Grand Canyon Disproves Creationism

[Dale]

Right tell that to the people at Oroville dam. They had to deal with the same catastrophic force that created the grand canyon. They were dealing with 12,600 cu ft/s of water pressure.

There is a chance in 2036 that California will have to deal with enough catastrophic force to make Oroville dam look like childs play. Just like Japan had to deal with a lot of catastrophic force from the tsunami there.
giant tsunami waves

Joshua, I'm glad you are still interested in my thread. The breach of the Oroville Dam was an engineering miscalculation. The engineers who designed it didn't think there would ever be that much rain in the area in such a short period of time. It has nothing to do with Uniformitarianism.

That miscalculation is most likely related to global warning due to anthropogenic causes such as the release of huge amounts of CO2 due to the burning of coal and oil. Most creationists deny the phenomena of global warming since they don't understand science.

Do you understand vectors of force? Creationists apparently claim that the Earth was covered by seven vertical miles of water during the great Flood. That's what it would take to cover the top of Mt. Everest. If that were the case, the weight of all that water would be pointed down. Wouldn't that tend to flatten all hills, and all mountains, unless they were made of solid rock? It would not create a complicated landscape of meandering creeks and rivers.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Creationists apparently claim that the Earth was covered by seven vertical miles of water during the great Flood.

The great flood took place back at the time when Pangaea was destroyed. Noah's flood is what we call a paradigm or a shadow and a type of the flood that took place back in the day of the dinosaur.

IF you have an issue with YEC then lets get out the book that Bishop Ussher wrote and show me anything in his 2,000 page book that you can prove is not accurate or true. I know that people after Ussher got mixed up and confused but I think we can rely in the book Ussher wrote over 500 years ago. That is why the book is still around and still in print and why we still talk about YEC Creationism.

 

[joshua 1 9]

It has nothing to do with Uniformitarianism.

The discussion for well over 100 years has to do with catastrophic vs gradualism or uniformitarianism. If you want to argue for uniformitarianism go right ahead but it was catastrophic forces that made the grand canyon not uniformitarianism as you suggest. You do not have a shred of evidence to support your claim cecause science simply does not verify what you are saying.

 

[Dale]

The discussion for well over 100 years has to do with catastrophic vs gradualism or uniformitarianism. If you want to argue for uniformitarianism go right ahead but it was catastrophic forces that made the grand canyon not uniformitarianism as you suggest. You do not have a shred of evidence to support your claim cecause science simply does not verify what you are saying.

How old to you think the Grand Canyon is?
That's a good place to start.

 

[pat34lee]

Most creationists deny the phenomena of global warming since they don't understand science.

That is a damnable slander that needs to stop being spread.

It's like saying that anyone who disagrees with me on economics
can't have a good reason. They're just too stupid to comprehend.

Do you understand that the global warming hysteria is not based
on science facts but on politics and globalism? The agenda drives
the science, and only pays for results that they want. This gives
rise to falsified data and outright fraud.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/19211/global-warming-hoax-exposed-australia-weather-john-nolte

 

[pat34lee]

Do you understand vectors of force? Creationists apparently claim that the Earth was covered by seven vertical miles of water during the great Flood. That's what it would take to cover the top of Mt. Everest.

Nice straw man. How easily they fall under any argument.

Try this. There were no large mountains before the flood;
no deep ocean trenches and the earth's diameter was much
smaller. One or two miles of vertical water would have been
more than enough to drown every land dwelling creature.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674984715000518
http://creationconcepts.org/resources/PREFLOOD.pdf

 

[Job 33:6]

Nice straw man. How easily they fall under any argument.

Try this. There were no large mountains before the flood;
no deep ocean trenches and the earth's diameter was much
smaller. One or two miles of vertical water would have been
more than enough to drown every land dwelling creature.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674984715000518
http://creationconcepts.org/resources/PREFLOOD.pdf

But you see, there would have had to have been uplift and tall mountains before the flood as the superpositionally lowest strata was already uplifted, prior to deposition of superpositionally shallower layers from the flood.

 

[joshua 1 9]

How old to you think the Grand Canyon is?
That's a good place to start.

They say: "the Colorado River has been carving the Grand Canyon for only 6 million years". The rock it self is said to go back 270 million years. Do you want to start getting into a discussion of plate tectonics because if you do then you are missing the point of my post that had to do with water pressure and catastrophic vs gradualism. IF you want to bring plate tectonics into the discussion we can go there and we can do that.

