Evolutionary debate

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Is that your explanation?

Pangea began to break up 175 million years ago. There is no more need to "explain" how Pangea broke up in one man's lifetime than there is to explain how Santa visits all the children in the world in one night use a sled drawn by flying Reindeer or how a blue ox could be so big it took crows a whole day to fly from horn to horn.

 

[shinbits]

There is no more need to "explain" how Pangea broke up in one man's lifetime than there is to explain how Santa visits all the children in the world in one night use a sled drawn by flying Reindeer

You know, that belief about Santa isn't actually correct.

Santa supposedly delivers presents to kids who've been good all year long. People always leave that out for some reason.

That being the case, Santa is probably only delivering presents to about one or two kids on the entire planet. So it's not as impossible as it sounds.

 

[AV1611VET]

There is no more need to "explain" how Pangea broke up in one man's lifetime...

You got that right.

The Bible says it -- that settles it.

Therefore I reject your uniformitarianism.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

You got that right.

The Bible says it -- that settles it.

Therefore I reject your uniformitarianism.

Rejecting reality in favor of your interpretation of the Bible won't change reality.

 

[AV1611VET]

Rejecting reality in favor of your interpretation of the Bible won't change reality.

Good -- I reject your uniformitarianism.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Good -- I reject your uniformitarianism.

Reject away. I prefer to call the approach of modern geology actualism as I explained already. I am interested in what actually happened rather than what you claim happened based on your particular interpretation of a book of Hebrew Origin stories.

 

[AV1611VET]

Reject away. I prefer to call the approach of modern geology actualism as I explained already.

Fair enough -- I reject your acutalism.

Especially if it can't explain how Pangaea became the seven continents* in one man's lifetime.

* Five continents actually. It wasn't until the Panama and Suez canals were built that we got seven continents.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Fair enough -- I reject your acutalism.

Especially if it can't explain how Pangaea became the seven continents* in one man's lifetime.

It is not necessary to explain something that did not happen.

* Five continents actually. It wasn't until the Panama and Suez canals were built that we got seven continents.

Actually North and South American were separated before the isthmus of Panama formed about 3 million years ago.

Isthmus of Panama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This led to the Great American Interchange

Great American Interchange - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and the eventual extinction of a large number of South American Marsupial species.

 

[Greatcloud]

There are a few spiritual gifts that are not considered "active" or needed anymore. Tounges is not considered to be needed because we now have the written word for our benefit.

As a Charismatic I disagree and believe we need all the gifts and miracles for today, just like answers to prayer.

AV1611VET.....You believe in the miraculas in answers to prayer. Well also every book of the Bible has the miraculas in it except two Esther and the Song of Songs. Thats every book of the new testament too. Also our church speakes in tounges a lot and so do I in my prayer closet and in public. We also practice the laying on of hands to heal the sick. We also get slain in the Spirit, as do millions of other Charismatics and Penecostals and Assembly of God as well as many others.

Frumious Bandersnatch........During the flood is when the continents were torn apart. The Bible speaks all about it. The time frame could be hundreds of years to ultimately finish what began during the flood.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

{Snip}
Frumious Bandersnatch........During the flood is when the continents were torn apart. The Bible speaks all about it. The time frame could be hundreds of years to ultimately finish what began during the flood.

AV says it all happened after the flood. You can't both be right but you can both be very wrong and you are.

I suppose you are talking about the YEC flood model called Catastrophic Plate Tectonics of Baumgardner et al.
Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: A Global Flood Model of Earth History

There are a multitude of falsifications of the that model including the geologic column and fossil record. One falsification I have discussed before is the problem that Catastrophic plate tectonics would have ended life on earth.

http://www.christianforums.com/t60449/

I discuss several of the other falsifications of CPT aka Runaway Subduction on that thread

http://www.christianforums.com/t60449/#post1103930

Unfortunately some of the links no longer work.

If you are talking about Walt Brown's hydroplate flood model that one is even goofier and cooks the earth to death many times over as well as being totally unable to account for the earth's geology and paleontology.

Walter Brown's Hydroplate Theory

Both of these creationists fanstasy models complete the process of continental separation and cooking the earth to death before the end of the flood so they do not fit with AV's interpretation.

 

[SkyWriting]

AV says it all happened after the flood. You can't both be right but you can both be very wrong and you are. ...

Sorry. You are referring possible past events. One can develop theories to fit the facts best. But each theory is a hypothetical solution to observations people can re-check. Your own favorite theory is no different.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Sorry. You are referring possible past events. One can develop theories to fit the facts best. But each theory is a hypothetical solution to observations people can re-check. Your own favorite theory is no different.

Wrong. There is a big difference. Current geological models of plate tectonics and geology in general are supported by a wide variety of observations, explain an wide variety of observations and have not been falsified. Creationist fantasies about a global flood and rapid continent separation either during or after the flood are supported by nothing in science and explain nothing in science that can't be explained better by "mainstream science" but most importantly have been falsified by a wide variety of observations.

 

[AV1611VET]

Current geological models of plate tectonics and geology in general are supported by a wide variety of observations...

Three questions:

1. At what grade of clarity are these observations?
2. Do any of these observations contradict or overlap?
3. Are these the same observations that gave us four different stories as to how we got our moon?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Three questions:

1. At what grade of clarity are these observations?

1. I am not sure exactly what you mean but the observations, measurements and calculations of current and past plate movements and rates are quite solid as far as I know though not all questions are yet answered of course. If you have any evidence of problems with mainstream geology let's hear them. (Your interpretation of the Bible does not count as evidence)

   [*]Do any of these observations contradict or overlap?

The current picture of plate tectonics is of course supported by multiple overlapping observations as are the data on the age of the earth and the data falsifying the global flood. If you think there are any that are contradictory observations please post them and we can discuss whether they are or not. You and Skywriter clearly have contradictory ideas about the timing of the breakup of Pangea.

Are these the same observations that gave us four different stories as to how we got our moon?

You are very fond of this one aren't you? There is no current dispute in science that the moon formed about 4.5 billion years ago about 100 million years after the formation of the earth. The hypothesis that explains the data best is the ejected ring hypothesis. Science progresses by formulating, testing and rejecting hypotheses on the basis of evidence. The recently created earth and global flood were rejected as falsified based on evidence more than 150 years ago and all the evidence of science since then reinforces that rejection.

 

[AV1611VET]

You are very fond of this one aren't you?

Let me get to my main point.

I have a real problem with you guys calling this stuff 'observations'.

You haven't observed a thing; all you can do, at very best, is take a guess.

And of my three questions, I did not fail to notice that you used the word 'observations' to answer #2, but not#1 and #3.

To be sure, I plan to challenge you guys on your 'clarities of observation' in your future [myopic] explanations of Biblical events; if for no other reason than to see how you answer.

I think my point is pretty clear: science is myopic.

 

[SkyWriting]

Wrong. There is a big difference. Current geological models of plate tectonics and geology in general are ...

...the Current geological models of plate tectonics and geology.
Meaning they are replaceable by the ones that follow.

 

[SkyWriting]

...The recently created earth and global flood were rejected as falsified based on evidence more than 150 years ago and all the evidence of science since then reinforces that rejection.

I had no idea you were that old.
You're not speaking for everyone.

Besides, you're referring to old models and theories. Not the current Creationist models and theories.

 

[Ryal Kane]

The current picture of plate tectonics is of course supported by multiple overlapping observations as are the data on the age of the earth and the data falsifying the global flood. If you think there are any that are contradictory observations please post them and we can discuss whether they are or not. You and Skywriter clearly have contradictory ideas about the timing of the breakup of Pangea.

A few years back I watched a Penn and Teller show debunking UFO conspiracy theorists. At one point they went to a convention with lots of people peddling their theories. What was really fascinating was that while all these theories contradicted each other, none of the people seemed to even notice. So long as they re-enforced the belief that aliens existed, they were fine.

Likewise, I've noticed that really dedicated creationists don't mind if other creationists hold a theory that contradicts theirs. All that matters is that they re-enforce the general creationist belief.

 

[Cassiterides]

Whoever said the Chinese descend from Canaan is way off. Chinese (Asians) descend from Japheth.

Genesis 9: 27 ''God shall enlarge Japheth''

Asians are more than 60% of the world's population, China's population is also the highest at 1. 4 billion people.

If you look at Miautsu-Chinese folklore the name ''Jahphu'' appears as their progenitor clearly identfiable as Japheth. They have a flood story which also speaks of Nuah.

For more info see: Truax, E. Genesis According to the Miao People. Impact Article. April 1991. Institute for Creation Research.

 

[AV1611VET]

Whoever said the Chinese descend from Canaan is way off. Chinese (Asians) descend from Japheth.

Japheth is considered the progenitor of the Europeans.