"Embedded Age" Requires Fake Fossils

[bhsmte]

It is my hypothesis! I wish you or some other scientist would build on that. If science represents the search for truth, then we must consider all reality instead of excluding from it what is most precious to Christians. God either exists or he doesn't. If he does, then science will never discover what really happened in the deep past if they close the door to true search for truth.

Science considers the evidence. If no evidence exists, you wouldn't want it to be manufactured, would you?

 

[AV1611VET]

Science considers the evidence. If no evidence exists, you wouldn't want it to be manufactured, would you?

Like the SETI array?

 

[bhsmte]

We do not share a common ancestor with apes. What we share with apes is a common designer.

All kinds of objective evidence would disagree with you.

If you have to deny the evidence, I understand, but the evidence isn't going away because you don't like it.

 

[Nic Samojluk]

And creationists don't have their own journals to publish in? They don't have ways of getting their research out to the public?

They do. Here is one example. BTW, Dr. Roth is a man who shares my views about origins.

Ariel Roth
Creationist biologist and geologist
Biography

Ariel A. Roth has published extensively on the creation-evolution issue for over 50 years and is a leading figure in Flood geology. He is a former professor of biology and director of the Geoscience Research Institute at the Loma Linda University in the USA and editor of the scientific journal Origins. Roth has a B.A. in Biology from the Pacific Union College and a M.S. and Ph.D. in biology from the University of Michigan. In addition he has qualifications in radiation biology from the University of California at Berkley and in geology and mathematics from the University of California at Riverside. He is a member of the Geological Society of America and the Society for Sedimentary Geologists. Roth is a prolific author of scientific papers in the fields of biology and geology as well as of the book Origins: Linking Science and Scripture. For more information see interview with Ariel Roth. See also his chapter in In Six Days.

Articles

• ‘Flat gaps’ in sedimentary rock layers challenge long geologic ages

 

[Herman Hedning]

Like the SETI array?

Is there a problem with the Allen Telescope Array being built?

 

[RickG]

Since I believe the Flood was global,

So do I, but not as described in the Genesis account. Rather stories handed down from observed flooding as a result of the retreat of the Laurentide ice sheet. There are several scientifically documented flood events that affected global sea level rise significantly. One of the last ones encroached the Black Sea increasing its size by more than a third and encroaching upon what are now known as the mountains of Ararat.

I believe there was more water on the earth during the Flood than there was when the creation week ended.

However, the well understood global water cycle says different.

Where did all that water go then, after the Flood?

It's still there although isostatic rebound would account for some of the apparent digression.

Scripture seems to indicate that God ordered the Flood waters to go to a rendezvous point -- probably for removal from the earth, else the earth would obviously still be underwater.

And where is this rendezvous point.

So again, where did all that water go?

There's been no change in global water content. The water cycle is a feedback system.

I believe God "siphoned" it off the earth and put it somewhere else in the solar system.

What an imagination.

Now it gets interesting.

You mean you are going to top the last claim?

Since God dosen't do anything haphazardly, I believe He may have put the water ... along with all the "floaties" in it ... on Neptune to serve as some sort of "warning beacon" to rogue angels that may be contemplating visiting us and repeating the events of Genesis 6.

Yup! That tops that. God, I hope Nic is reading your post.

Much like emperors of the past would put victims heads on poles to adorn the entrance to a city as a warning sign of who they were messing with; God may have put the dead bodies of the dinosaurs, humans, giants (nephilim), layers of earth and so on as a "final warning" to these angels.

Uh hu....keep going.

Just a pet theory of mine that nicely explains:

1. where the water went after the Flood
2. why there's no physical evidence of the Flood
3. meandering rivers

Actually that's not a theory, in fact not even a hypothesis; and as for a belief, yeah, a fabricated belief.

For those who disagree with me about Neptune -- and believe me, I expect them to -- I have a simple question:

Where do you think the waters went?

Some think the moon was a viable placement (hence its "seas"), some think Mars (hence its "channels"), I think Neptune.

The moon has no seas, never has. Those are lava flows. Where did it go after Mars? The water is not here any more you know.

 

[Nic Samojluk]

I specifically made it clear that the scientific fields involving the expertise of dating rocks, sediments, etc., is not that of evolution, rather geochemistry and geochronology.

Yes, I did understand what you meant. You answer is correct for those who believe in deep time and millions of years, which I do not share. This is why I suggested that it was in the eyes of the beholder.

When a person rejects the idea of common design, he gets stuck with evolution and deep time.

 

[RickG]

They do. Here is one example. BTW, Dr. Roth is a man who shares my views about origins.

Ariel Roth
Creationist biologist and geologist
Biography

Ariel A. Roth has published extensively on the creation-evolution issue for over 50 years and is a leading figure in Flood geology. He is a former professor of biology and director of the Geoscience Research Institute at the Loma Linda University in the USA and editor of the scientific journal Origins. Roth has a B.A. in Biology from the Pacific Union College and a M.S. and Ph.D. in biology from the University of Michigan. In addition he has qualifications in radiation biology from the University of California at Berkley and in geology and mathematics from the University of California at Riverside. He is a member of the Geological Society of America and the Society for Sedimentary Geologists. Roth is a prolific author of scientific papers in the fields of biology and geology as well as of the book Origins: Linking Science and Scripture. For more information see interview with Ariel Roth. See also his chapter in In Six Days.