Getting back to the subject we are told: "The volume of flow of the old river varied tremendously over a yearly cycle, from late spring floods that frequently topped 100,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) to late summer flows of only a few thousand cfs." Catastrophic is 100,000 cfs, gradualism is a few thousand cfs. The grand canyon was formed with a catastrophic force of over 100,000 cfs.

https://www.nps.gov/grca/learn/nature/hydrologicactivity.htm

Now, I am going to say this one more time. IF geology does not understand catastrophic theory than they are going to have to deal with disasters like what happened at Oroville where hundreds of thousands of people had to be evacuated. Their homes were at risk if the officials had not resolved the issue The problem there had to do with catastrophic conditions not gradualism.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson is warning people about a catastrophic event that could take place in California in 2036. California has almost constant problems that are considered to be catastrophic. So to deny catastrophic theory and to try to claim this world is the result of gradualism is simply not going were the evidence leads us.

We have spring flooding here and it is something we need to be prepared to deal with. Developers will put in housing projects with sewer systems built to deal with gradualism and they simply are not prepared for the catastrophic conditions of the flooding that takes place in the spring. This is why Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount teaches us to build on a solid foundation. So our work will not be destroyed when the storms of life comes along. If people ONLY understood that one sermon (found in 3 chapters in the book of Matthew) they would go a long way toward understanding the teachings of Jesus.

 

[Dale]

The great flood took place back at the time when Pangaea was destroyed. Noah's flood is what we call a paradigm or a shadow and a type of the flood that took place back in the day of the dinosaur.

IF you have an issue with YEC then lets get out the book that Bishop Ussher wrote and show me anything in his 2,000 page book that you can prove is not accurate or true. I know that people after Ussher got mixed up and confused but I think we can rely in the book Ussher wrote over 500 years ago. That is why the book is still around and still in print and why we still talk about YEC Creationism.

Joshua,

You believe in Bishop Ussher's chronology and yet you also believe in a continent of Pangaea? Bishop Ussher didn't believe in a continent of Pangaea. I don't understand where you are coming from here.

 

[Dale]

That is a damnable slander that needs to stop being spread.

It's like saying that anyone who disagrees with me on economics
can't have a good reason. They're just too stupid to comprehend.

Do you understand that the global warming hysteria is not based
on science facts but on politics and globalism? The agenda drives
the science, and only pays for results that they want. This gives
rise to falsified data and outright fraud.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/19211/global-warming-hoax-exposed-australia-weather-john-nolte

Pat34Lee,

This is a Christian forum. Please avoid the cuss words.

Let me respond to your claim that global warming is "hysteria" not based on facts.
By the way, when do you claim this "hysteria" started? Can you give a year?

I am a chemist. I have a degree in chemistry from Georgia Institute of Technology.

Carbon dioxide is O=C=O, oxygen double bond carbon double bond oxygen.

The carbon-oxygen double bond absorbs infrared. Chemists and physicists have known that since the 19th century. As the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases, it intercepts more infrared rays, both those coming from the sun and those emitted from the earth. In this way, radiation, infrared, becomes molecular motion, warming the atmosphere.

 

[The Barbarian]

They say: "the Colorado River has been carving the Grand Canyon for only 6 million years". The rock it self is said to go back 270 million years.

Yes. The rock has to be older than the river cutting through it. Do you not see why?

Do you want to start getting into a discussion of plate tectonics because if you do then you are missing the point of my post that had to do with water pressure and catastrophic vs gradualism.

The energy required to move continents that far, even in scales of hundreds of years would have boiled the seas.

IF you want to bring plate tectonics into the discussion we can go there and we can do that.

They are still moving. But on the order of centimeters per year. And we know it's been like that for hundreds of millions of years. Do you know why?

Getting back to the subject we are told: "The volume of flow of the old river varied tremendously over a yearly cycle, from late spring floods that frequently topped 100,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) to late summer flows of only a few thousand cfs." Catastrophic is 100,000 cfs, gradualism is a few thousand cfs. The grand canyon was formed with a catastrophic force of over 100,000 cfs.

Now, I am going to say this one more time. IF geology does not understand catastrophic theory than they are going to have to deal with disasters like what happened at Oroville where hundreds of thousands of people had to be evacuated. Their homes were at risk if the officials had not resolved the issue The problem there had to do with catastrophic conditions not gradualism.

You do understand that the uniformitarian geologists recognized and discussed catastrophic changes that happen over time, do you not?

