archaeologist
Well-Known Member
not at all. a global flood is the only thing that makes sense and does what God describes. no loose ends.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Reality contradicts a global flood as well, so what do you propose if neither scenario is valid
If all of geology can explained by a global flood with "no loose ends," why do you suppose so few geologists subscribe to such a scenario? Like many other YECs, do you think that the majority of the world's geologists are so set against God that they will cling to a fruitless, non-functional paradigm (costing billions of dollars a year) just to avoid the inevitable conclusion that stems from Flood geology?not at all. a global flood is the only thing that makes sense and does what God describes. no loose ends.
Sounds like the perfect candidate for a metaphorical story to me.On a side note - There's actually a theology to this. In the beginning of creation, remember that the waters covered the face of the earth and the spirit of God hovered over the water, then the separation of waters from land, etc..
Then the earth became corrupt, its stench reaching up to heaven. (If something stinks, you wash it) So now He mingles them back together again so the world is returned to its pre-creation state: the whole earth is once again covered in water.. then soon onward we have a dove hovering over the waters.. and again a separation of the waters from land. (The next time in Scripture we see a dove hovering over water is the Baptism of Christ).
Evolution doesn't require endless miracles to explain. I fail to see how it's just as inefficient as a global flood.Well, for that matter so is evolution.
Makes sense to who? The only people it makes sense to are the scientifically ignorant creationists, and they are a minority. Evidentiary wise, it doesn't fit whatsoever.not at all. a global flood is the only thing that makes sense and does what God describes. no loose ends.
Makes sense to who? The only people it makes sense to are the scientifically ignorant creationists, and they are a minority. Evidentiary wise, it doesn't fit whatsoever.
Sounds like the perfect candidate for a metaphorical story to me.
That was my bad, I mis-read what you wrote orgionally.. my apologies.Evolution doesn't require endless miracles to explain. I fail to see how it's just as inefficient as a global flood.
Just to be clear, most YECs would say that the flood does not require "endless miracles" either. Yes, God miraculously led the animals to the Ark and shut the door. Somehow, He caused rain and water from under the earth -- but it could easily have been an asteroid strike or somesuch. The vast majority of the geologic strata are totally consistent with the deposition mechanisms to be expected in a global flood. Not with a simplistic model of the flood to be sure, but consistent with the things one should expect from a dynamic global event.Evolution doesn't require endless miracles to explain. I fail to see how it's just as inefficient as a global flood.
The only people it makes sense to are the scientifically ignorant creationists
Evolution doesn't require endless miracles to explain. I fail to see how it's just as inefficient as a global flood.
"magic"??? Aww, c’mon Mallon – this is not exactly how I would describe God's direct actions.Of course the Flood requires countless miracles, pop. It requires magic to herd the animals onto the ark, to seal the door,
The Bible says that God caused it. It does not specify how. It could have been through natural or supernatural means. Yes, asteroid is just a guess of a possible way.to set your catastrophic plate tectonics in motion, to flood the entire earth (there's no mention of an asteroid in the Bible, by the way),
Actually, the post flood activities, including receding waters, winds, ice age, etc. are reasonably explainable by natural processes, especially with expected tectonic activity because of the shifting weight of the water if nothing else, as well as the freezing of the polar caps, etc.to blow the waters off the earth again,
Perhaps, but people who have studied the ark and possible designs, etc. have come up with reasonable explanations, consistent with the Scriptural record that explain airflow, waste disposal, etc. Personally I think (but its just my opinion with no real evidence) that God, having helped to get the critters on board, helped Noah & co. to care for them by having the critters hibernate.to maintain the health of the animals on the ark,
Like what?etc., etc., etc.
You cannot test history. If you persist on saying it is "untestable" then neither is evolution. YEC specifically predicts that one would find worldwide geologic strata consistent with a global flood. This can be discussed and tested. However, I insist we discuss it using real dynamics and not overly simplistic views.That's more ad hoc than any scientist should be comfortable with. It's untestable, and therefore provides no explanatory value in understanding the history of the earth.
On the contrary, the vast majority of strata are consistent with a global flood.(And no, the "vast majority of strata" are not consistent with your Flood model.
Please. Do we have to visit this again? Sheesh. I have "admitted" that there is no single computer model for the entire flood covering every square foot of the planet minute by minute for the time of the flood. There are a variety of models which cover various parts of the flood, including currents and material transport over continents, hypercane and atomospheric effects, etc. ICR has a small supercomputer and program specifically dedicated to doing more and more modeling of various kinds. But note: there is not a 100% accurate model of even current weather. Why are you insisting on one for a time over 4000 years ago? Understanding GLOBAL dynamics is difficult - and has not been achieved by ANYONE except in very simplified form. Models that try to do things on a global basis, such as those used to investigate global warming are much coarser than what I think you are asking for, and are heavily disputed and being worked on all the time to incorporate a new variable, etc. Each variable introduces a whole new set of interactions. So you can ask for the impossible - but it just isn't fair.You've admitted time and again that you don't even have a model because the Flood was too "complex" to set parameters for.
The best that can be done IS THE SAME THAT IS DONE WITH CONVENTIONAL GEOLOGY. One looks at the formations and talks about how they could have been formed. There is no complete model for conventional geological formation any more than there is a complete model of the flood. However, we can look and discuss each site and determine if it is consistent with a global flood model.I really wish you would quit with the hearsay and present something tangible here that we can all have a look at.)
The Bible says that God put the earth on it's pillars, I guess you'll have to discard the scientific evidence that says otherwise, since it's obviously flawed.Given the choice between two possibilities, I will always prefer the one consistent with Scripture.
the initial life form originating would take a great miracle.
a male and female of the same species meeting and mating, or even living in the same region would take a great miracle.
Evolution says nothing about the origin of life - that's abiogenesis (although admittedly, the two are linked).
So it was a great miracle that my parents met and had me?
It requires magic
By "direct actions" do you mean miracles? If so, what's the difference between magic and miracle? I don't know what offends you about the usage of one word and not the other."magic"??? Aww, c’mon Mallon – this is not exactly how I would describe God's direct actions.
pop, there is no amount of water either beneath the crust of the earth or in the sky that could possibly flood the entire earth. It would take a miracle to do that. And try as you might to account for the Flood via natural phenomena -- either by appeal to an asteroid or to a vapour canopy or whatever -- there is no scientific evidence for either scenario, contrary to your opinion that the Flood has any sort of scientific merit whatsoever. (Besides, an asteroid smashing into the earth would have the effect of vapourizing water -- not unleashing it).The Bible says that God caused it. It does not specify how. It could have been through natural or supernatural means. Yes, asteroid is just a guess of a possible way.
This is just talk, pop. If you want to make a convincing case, you're going to have to provide more than just ad hoc and hearsay. Show me a Flood model that depicts water transgression and regression, cyclical ice ages, and rapid plate tectonics (that doesn't take 20 million years to kick-start).Actually, the post flood activities, including receding waters, winds, ice age, etc. are reasonably explainable by natural processes, especially with expected tectonic activity because of the shifting weight of the water if nothing else, as well as the freezing of the polar caps, etc.
... which would be a miracle. Thousands of animals hibernating out of season at the same time. That's magic.Personally I think (but its just my opinion with no real evidence) that God, having helped to get the critters on board, helped Noah & co. to care for them by having the critters hibernate.
Sure you can. History leaves traces that we can test. We put murderers in prison all the time because we can use forensic science to test history.You cannot test history.
Evolution is testable because it posits natural explanations for natural phenomena.If you persist on saying it is "untestable" then neither is evolution.
Name some. I'm just going to keep insisting that you're wrong until you can actually put a name to strata that are consistent with a global flood. What about the Morrison Formation? Is it consistent with the Flood? How about the Tendaguru Formation? Is it consistent with the Flood? Or what about the Chinle Formation?On the contrary, the vast majority of strata are consistent with a global flood.
Because, pop, you keep going on and on and on about how much better Flood geology explains the world's strata than conventional geology. And then when the gloves come off and you're actually asked to account for your words, you always resort to the following rhetoric:But note: there is not a 100% accurate model of even current weather. Why are you insisting on one for a time over 4000 years ago?
That is to say, you complain about how complex the Flood would have been, you whine about how difficult it is to model, and you regret how hard it is to come up with predictions that we can verify with ground truth.Understanding GLOBAL dynamics is difficult - and has not been achieved by ANYONE except in very simplified form.
Why not take shernren up on his challenge in this thread, then? For all the confidence you exude about how well Flood geology can explain "the vast majority of strata", you've been mighty quiet there.However, we can look and discuss each site and determine if it is consistent with a global flood model.
pop, if it were not for our ability to use conventional geology to "stitch sites together", we would not be able to recreate maps like this:Very likely, with more researchers and time - lots of time, we can form a more and more coherent picture of how all the sites stitch together - but for now, we just don't have that for conventional geology, let alone flood geology.
pop, there is no amount of water either beneath the crust of the earth or in the sky that could possibly flood the entire earth. It would take a miracle to do that
Evolution is testable because it posits natural explanations for natural phenomena.
And the supernatural cannot be tested by science
An amount that is rather less than what creationists need.i don't know about that. researchers recently claimed they discovered a water source the size of the arctic ocean under the surface.
You can only put so much water into the atmosphere before it starts to condense out. As for sticking the water beneath the surface of the Earth, maybe you ought to find it there first before claiming that it once existed on the surface.the truth is, we do not know how much water is under the surface nor do we know the total amount of water in the atmosphere either.
Monsoons occur over a limited area, not the entire Earth. Additionally, they never provide a 9km depth of water over even this limited area.maybe most of you have not lived in asia but when the monsoons come, we get storms that can provide up to 11 inches of rain in an hour, there is a lot more water around than people give credit for.
You are not just wrong, but are being extremely deceptive. Resistance to antibiotics in bacteria is one example of evolution. ERVs is an example of molecular evidence which shows evolution. Biogeography was one of the fields of evidence that evolution was originally conceived to explain.i will disagree. there is nothing in science that proves or demonstrates the evolutionary process in action. at best it is wishful thinking and hyperbole, inference but not one piece of 'evidence' can show evolution at work or was responsibile.
Science is a method for explaining the world around us. As long as you make factual statements, science can evaluate those statements.science isn't the final authority on any matter, its limitedness disqualifies it as having any definitive say and where in the Bible does God direct us to use science to prove His acts?
God didn't tell us to be stupid. God didn't endorse ignorance. God didn't raise dishonesty to a virtue, even if that dishonest is ostensibly done in His service.God tells us to have faith but not disbelief.
Unless you prayed this anti-science message onto the internet, even you have accepted secular/human constructs. If you're going to reject one, you have to reject all of them. If you accept one (such as medicine or thermodynamics), you'd better accept all of them.which brings us to the core of the problem. christians HAVE accepted secular/human constructs and seek to fit the Bible to what secular people say it should be. doesn't work that way.
A truly miniscule amount of water in the grand scheme of things.i don't know about that. researchers recently claimed they discovered a water source the size of the arctic ocean under the surface.
But we can put very strong constraints on this - constraints that totally rule out global flood rubbish.the truth is, we do not know how much water is under the surface nor do we know the total amount of water in the atmosphere either.
But this not magic appear from nowhere water - it's all completely understood and accounted for.maybe most of you have not lived in asia but when the monsoons come, we get storms that can provide up to 11 inches of rain in an hour, there is a lot more water around than people give credit for.
i will disagree. there is nothing in science that proves or demonstrates the evolutionary process in action. at best it is wishful thinking and hyperbole, inference but not one piece of 'evidence' can show evolution at work or was responsibile.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?