Articles

• ‘Flat gaps’ in sedimentary rock layers challenge long geologic ages

So his area is biology, why is he publishing something in the area of sedimentology? Anyway, thanks for the link, I will read it.

 

[bhsmte]

Yes, I did understand what you meant. You answer is correct for those who believe in deep time and millions of years, which I do not share. This is why I suggested that it was in the eyes of the beholder.

When a person rejects the idea of common design, he gets stuck with evolution and deep time.

It's actually in the eyes of the evidence.

Now, some eyes do reject and deny this evidence.

 

[Nic Samojluk]

If you ever see the employment requirements for Answers in Genesis or other such sites you will see that they order their employees to abandon the scientific method. They have to assume that the Bible is right no matter what the evidence says.

The problem with the scientific method is that it requires a commitment to materialistic philosophy. This is something a true Christian will never agree to. In my view, an honest and open minded Christian scientist should never accept the wrong notion that there are no scientific errors in the Bible.

 

[Loudmouth]

The problem with the scientific method is that it requires a commitment to materialistic philosophy. This is something a true Christian will never agree to. In my view, an honest and open minded Christian scientist should never accept the wrong notion that there are no scientific errors in the Bible.

Do you think we can trust God's Creation to tell us the truth about the history of the Earth?

 

[bhsmte]

The problem with the scientific method is that it requires a commitment to materialistic philosophy. This is something a true Christian will never agree to. In my view, an honest and open minded Christian scientist should never accept the wrong notion that there are no scientific errors in the Bible.

In your opinion then, does this mean the majority of Christians who agree with evolutionary theory, are not real Christians?

 

[lasthero]

They do

So you admit your complaints about censorship were baseless?

 

[Loudmouth]

I gave you some examples of major life forms: dogs, elephants, and rats.

Why do creationists never understand how biology works? Dogs, elephants, and rats are all part of the mammal kind.

 

[bhsmte]

My field is religion. My dissertation dealt with abortion. I know very little about biology and geology. I do agree that we did not evolve from chimpanzees; but I do not accept the notion that we share a common ancestor. We do share, though, a common design.

If someone told you, they were in a certain field that was not theology and they disagreed with your interpretation of scripture, you probably wouldn't take their opinion very seriously now would you?

 

[Loudmouth]

What we still have not seen the creationists try to explain the consistent results from radiometric dating. For example . . .

"There are several important things to note about these results. First, the Cretaceous and Tertiary periods were defined by geologists in the early 1800s. The boundary between these periods (the K-T boundary) is marked by an abrupt change in fossils found in sedimentary rocks worldwide. Its exact location in the stratigraphic column at any locality has nothing to do with radiometric dating — it is located by careful study of the fossils and the rocks that contain them, and nothing more. Second, the radiometric age measurements, 187 of them, were made on 3 different minerals and on glass by 3 distinctly different dating methods (K-Ar and 40Ar/39Ar are technical variations that use the same parent-daughter decay scheme), each involving different elements with different half-lives. Furthermore, the dating was done in 6 different laboratories and the materials were collected from 5 different locations in the Western Hemisphere. And yet the results are the same within analytical error. If radiometric dating didn’t work then such beautifully consistent results would not be possible."
http://ncse.com/rncse/20/3/radiometric-dating-does-work

They claim that they use the same evidence but interpret it differently. That isn't true. They never face up to the evidence, such as the evidence presented above.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We do not share a common ancestor with apes. What we share with apes is a common designer.

Denying a fact does not make it false. There is no reliable evidence for your claim, there is for mine.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And why there is such huge gap in our abilities? Can you discuss this topic with any of the apes? My bet is that the future descendants of apes will never match the mental capacity or the language abilities of humans. The reason is quite simple: Humans were created in the image of God, while apes were not.

I suggest that you adopt the common design hypothesis! It would solve the most serious problems of evolutionist scientists.

What problems? And there is no scientific "common design hypothesis", and as you know that is only the fault of creationists.

Chimpanzees have different abilities than we do, some of their mental talents even beat ours. There is not an unreasonable difference in our abilities.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Junk DNA is not junk after all. Scientists are beginning to discover that such DNA have a function in the organism.

I am sorry but you are listening to creationists that bought into some hype from Project ENCODE. I am not at my home computer right now, but I can give you some links later today on this topic. But here is a simple "proof" of the existence of Junk DNA. Are you more "complex" than an onion? Not according to your claim, they have several times the DNA that you do. Are you more complex than an amoeba? Not according to you, they can have up to 200 times the amount of DNA than you have.

 

[Nic Samojluk]

I reject abortion as well.

Glad to hear that! Perhaps you might be interested in reading my books on this topic. Here is the link:

“From Pro-life to Pro-choice,” and “Murder in Paradise”

http://www.lulu.com/shop/nic-samojluk/murder-in-paradise/paperback/product-21623695.html

In the event you prefer not to spend money on them, I am offering to order a gift copy of one of them if you send me your name and mailing address. My email is nic1@inbox.com