Coincidences?

Frumious Bandersnatch · Aug 19, 2003

My favorite is escapability up the mountains. You know, the one about oak trees outrunning velocirators. The really amusing thing is these same creationists will turn around and tell you that there were no significant mountains before the flood.

Then there is the biome one, you know how mangroves and water lilles alway live high in the mountains and lichens and conifers alway live way down in the swamp. Wait, creationists have this backward too and what about there being no mountains?

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Gracchus · Aug 19, 2003

And if there were no mountains, whence came those thousands of cubic miles of sediment?

Frumious Bandersnatch · Aug 20, 2003

Gracchus said:
And if there were no mountains, whence came those thousands of cubic miles of sediment?

I suppose that would make an interesting topic for a new thread. Creationists postulate that thousands of feet of sediements including sand, gravel, limestone and so on, were deposited all over the world by the flood but they never reveal any source for these sediments. Did God create 10,000 cubic miles of sand somewhere just for it to be picked up by the flood and distributed to form the Coconino sandstones and did He create huge piles of sand in other places to account for all the sandstones in the world? That doesn't make much sense to me.

However, I would like to hear some YECs try to explain the fossil record on this thread. I guess they must know that they can't do it.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Frumious Bandersnatch · Aug 24, 2003

So are the YECs who post ready to admit that there is no way that a significant fraction of the fossil record could have been deposited by a worldwide flood? It seems that way. How many falsifications of the worldwide flood do you need before you follow the lead of the creationist geologists of the 19th century and realize that it is your interpretation of Genesis that is incorrect and not most of science?

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Gracchus · Aug 24, 2003

Frumious Bandersnatch said:
So are the YECs who post ready to admit that there is no way that a significant fraction of the fossil record could have been deposited by a worldwide flood? It seems that way. How many falsifications of the worldwide flood do you need before you follow the lead of the creationist geologists of the 19th century and realize that it is your interpretation of Genesis that is incorrect and not most of science?

The Frumious Bandersnatch

The Frumious Bandersnatch

A long, loud silence....

Siliconaut · Aug 25, 2003

The silence continues... *bump*

Frumious Bandersnatch · Aug 25, 2003

Siliconaut said:
The silence continues... *bump*

Of course it continues. All YEC explanations of how the worldwide flood might have sorted to the fossil record are so easily shown to be nonsense that they have quit trying.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

JohnR7 · Aug 25, 2003

Siliconaut said:
The silence continues... *bump*

The silence continues because no one wants to discuss the issues. The pick on some tiny, tiny little point, then they falsify it, and claim victory. Then when you try to get them into a discussion on the real issues, they do not want to talk about it. Because they know it will not be so easy for them to falsify the real issues at hand.

Nathan Poe · Aug 25, 2003

JohnR7 said:
The silence continues because no one wants to discuss the issues. The pick on some tiny, tiny little point, then they falsify it, and claim victory. Then when you try to get them into a discussion on the real issues, they do not want to talk about it. Because they know it will not be so easy for them to falsify the real issues at hand.

Right, John. We're all familiar with the YEC tactics you've mentioned. This thread was for more rhetorical purposes; trying to expose YECism for the pseudoscientific nonsense it is.

Frumious Bandersnatch · Aug 26, 2003

Nathan Poe said:
Right, John. We're all familiar with the YEC tactics you've mentioned. This thread was for more rhetorical purposes; trying to expose YECism for the pseudoscientific nonsense it is.

And it seems to have done the job well.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

JohnR7 · Aug 26, 2003

Nathan Poe said:
Right, John. We're all familiar with the YEC tactics you've mentioned. This thread was for more rhetorical purposes; trying to expose YECism for the pseudoscientific nonsense it is.

But now they are saying after years of research they have discovered that the universe is Billions of years old. But due to "time delusion" the earth just looks like it is only 6000 years old. Or was it the other way around?

Nathan Poe · Aug 26, 2003

JohnR7 said:
But now they are saying after years of research they have discovered that the universe is Billions of years old. But due to "time delusion" the earth just looks like it is only 6000 years old. Or was it the other way around?

First of all, it's time dilation, not delusion. Using Einstein to salvage YEC.

The belief is, from the article you linked in another thread, that the Earth is 6000-10000 years old, as long as you're there. Because Einstein said that time is relative, Earth is 10,000 years old, and to us, the "edge of the universe" wherever that is, is 15 billion years old, because time goes faster there than here.

If we were at the edge of the universe, it would seem 10,000 years old, but looking back at Earth, it would probably seem only about 6 months old or something because time would seem to be going slower.

And if you believe that, I'll introduce you to Bigfoot.

Frumious Bandersnatch · Aug 26, 2003

Now perhaps some YEC could give us an explanation of how a significant fraction of the fossil record was deposited by a worldwide flood. I won't hold my breath.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Jet Black · Aug 27, 2003

anyone going to answer frumious?

Frumious Bandersnatch · Sep 3, 2003

I am back in town for a couple of days. I see no YEC can deal with the fossil record yet. This is not surprising since the idea that a significant fraction of the fossil record was somehow laid down by a single worldwide flood is totally absurd.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Frumious Bandersnatch · Sep 13, 2003

As I said in my post on the four-legged fish tread, I just visited the Berlin Museum of Natural History which has some famous Fossils. I saw fossil of early amphibians, dinosaurs and modern mammals. All of these fossil are found sorted in the fossil record and never together. Creationists simply can't explain how the flood sorted the fossil record and this is as true of the most educated creationist in the world. Their pseudo explainations are easily seen to be absurd.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Siliconaut · Sep 15, 2003

@Fruminous:

[...] I just visited the Berlin Museum of Natural History which has some famous Fossils.

What the heck?! And you didn't call me so we could meet and reminisce of the good old times? *grinds teeth in frustration*

"See that trilobite? Fierce creatures, they'd jump you and gnaw your arm off. My grand-grand-grand...-grandfather used to make a living off hunting them for their meat. That is, until he was eaten by a T-rex those fierce Neanderthals set upon him!"

Frumious Bandersnatch · Sep 15, 2003

Siliconaut said:
@Fruminous: What the heck?! And you didn't call me so we could meet and reminisce of the good old times? *grinds teeth in frustration*

"See that trilobite? Fierce creatures, they'd jump you and gnaw your arm off. My grand-grand-grand...-grandfather used to make a living off hunting them for their meat. That is, until he was eaten by a T-rex those fierce Neanderthals set upon him!"

Sorry, I didn't have your number. That aside we see that YECs can not possibly explain how a worldwide flood could have deposited a significant portion of the fossil record as YECs claim. This is just one of many falsifications of the worldwide flood that YEC can't possibly deal with.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Siliconaut · Sep 15, 2003

Sorry, I didn't have your number.

Tsk, tsk! It's in the phone book! Right next to my real name!

That aside we see that YECs can not possibly explain how a worldwide flood could have deposited a significant portion of the fossil record as YECs claim. This is just one of many falsifications of the worldwide flood that YEC can't possibly deal with.

Yep, even though they come up with funny ideas like "sorting by density" and other ad-hoc-hypotheses, which are easily shown to be fallacious but continue to be used in the never-ending quest to impress simple country folk. :/

Frumious Bandersnatch · Sep 15, 2003

Siliconaut said:
Tsk, tsk! It's in the phone book! Right next to my real name!

Yep, even though they come up with funny ideas like "sorting by density" and other ad-hoc-hypotheses, which are easily shown to be fallacious but continue to be used in the never-ending quest to impress simple country folk. :/

I like the running up the mountains nonsense. Some wag on one of these boards has said that YEC is the belief that oak trees outran velociraptors while escaping the flood.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

Coincidences?

Contributor

Senior Veteran

Contributor

Contributor

Senior Veteran

Not to be confused with the other Norman Hartnell

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Jet Black

Guest

Contributor

Contributor

Not to be confused with the other Norman Hartnell

Contributor

Not to be confused with the other Norman Hartnell

Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency