permineralized in dinosaur bones are no issue because there is no such research in existence to suggest that such a thing shouldn't be possible, as there is with respect to DNA.

I don't know if it is accurate or not, but there is already claims of dinosaur DNA discoveries coming out of mainstream science journals.

Possible Dinosaur DNA Has Been Found - Scientific American

If this turns out to be false, you will claim worldview vindication. But if this turns out to be true, you will just say your assumptions about DNA preservation was wrong, and of course DNA can last 65+ million years, because they were found in dinosaur remains. Everything bows down to the foundational belief in evolutionary deep-time.

Meanwhile it's a head scratcher for YECs why, as noted above:

So if dinosaurs were on the ark, given that the pleistocene is post-flood (according to you, but not all YECs would agree there).
A. Where are all the pleistocene dinosaurs? And;
B. Where are the dinosaur genomes?

Whooly mammoths went extinct in the pleistocene, and we find their bodies. But we don't find dinosaur bodies in the pleistocene despite according to YECs that being the time in which they died off. (Well, though some YECs might think dinosaurs are still alive too, but that's another subject all together).

There would have to have been dinosaurs (I would assume very young ones) on the Ark as they are air-breathing land animals. We would have to assume that dinosaur lineages, along with other types of animals, were particularly ill-suited for survival in the new world after the flood, and so populations quickly died out. (they may have even lingered around as endangered species up until antiquity) If they only existed in small numbers after the flood, then the chance of their remains being preserved would be extremely low.

We find woolly mammoths in the Pleistocene because they were alive, likely in great numbers, at the time of their burial. We don't find dinosaurs because they were either extinct by this time or at such low population that they did not leave a trace.


This is basically the same type of assumptions evolutionists make all the time. If a creature disappears in the fossil record then you simply assume an extinction event. If it reappears in the fossil record after a long gap, then you call it a "ghost lineage", you assume it existed throughout that time gap, but left no fossil evidence.

This is the old-earth belief system. It is a way of viewing the world through the lens of uniformity, projecting the present into a distant past. The global flood is not rejected on evidentiary grounds but instead on philosophical or ideological grounds. The idea of man being under such total judgment from his Creator is anathema to the entire spirit of the enlightenment. Instead the idea of man progressively emerging out of the animal kingdom, using his powers of intelligence and reason to forge his own destiny and cvilization was an attractive metaphysical replacement for enlightenment thinkers.

 

[The Barbarian]

Here's a creative (and I believe, sincere) way to maintain YE creationist belief in the face of all this evidence:
Yes, I believe there was an "ice-age". Actually, there were several ice-ages. They were all in virtual history. The last one ended about 10,000 years ago. So it doesn't enter into real history, since Creation happened just over 7,000 years ago. Since my work is designed to defend the historical truth of the Bible against charges that what it reports as history is in fact fiction, I have not had much cause to talk about the ice-ages so far. (In my understanding of virtual history and the past, one can just accept what the scientists specializing in these fields are telling everyone is their best understanding/reconstruction of these past events. These reconstructions do not attack the historical integrity of the Bible in any way once one understands the concept of virtual history.)


Actually, I think there is enormous evidence of biological evolution (meaning extensive changes to flaura and fauna)---again, in virtual history. Note that the Bible does not say that biological evolution CAN NOT happen; it says that biological evolution DID NOT happen. That is, the Bible clearly teaches that we got here by CREATION, not by EVOLUTION. "In the beginning God CREATED the heavens and the earth", not "In the beginning God EVOLVED the heavens and the earth." But none of this excludes the possibility of biological evolution in virtual history. In fact, the teaching in Romans 8:20, that the creation was subjected to futility at the time of the Fall, meshes rather well with evolution being the thing seen in the virtual history data, for the hallmark of evolution is not purpose, but random chance and meaninglessness.


The Grand Canyon should also be understood just as the standard scientists describe its formation. It too is a virtual history phenomenon.


