Creationist Challenge: Plate Tectonics

dad · May 1, 2006

Split Rock said:
Just out of curiosity, can you explain why the geological processes of the Pre-Spit world based on different laws of nature fit so well with modern geology based on non-changed laws of nature and an older planet?

Yes. When things happened faster, like say, cooling lava, it was so different that if we assume present rates, the results are wildly skewed. If one looks at fossils, say, as well, and also assumes they were not created, but took ages to evolve, one has two wild errors that jive with each other! But the thing is the young earth merged model also jives, and science cannot address the issue except by pure uncut assumptions!

Gracchus · May 1, 2006

dad said:
Yes. When things happened faster, like say, cooling lava, it was so different that if we assume present rates, the results are wildly skewed. If one looks at fossils, say, as well, and also assumes they were not created, but took ages to evolve, one has two wild errors that jive with each other! But the thing is the young earth merged model also jives, and science cannot address the issue except by pure uncut assumptions!

So exactly what is it that does differentiate the pre-split world processes from current processes? Or is there any way to tell? If they are identical in effect, and if the split left no evidence, how do you know that there was a split?

caravelair · May 1, 2006

dad said:
Yes. When things happened faster, like say, cooling lava, it was so different that if we assume present rates, the results are wildly skewed.

nonsense! since last thursday, we have observed no change in the cooling rates, and since the universe was created last thursday, that means the rates have been constant for ALL TIME.

If one looks at fossils, say, as well, and also assumes they were not created, but took ages to evolve, one has two wild errors that jive with each other!

too true, the fossils were created last thursday to create the false appearance of age.

But the thing is the young earth merged model also jives, and science cannot address the issue except by pure uncut assumptions!

just as the last-thursdayism model "jives". way to go.

Frumious Bandersnatch · May 1, 2006

Delusions about a bizarro universe with vastly different and wildly fluctuating laws of physics a few thousand years ago are pure fantasy and do not deserve comment. They seem to be nothing more than a vain attempt to distract attention from the multitude of falsifications of the young earth and global flood that YEC can't hope to deal with scientifically.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

dad · May 1, 2006

Gracchus said:
Gracchus said:

So exactly what is it that does differentiate the pre-split world processes from current processes?

Click to expand...

The former and future merged processes involve the spiritual as well as the physical together. And never can just the physical alone work that way.

Or is there any way to tell? If they are identical in effect, and if the split left no evidence, how do you know that there was a split?

Click to expand...

We can tell from the differences documented in the past and future in the bible. Even in the present, or last several thousand years we can tell by miracles. Miracles are simply the addition of the spiritual in this physical only world. They are a sample and taste of how it will be when the spiritual and physical are combined. For example, Aaron's rod that budded. It grew before the eyes! Even bore fruit. That is how it happens in a merged world.

dad · May 1, 2006

Gracchus said:
So exactly what is it that does differentiate the pre-split world processes from current processes? Or is there any way to tell? If they are identical in effect, and if the split left no evidence, how do you know that there was a split?

The addition of the spiritual is the difference. The physical only can never work the way the both do. The bible tells us how different the past and future are. We know it could not have been just as it now is.

dad · May 1, 2006

caravelair said:
nonsense! since last thursday, we have observed no change in the cooling rates, and since the universe was created last thursday, that means the rates have been constant for ALL TIME.

Where all time is defined as this week, yes. Some of us have a bigger fishbowl than that.

too true, the fossils were created last thursday to create the false appearance of age.

Normally smart sounding people echo this little mantra as if it is wisdom. I really can't understand how they think the world created last week is clever in any way. It is moronic.

caravelair · May 2, 2006

dad said:
Where all time is defined as this week, yes. Some of us have a bigger fishbowl than that.

the thing is, most of your fishbowl is imaginary. only from last thursday onwards is real.

Normally smart sounding people echo this little mantra as if it is wisdom. I really can't understand how they think the world created last week is clever in any way. It is moronic.

it is no more or less moronic than your split/merge nonsense. that's the point, dad. we all see your split/merge idea in the same light that you look at this last-thursdayism idea now. your idea is no less silly than last-thursdayism, and it's not any more testable either.

dad · May 2, 2006

caravelair said:
the thing is, most of your fishbowl is imaginary. only from last thursday onwards is real.

The physical only universe is real. We live in it and observe it. Just as we observed more than this week, most of us. That is a silly fallback position trying to ridicule any belief that the PO was not forever, cause you can't support the idea! Basically, a tacit admission of total defeat.

it is no more or less moronic than your split/merge nonsense. that's the point, dad.

It is the point. The future and past were different, and all you can offer is shrill denials without proofs, observations, testings, or anything else but 'it's so because I say so'. Well, no, we need more than that.
My idea at least fits the bible. It also fits the evidence as your idea claims to do. Unlike your we popped up ;last week, and everything is an illusion idea.

Adriac · May 2, 2006

dad said:
The physical only universe is real. We live in it and observe it. Just as we observed more than this week, most of us. That is a silly fallback position trying to ridicule any belief that the PO was not forever, cause you can't support the idea! Basically, a tacit admission of total defeat.

Nuh uh. All your memories of anything before last thursday were created last thursday, along with all the rest of the universe.

You couldn't have actually experienced anything before last thursday, because the universe was only created last thursday! Duh.

dad · May 2, 2006

Adriac said:
Nuh uh. All your memories of anything before last thursday were created last thursday, along with all the rest of the universe.

You couldn't have actually experienced anything before last thursday, because the universe was only created last thursday! Duh.

You have a hard time grasping how matter could be different in the future or past, and the state of the universe fundamentally altered. No need to bring up silly last week creation theories. You must admit, that would explain rapid continental seperation. If it were true. Just like your physical only past claim, if true, would explain slow continental seperation.

No need to get silly about it, science just cannot tell us about the past and future being merged or not, period. It does cover last week, but I am not going to waste time 'proving' the obvious! I don't need absolute proof, science is not about that. For all intents and purposes it can be proved we were here 2 weeks ago.

Adriac · May 2, 2006

dad said:
You have a hard time grasping how matter could be different in the future or past, and the state of the universe fundamentally altered. No need to bring up silly last week creation theories. You must admit, that would explain rapid continental seperation. If it were true. Just like your physical only past claim, if true, would explain slow continental seperation.

No need to get silly about it, science just cannot tell us about the past and future being merged or not, period. It does cover last week, but I am not going to waste time 'proving' the obvious! I don't need absolute proof, science is not about that. For all intents and purposes it can be proved we were here 2 weeks ago.

No it can't. All of your so-called "evidence" was created along with the rest of the universe, last thursday.

I like how you have to resort to calling the TRUTH of last-thursdayism "silly". Might as well just admit you can't refute it rationally.

dad · May 2, 2006

Adriac said:
No it can't. All of your so-called "evidence" was created along with the rest of the universe, last thursday.

I like how you have to resort to calling the TRUTH of last-thursdayism "silly". Might as well just admit you can't refute it rationally.

I can, within reason. And that is all we ask. Reason.

Isa 1:18 - Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Adriac · May 2, 2006

dad said:
I can, within reason. And that is all we ask. Reason.

Isa 1:18 - Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Yeah, right. If you'd just look at what's right in front of your eyes, rather than believing in these dogmatic old-earth idiocies, you'd see the truth of last-thursdayism.

dad · May 3, 2006

Adriac said:
Yeah, right. If you'd just look at what's right in front of your eyes, rather than believing in these dogmatic old-earth idiocies, you'd see the truth of last-thursdayism.

What is in front of my eyes is a temporary physical universe. It is nice. Science is also here, it knows there was a last week. E=mc2 was written long ago. You doubt this? You stand against education, science, God and the bible, as well as reason, and common sense, and logic, and the evidence.

Nightson · May 3, 2006

dad said:
it knows there was a last week.

It knows no such thing. You cannot disprove last thursdayism, thats the whole point of it dad.

caravelair · May 3, 2006

dad said:
The physical only universe is real. We live in it and observe it. Just as we observed more than this week, most of us.

no you didn't, you were just created with the false memories of before last week to create the appearance of a universe that is older than 1 week. your memories were created on thursday though, along with everything else.

That is a silly fallback position trying to ridicule any belief that the PO was not forever, cause you can't support the idea!

you're right, it was not forever, it only existed since last thursday. the merge/split is a silly fallback position to deny the truth of last-thrusdayism, because you can't support the idea that the universe existed before last thursday!

Basically, a tacit admission of total defeat.

nope, last-thursdayism claims victory, not defeat. you can't disprove it, so it must be true!

It is the point. The future and past were different, and all you can offer is shrill denials without proofs, observations, testings, or anything else but 'it's so because I say so'.

no, the past has always been the same since it was created last thursday. all you can offer is shrill denials without proofs, observations, testings, or anything else but "it's so because i say so".

Well, no, we need more than that.

yes we need more than what you have offered to disprove last-thursdayism.

My idea at least fits the bible.

so does mine. the bible was created as part of the evidence indicating a false age of more than 1 week.

It also fits the evidence as your idea claims to do. Unlike your we popped up ;last week, and everything is an illusion idea.

actually, last-thursdayism fits with ALL evidence 100% perfectly. your idea does not fit with the evidence any more than ours.

caravelair · May 3, 2006

dad said:
What is in front of my eyes is a temporary physical universe. It is nice. Science is also here, it knows there was a last week.

no it doesn't, it just THINKS there was a last week because of all the false evidence that was planted there to make it appear as if it were so. you know, just like how those silly scientists think the world is billions of years old. it's not, it's less than a week old. silly scientists!

E=mc2 was written long ago. You doubt this?

of course i do! it was written last thursday, it was just placed in some history books and science books to help create the false illusion of age.

You stand against education, science, God and the bible, as well as reason, and common sense, and logic, and the evidence.

so do you, with the possible exception of god and the bible, though it's a matter of opinion, i'm sure.

correlationrevelation · May 3, 2006

the world is 30,000 years old? That is a HUGE assumption, and everything that you said hinges on that creation "date".
- Adrienne

Frumious Bandersnatch · May 3, 2006

correlationrevelation said:
the world is 30,000 years old? That is a HUGE assumption, and everything that you said hinges on that creation "date".
- Adrienne

I may be misinterpreting it but I think the point of the OP is that the break up of Pangea to form the present continents can not be fit in a 30,000 year old earth so there is no way they could fit in the 6,000 year old earth that YECs claim.

the Frumious Bandersnatch

Creationist Challenge: Plate Tectonics

Undefeated!

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

Well-Known Member

Undefeated!

Well-Known Member

Undefeated!

Well-Known Member

Undefeated!

Well-Known Member

Undefeated!

Take two snuggles and call me in the morning

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency