Search results

  1. TrueCreation

    Objective Morality and Moral Foundations

    I would like to initiate discussion on the following questions: 1. Are moral systems objective, or must they be objective? 2. Does morality require God? 3. Is morality based on authority or the intrinsic worth of it's propositions? 4. What is the foundation for, or the fundamental idea of...
  2. TrueCreation

    Flood Basalts destroy creation flood geology

    I don't know what your talking about. How do you say plume tails don't exist? The reason they are postulated is that they are observed in plume model simulations and analogous physical models. Obviously that the mantle and plumes are solid has nothing do with with anything here. Plumes are...
  3. TrueCreation

    Flood Basalts destroy creation flood geology

    Well the 'cooling' of mantle plumes isn't all that useful in this context. Continuously erupting hot spots survive not because of an internal heat capacity of an underlying plume head but (probably) because it is fed from a thin conduit extending to the source region (thought to be near the...
  4. TrueCreation

    Sign Petition to get Kent Hovind to do written discussion

    thanks, my friend! Feel free to post the link everywhere you like!
  5. TrueCreation

    Sign Petition to get Kent Hovind to do written discussion

    Believe it or not but he has a bit of a reach on many less intellectually inclined 'creationists'. Even AIG wont come out and say he is a complete nut (the most they will do is suggest 'caution' to his arguments or refer to his '250k challenge' as an unfortunate 'gimmick'). My parents entire...
  6. TrueCreation

    Sign Petition to get Kent Hovind to do written discussion

    I'm sure he wont care, but I made this petition to get Hovind to engage in a written exchange: http://www.petitiononline.com/khovind/petition.html Anyone interested in truthfulness, whether 'creationist' or 'evolutionist' should be happy to sign it. I suppose this might get him to either...
  7. TrueCreation

    Scientific proof of flood.

    I don't think so. Catastrophic plate tectonics--perhaps about as general a description of such an event as you can get, is very new. I think that the assertion that the "basics of geology and physics disproved the flood [200] years ago" is dumb and clearly exhibits a lack of understanding in...
  8. TrueCreation

    Scientific proof of flood.

    It is an attempt at formulating a rather fundamental alternative hypothesis of large scale geodynamics so that observations in geology and geophysics can be explained. I don't think disqualifies is the word. If this were so, then it would be unfortunate if Wegener's primary reason for...
  9. TrueCreation

    Scientific proof of flood.

    Thats because this "flood model" has evolved. Material physics, geophysics, shock hydrodynamics, etc. was not very well developed at this time... lol, I don't think that is a good analogy. Why are you comparing competing observational hypotheses to competing very theoretical hypotheses...
  10. TrueCreation

    i want a straight up answer from YEC's

    sadly, even many scientists allow belief to effect their work indefinitely. Scientists will always make value judgements, but value judgements are value judgements. -Chris Grose
  11. TrueCreation

    Ones again is the flood impossible?

    lol, what are you talking about? What I've said you can find in any introductory text on diagenesis.. -Chris Grose
  12. TrueCreation

    Ones again is the flood impossible?

    I didn't say they were. Who are you talking to? -Chris Grose
  13. TrueCreation

    Ones again is the flood impossible?

    Indeed as far as I know you are right. However, they are not necessarily indicative that YEC time scales are wrong either. -Chris Grose
  14. TrueCreation

    Scientific proof of flood.

    You seem to think that it actually disconfirms more sophisticated hypotheses like CPT. -Chris Grose
  15. TrueCreation

    Ones again is the flood impossible?

    lol... no. Probably not. However this is only because those diagenetic processes which cause lithification tend to take some span of time to develop. Thermal conduction takes time, the development of overburden pressure requires time for sediments constituting the overburden to deposit...
  16. TrueCreation

    Scientific proof of flood.

    Perhaps you should go back and read post 842. -Chris Grose
  17. TrueCreation

    Scientific proof of flood.

    lol. That was cute... -Chris Grose
  18. TrueCreation

    Scientific proof of flood.

    The global flood of 200 years ago was disproven by the science of 200 years ago.. I am guessing that you also do not endorse tentativity in science? -Chris Grose
  19. TrueCreation

    Scientific proof of flood.

    Of course they are. Thats what CPT is, an attempt to explain observations. An explanation for observations implies a hypothesis. Hypotheses which attempt to convey dynamic systems require mechanisms. Motivation for investigation does not imply truth or falsity. I agree that the majority of the...
  20. TrueCreation

    Ones again is the flood impossible?

    My point is that it is probably misleading to consider the earths surface static. It probably isn't just a matter of dumping enough water to exceed the height of everest and then somehow removing that excess water. -Chris Grose