Virtual history is not a hard idea. Just think about what it means to actually CREATE something. Creating a story is a helpful analogy. Take "The Hobbit" as an example of a created entity. Now step into the book with Bilbo on page one and begin to examine the world around you. Everything you see and examine around you has already, on page one, an extensive built-in virtual history. Bilbo is in his 50's as I recall. So he has a virtual history. His house has been dug back into the hill, implying someone did some digging. If you examine the tunnels you can no doubt find tool marks left by the workmen. His front door is made of wood, implying trees grown, sawn into planks, planed, and fastened together by craftsmen, all before the story begins. And on and on it goes...Bilbo's clothing with all those stitches, and the soil in his yard and garden with humus from long-dead leaves, ...


We are living in a CREATION. The creation we are living in is a story of God's making. It opens on page one 5176+/-26 B.C. (by my best reckoning so far). The story moves from Creation to Fall to Flood to Exodus to Birth of Christ to Crucifixion to Redemption to ultimate Restoration of all things. This story is our reality, but it is not ultimate reality. (God is ultimate reality---He transcends the story just as any author transcends their created story.) And like any story, it has, necessarily, a virtual history built in from page one onward.


The big take-home point is that evidence of virtual history---of even millions or billions of years of this or that process operating in the past---does not and cannot falsify the fact of creation in a created entity. So we can let the virtual history data about the Grand Canyon or the ice ages or whatever else speak for itself and say whatever it seems to say. We do not have to resort to foolishness (e.g., denying the validity of tree-ring calibrated radiocarbon dates) to try to wipe out every trace of any natural process prior to the biblical date of Creation. We understand virtual history to be part and parcel of any created thing, so evidences of such processes do not threaten our faith or falsify the Bible's claim that we got here by supernatural creation just over 7000 years ago.
BC Correspondence: Virtual History

 

[Job 33:6]

.
I don't know if it is accurate or not, but there is already claims of dinosaur DNA discoveries coming out of mainstream science journals.

Possible Dinosaur DNA Has Been Found - Scientific American

From the article you've posted:
"At best, their biological makers seem to be degraded remnants of genes that cannot be read—broken-down components rather than intact parts of a sequence."

 

[Job 33:6]

.
There would have to have been dinosaurs (I would assume very young ones) on the Ark as they are air-breathing land animals. We would have to assume that dinosaur lineages, along with other types of animals, were particularly ill-suited for survival in the new world after the flood, and so populations quickly died out. (they may have even lingered around as endangered species up until antiquity) If they only existed in small numbers after the flood, then the chance of their remains being preserved would be extremely low.

We find woolly mammoths in the Pleistocene because they were alive, likely in great numbers, at the time of their burial. We don't find dinosaurs because they were either extinct by this time or at such low population that they did not leave a trace.
.

This really doesn't make any sense imo. So God calls on Noah to bring dinosaurs onto the ark to save them from the flood, but then they die out due to the flood anyway (the flood allegedly altered the environment in which it became uninhabitable for them but oddly enough not for any other reptiles on the ark). Combined with arbitrary ideas relating to post flood populations (which also is not justified by things like population genetics). They survived the flood yet there's no evidence of them in post flood strata (another internally disputed concept by YECs), mammoths, neanderthals, all sorts of other reptiles and amphibians, crocodiles etc. all survived the flood and there is evidence for them, and it just so happens to be the case that even though dinosaurs survived the flood, there's just not found in post flood strata as other animals are, in actuality they just died as a result of the flood, within some brief time immediately following the flood.

It just couldn't be more imaginative and inconsistent with all the data we have. And it's inconsistent with scripture itself in that the flood ends up killing off animals that God intentionally sought to save by calling on Noah to rescue them.

Imagine, God calls on Noah to save certain animals, but then they can't even survive post flood conditions, and so they just die off anyway. And as an alternative idea, it's just a bizarre coincidence that we don't have any dinosaurs in any recent rock layers despite them being alive after the flood. What would have been the point of God calling on Noah to save dinosaurs when they couldn't even survive post flood anyway?

Explaining all this away is just a nightmare. vs an alternative that earth is simply old and dinosaurs simply died off long ago.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Looking at this cross section of a location in the Grand Canyon.

1. What we are looking at first, at the bottom we see limestone, which is rock that is formed by the bodies of early life falling to the bottom of deep oceans.
2. This rock is covered by other sedimentary layers.
3. The surface raises above sea level. It is then covered by lava formations that were laid down on dry land by volcanic activity.
4. Then, the volcanic rock was worn down and shows evidence of vegetation.
5. Then the volcanic rock was covered over by more sedimentary layers.
6. The next occurrence would be a crustal uplifting causing the layers to become diagonal.
7. The diagonal rock was in the form of mountains which were then eroded away leveling the formation.
8. Then more sedimentary rocks were laid down, some of which were limestone indicating the surface has again submerged below the ocean.

Many young earth creationists will state that all these formations occurred over a couple months during Noah's flood.

Here is the issue.
We see layers of sedimentary rock including limestone(life), followed by a dry-land layer of lava, followed by erosion and vegetation, followed by more sedimentary layers, followed by crustal upheaval forming diagonal layers, followed by the erosion of those layers down flat, followed by more sedimentary layers (including limestone, again life beneath an ocean), and finally back to the current dry earth of southwest USA. There is simply no way that this history could be formed during a 120-day flood. We can only conclude that all of these formations were made over a very long period of time, long before Adam and Eve were made in the Garden of Eden.

View attachment 310133

Why couldn’t the layers be formed by the flood? You said they can’t buy didn’t explain why they can’t.

 

[lifepsyop]

From the article you've posted:
"At best, their biological makers seem to be degraded remnants of genes that cannot be read—broken-down components rather than intact parts of a sequence."

.....and evolutionists used to claim original dinosaur protein was exogenous contamination because it was deemed foolish to believe it could be preserved for so long

if dinosaur DNA is discovered, you will just conclude that it can last longer than previously thought. And I'm sure some 'studies' will come along showing how just the right conditions can preserve DNA intact over 65+ million years.

People ultimately seek to confirm their ideological worldviews, and that's why things proceed in this way.

 

[The Barbarian]

.....and evolutionists used to claim original dinosaur protein was exogenous contamination because it was deemed foolish to believe it could be preserved for so long

Seems unlikely, since such material had been long known in fossil invertebrates. You have a checkable source?

if dinosaur DNA is discovered, you will just conclude that it can last longer than previously thought

Sounds reasonable. Sometimes that happens. For example, a few years ago, some dinosaur heme (fragment of hemoglobin molecule) was found. Interestingly, it turned out to be more like the heme of birds that it was like heme of other reptiles, once again confirming that birds are dinosaurs.

And I'm sure some 'studies' will come along showing how just the right conditions can preserve DNA intact over 65+ million years.

Since no one has shown any such "intact" DNA, that's unlikely. However, I'm pretty sure that there's a way to do it, even if we don't know what it is.

People ultimately seek to confirm their ideological worldviews, and that's why things proceed in this way.

I don't blame you for it; there's nothing dishonest or inherently illogical about it. I just think it's not a very effective way to frame an argument.

 

[lifepsyop]

This really doesn't make any sense imo. So God calls on Noah to bring dinosaurs onto the ark to save them from the flood, but then they die out due to the flood anyway (the flood allegedly altered the environment in which it became uninhabitable for them but oddly enough not for any other reptiles on the ark). Combined with arbitrary ideas relating to post flood populations (which also is not justified by things like population genetics). They survived the flood yet there's no evidence of them in post flood strata (another internally disputed concept by YECs), mammoths, neanderthals, all sorts of other reptiles and amphibians, crocodiles etc. all survived the flood and there is evidence for them, and it just so happens to be the case that even though dinosaurs survived the flood, there's just not found in post flood strata as other animals are, in actuality they just died as a result of the flood, within some brief time immediately following the flood.

there is nothing here that your own belief-system isn't challenged with... try looking up the wanting explanations of why certain animals went extinct and others didn't at the Cretaceous/Paleogene. Have a look at some evolutionary models of ghost lineages. You believe that types of creatures can disappear from the fossil record for millions of years, even though they are claimed to still be surviving during that time. So why do you act like this is some kind of problem for YEC?

It just couldn't be more imaginative and inconsistent with all the data we have. And it's inconsistent with scripture itself in that the flood ends up killing off animals that God intentionally sought to save by calling on Noah to rescue them.

Imagine, God calls on Noah to save certain animals, but then they can't even survive post flood conditions, and so they just die off anyway. And as an alternative idea, it's just a bizarre coincidence that we don't have any dinosaurs in any recent rock layers despite them being alive after the flood. What would have been the point of God calling on Noah to save dinosaurs when they couldn't even survive post flood anyway?

There were many human lines that died out as well. Do you think God cares more for humans or dinosaurs? Why be surprised that some types of animals died out?

You could launch this style of theological argument against the Bible as a whole. Why create humanity if they are going to rebel against you? Why save Israel out of Egypt if they are going to rebel against you in the wilderness? Why give them the promised land if they are going to start worshipping false gods and corrupting everything?

What I've learned is that God has been teaching us about his ultimate plan of salvation since man first separated himself through disobedience. These 'promise-shaped patterns' have occurred throughout history. The animals of the whole earth being brought to Noah to safely board the Ark was a picture of ultimate salvation when God will collect people of every nation, tribe, and language into his sanctuary.

The pattern begins over again after the flood. Noah has been 'given the land', just as Israel is later given the land of Canaan, as followers of Jesus will ultimately be given the kingdom of heaven. The living creatures once again multiply and fill the land, but since the world is still a fallen place, there is still death, disease, starvation, predation, and many creatures die out, just as many human lineages die out. Look what Israel does when "the Ark lands" in Canaan and how they handle their inheritance in the book of Judges. It falls once more to violence and corruption, as God continues to deliver wrath upon the rebellious and protect and a guide a faithful remnant through history.

 

[Job 33:6]

there is nothing here that your own belief-system isn't challenged with... try looking up the wanting explanations of why certain animals went extinct and others didn't at the Cretaceous/Paleogene. Have a look at some evolutionary models of ghost lineages. You believe that types of creatures can disappear from the fossil record for millions of years, even though they are claimed to still be surviving during that time. So why do you act like this is some kind of problem for YEC?

Dinosaurs not existing today isn't an issue for old earthers because we see their bones under a layer of asteroid debris 65 million years ago. It just is what it is, they died. That's why none are around today and that's why nobody has sequenced a genome.

But it is a problem if young earthers believe that dinosaurs were on the ark, yet they all randomly decided to go extinct anyway, due to flood related climate change (or so it sounds like you're describing) despite God calling on them to board the ark so that they could survive. And then for whatever reason some post flood animals have readily sequenceable DNA while dinosaurs, for reasons unknown, do not, despite them all collectively surviving in recent times.

That just doesn't make any sense because it would contradict God's objective to save them from the flood by putting them on the ark. Yet God himself then kills them with environmental changes as a product of the flood after the flood is over. And you mentioned that maybe dinosaurs lived into antiquity, yet this would still beg the questions, if there were dinosaurs in Roman colosseums, where are the bones and where is the sequenceable DNA?

It's like you want to have your cake and eat it too. You want to believe that they survived the flood and lived with the Romans battling in colluseums, yet all evidence indicates a prehistoric extinction. No bones, no sequenced genomes, aside from the other mountains of evidence indicating an ancient earth.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Why couldn’t the layers be formed by the flood? You said they can’t buy didn’t explain why they can’t.

