My Pool Challenge

AV1611VET said:

LOL -- God can't win in academia, can He?

Genesis 1 has cosmic evolution twisted into a pretzel in the following ways:

1. Earth before Sun
2. Light before Sun
3. Plants before marine organisms
4. Fruit bearing trees before fish
5. Birds before insects
6. Plants before Sun
7. Man before rain

... and academia says it's because Genesis 1 is a myth.

But God cleans up the flood nice and neat, line upon line, in some geologic order, and academia says it shows Genesis 1 is a myth.

Solid aurum.

Click to expand...

The question before us is where fossils like the one shown below came from. Did they come from a break? That is, are these the fossil remnants of an animal that really walked on the earth? Or did somebody "set the balls up" to look like a break? Did somebody plant these fake fossils in the ground on or around 23 October, 4004 BC?

I find it impossible to believe that all these bones were placed down there in 4004 BC in such a way that they look like dinosaur bones. I find it much more likely that these fossil bones are "from a break", that these bones are from a real dinosaur that lived long ago.

And if I may add, the process that made these bones, did a very "nice break".

AV1611VET said:

If that is an original dinosaur, no, it did not come from a break.

In fact, God paraded it right past Adam to see what Adam would name it.

Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
Genesis 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

If, on the other hand, it came from ma and pa dino, then, yes, it is a product of a break, and may have been on the Ark with Noah.

Either way, man and dinosaurs cohabited.

Click to expand...

Ah, so when we find fossils, you agree they came from the remains of real animals.

And what about all of the fossils that we find deep in the layers of the Grand Canyon? For you have told us all those rock layers were created at creation in 4004 BC. And yet we find fossils far down below the upper levels of rocks. How did the fossils of real animals get down there below all those rocks, if those rocks were created at creation in 4004 BC?

doubtingmerle said:

Ah, so when we find fossils, you agree they came from the remains of real animals.

And what about all of the fossils that we find deep in the layers of the Grand Canyon? For you have told us all those rock layers were created at creation in 4004 BC. And yet we find fossils far down below the upper levels of rocks. How did the fossils of real animals get down there below all those rocks, if those rocks were created at creation in 4004 BC?

Click to expand...

Global flood a la Noah’s

Psalm 27 said:

Global flood a la Noah’s

Click to expand...

Ah, but AV1611VET in the past has not gone along with the claim that the fossil record was created by Noah's flood. Even in this thread he suggested that the Grand Canyon was cast in place in 4004 BC, with all the layers and fossils it contains all cast in place in one huge creation event.

In fact, that seems to be the whole purpose of this thread, but he has been evasive in revealing the purpose. He seems to be saying that balls can be arranged on a pool table to look like a break, therefore fossil bearing strata can be placed in the earth without there being a life history that created them.

You and I both know AV1611VET's views are wrong. There is no way we can look at all the fossils in multiple layers of the earth's crust, and say God created the earth with all that stuff in place. That would mean fossils similar to the dinosaur fossil I pictured were never actually from animals, but were simply fake news that God implanted in the earth's crust.

You and I both know that AV1611VET's view is wrong.

And AV1611VET and I both know that your flood geology is wrong.

AV1611VET said:

You must have me mixed up with someone else.

Click to expand...

So sorry. I must have had you confused with the other AV1611VET, who posted the following:

AV1611VET said:

A good example is the Grand Canyon.

Some are trained to think it was forged by the Colorado River,* others are trained to think it was created by an act of God.

Click to expand...

Do you agree with the AV1611VET that posted that?

Do you or do you not think that the Grand Canyon was cast in place at creation in October 4004 BC?

Do you or do you not think that the Grand Canyon not forged by water flowing through the canyon?

Do you or do you not think the fossils found deep in the layers of the Grand Canyon were there on day 1 of creation?

It baffles my mind why one would start a thread based on an analogy without explaining the point he was trying to make by the analogy, and without answering obvious questions about the point he is trying to make.

AV1611VET said:

This what I posted:
The Grand Canyon was created by an act of God.Yes.I do not. The Grand Canyon, as I have said many times, was created when God split Eden (Pangaea) up into continents during Peleg's time (see Genesis 10).I do not think that the Grand Canyon was forged by water flowing through the canyon.

Click to expand...

OK, so you think that the actual crevice of the Grand Canyon was formed by the earth splitting apart.

But what about all the layers of rock that we see in the Grand Canyon? And what about all the fossils we find in those layers? Were the rock layers there from Creation (in 4004 BC), or were they layed down some time after creation? If after creation, do you claim they mostly came from the flood?

AV1611VET said:

More appropriately, by the earth being split apart.No.I'd say so, yes.

Click to expand...

OK, so you do go along with flood geology. I had always seen you as an omphalos kind of guy, that you thought all the earths layers were created by Day 7. My mistake.

Sorry, but the earths layers were not formed in a global flood. We know what rock layers look like when they are formed by settling water, and what they look like when they are formed by volcanoes or blowing wind. A large portion of the rock layers down there came from volcanoes and blowing wind, not by water. That indicates to me that there were millions of years of deposits, with many different events happening at different times.

AV1611VET said:

Take a look at this picture:
Let's say someone set these balls down this way.
Later, someone looking at it says, "Nice break."
Was he wrong?

Click to expand...

The balls are too evenly spread left and right for this to be a break. With all the velocity in one direction, the balls tend to be on the left or the right after a break.

Psalm 27 said:

an ammonite fossil and a nautilus shell-each according to their kind

Click to expand...

What kind is homo erectus? Is that human kind or ape kind?

AV1611VET said:

But the guy that came along later said, "Nice break."

Was he wrong, in your opinion?

Click to expand...

Suppose the guy had a short videos of a few frames of the balls in motion. Suppose he then used a computer program to track the balls back in time, adding in friction forces and dynamics of the colliding balls as he worked backwards. Theoretically it would be possible to trace all the balls back in time until they were all in the shape of a triangle, except for the cue ball that was traveling toward the triangle.

If the analysis was sound, then based on only a few video frames, one could surely say that this was a nice break. Of course one could not prove that some clever person had not set all these balls up so they were traveling like they would have been traveling if there had been a break, but that is very unlikely.

So it is with the Big Bang. We can look at the star movements and determine they all came from one point in space. Armed with that knowledge, we can stand back in amazement and gasp, "Nice break!".

AV1611VET said:

I stopped right here, merle.

This is one of the reasons I call these things "challenges."

If it's too hard to answer with a simple YES or NO, I'll withdraw the question.

Click to expand...

As I said before, if the pool ball placement was not the result of a break, then it would be wrong to say it was the result of a break.

That in no way proves that the Big Bang was not a "nice break".

AV1611VET said:

Take a look at this picture:

Let's say someone set these balls down this way.

Later, someone looking at it says, "Nice break."

Was he wrong?

Click to expand...

Your challenges make me laugh -keep em coming.

doubtingmerle said:

OK, so you do go along with flood geology. I had always seen you as an omphalos kind of guy, that you thought all the earths layers were created by Day 7. My mistake.

Sorry, but the earths layers were not formed in a global flood. We know what rock layers look like when they are formed by settling water, and what they look like when they are formed by volcanoes or blowing wind. A large portion of the rock layers down there came from volcanoes and blowing wind, not by water. That indicates to me that there were millions of years of deposits, with many different events happening at different times.

Click to expand...

Blowing wind is a new one for me. I'm going to look that one up.

As I thought. A great picture of wind erosion illustrates, it is a rare bird.