Here is the issue.
We see layers of sedimentary rock including limestone(life), followed by a dry-land layer of lava, followed by erosion and vegetation, followed by more sedimentary layers, followed by crustal upheaval forming diagonal layers, followed by the erosion of those layers down flat, followed by more sedimentary layers (including limestone, again life beneath an ocean), and finally back to the current dry earth of southwest USA. There is simply no way that this history could be formed during a 120-day flood. We can only conclude that all of these formations were made over a very long period of time, long before Adam and Eve were made in the Garden of Eden.

 

[lifepsyop]

Dinosaurs not existing today isn't an issue for old earthers because we see their bones under a layer of asteroid debris 65 million years ago. It just is what it is, they died.

For someone whose explanation is: "they died. it is what it is." I find it a little humorous that you see such a problem with a lack of explanatory power in another's worldview. I mean really, isn't a little humility in order?

But you're right, it is what it is. If dinosaurs were still walking around today, you're conclusion would be, of course, that they survived. If they disappear from the record of life, then they went extinct. Likewise YECs would assume that dinosaurs survived life from the Ark until present. We accommodate the data into our respective worldviews.

But it is a problem if young earthers believe that dinosaurs were on the ark, yet they all randomly decided to go extinct anyway, due to flood related climate change (or so it sounds like you're describing)

Natural selection isn't random, is it? ... and the dinosaurs didn't "decide" to go extinct. It just happened. It is what it is, remember?

despite God calling on them to board the ark so that they could survive. And then for whatever reason some post flood animals have readily sequenceable DNA while dinosaurs, for reasons unknown, do not, despite them all collectively surviving in recent times.

That just doesn't make any sense because it would contradict God's objective to save them from the flood by putting them on the ark. Yet God himself then kills them with environmental changes as a product of the flood after the flood is over.

You're ignoring my last response to this. What you're asking is the central theological questions of the entire Biblical worldview. Why did God create man just to have him die? Why did God save Israel from Egypt just to have them rebel against Him again? This is a overarching pattern throughout the whole Bible. God saves a population and brings them into a new land, only to have many of them die afterwards.

And you mentioned that maybe dinosaurs lived into antiquity, yet this would still beg the questions, if there were dinosaurs in Roman colosseums, where are the bones and where is the sequenceable DNA?

I never said dinosaurs were in Roman colosseums, and I seriously doubt we have that many animal bones preserved after dying in colosseums anyways, so it is a weird thing to expect. I imagine the dead or wounded beasts in Roman colosseums would be disposed of in a way that did not typically preserve it for thousands of years.

It's like you want to have your cake and eat it too. You want to believe that they survived the flood and lived with the Romans battling in colluseums, yet all evidence indicates a prehistoric extinction. No bones, no sequenced genomes, aside from the other mountains of evidence indicating an ancient earth.

You're still not acknowledging the presence of "ghost lineages" that are used in your own old-earth models. Do you know what a ghost lineage is? Still have a problem with long absences of fossils in the record?

 

[Job 33:6]

For someone whose explanation is: "they died. it is what it is." I find it a little humorous that you see such a problem with a lack of explanatory power in another's worldview. I mean really, isn't a little humility in order?

But you're right, it is what it is. If dinosaurs were still walking around today, you're conclusion would be, of course, that they survived. If they disappear from the record of life, then they went extinct. Likewise YECs would assume that dinosaurs survived life from the Ark until present. We accommodate the data into our respective worldviews.

But we have no bones, nor DNA from any recent strata. And so, I would say that such a reality suggests that they did not "survive life from the ark until present".

Other animals such as whooly mammoths survived until present day and we have fossils and DNA. And so, in those cases, I would agree with such an assessment. But the same doesn't apply to dinosaurs. This evidence contradicts your position.