 

[joshua 1 9]

You do understand that the uniformitarian geologists recognized and discussed catastrophic changes that happen over time, do you not?

The point is we have to deal with catastrophic issues. So we need to understand catastrophic theory. Uniformitarian theory far to often creates problems, it does not solve the issues we need to deal with.

 

[The Barbarian]

The point is we have to deal with catastrophic issues.

As you just learned, uniformitarianism does that quite nicely.

So we need to understand catastrophic theory. Uniformitarian theory far to often creates problems, it does not solve the issues we need to deal with.

And now you know otherwise.

 

[joshua 1 9]

And now you know otherwise.

Swing and a miss, nice try though.

 

[Dale]

Swing and a miss, nice try though.

Joshua, you never answered the comment I made in post #169.

Joshua,

You believe in Bishop Ussher's chronology and yet you also believe in a continent of Pangaea? Bishop Ussher didn't believe in a continent of Pangaea. I don't understand where you are coming from here.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You believe in Bishop Ussher's chronology and yet you also believe in a continent of Pangaea?

Yes to both questions. I have a copy of his book (almost 2000 pages). I do not see or find any contradictions between Ussher's book and the Bible. You can read his book online if you want to try to find an error or a contradiction. People say his book is to big. Then treat it like an encyclopedia or reference book and see if you an find any problems with the information contained in his book. His real claim to fame it that the dates he uses for Adam and Eve and everything else like Noah's flood are considered to be extremely accurate.

Bishop Ussher didn't believe in a continent of Pangaea.

Bishop Ussher never heard of Pangaea. In his day they knew very little about PRE RECORDED history. Bishop Ussher's book has to do with RECORDED history. NOT pre recorded history. Whatever his opinion was of pre recorded history really does not matter because his book has NOTHING to do with pre recorded history.

The point is Bishop Ussher was not effected by modern Science. Still his book is accurate and reliable. Based on the Bible and the books he was using at the time.

God is infinite and this subject is infinite. I am trying to keep this simple and concise.

We learn this from Gerald Schroeder. He uses ancient commentaries that were finalized hundreds or thousands of years ago, so we can know that they were not tampered with by people who have a modern understanding of science.

Ussher is YEC and Schroeder is OEC. Still both are accurate from their own perspective. Both testify that the Bible is 100% accurate and true. Both testify that Adam and Eve were real people that lived in a real garden of Eden around 6,000 years ago.

http://geraldschroeder.com/wordpress/?page_id=53

 

[The Barbarian]

Both testify that the Bible is 100% accurate and true.

You're telling us that snakes eat dust? I can assure you that they don't. Do you really believe that the Earth does not move, or that the sky is a dome over a flat Earth, with openings through which rain falls?

Why would these people ignore the message in the Bible, and instead insist that every detail therein must be literally true?

 

[Dale]

Yes to both questions. I have a copy of his book (almost 2000 pages). I do not see or find any contradictions between Ussher's book and the Bible. You can read his book online if you want to try to find an error or a contradiction. People say his book is to big. Then treat it like an encyclopedia or reference book and see if you an find any problems with the information contained in his book. His real claim to fame it that the dates he uses for Adam and Eve and everything else like Noah's flood are considered to be extremely accurate.

Bishop Ussher never heard of Pangaea. In his day they knew very little about PRE RECORDED history. Bishop Ussher's book has to do with RECORDED history. NOT pre recorded history. Whatever his opinion was of pre recorded history really does not matter because his book has NOTHING to do with pre recorded history.

The point is Bishop Ussher was not effected by modern Science. Still his book is accurate and reliable. Based on the Bible and the books he was using at the time.

God is infinite and this subject is infinite. I am trying to keep this simple and concise.

We learn this from Gerald Schroeder. He uses ancient commentaries that were finalized hundreds or thousands of years ago, so we can know that they were not tampered with by people who have a modern understanding of science.

Ussher is YEC and Schroeder is OEC. Still both are accurate from their own perspective. Both testify that the Bible is 100% accurate and true. Both testify that Adam and Eve were real people that lived in a real garden of Eden around 6,000 years ago.

http://geraldschroeder.com/wordpress/?page_id=53

On the accuracy of Bishop Ussher, here is a different opinion.


Bishop Ussher Goofed

Alice C. Linsley

Sunday, April 15, 2007


Quote
Error #1: Ussher did not recognize that the Genesis genealogies are regnal not generational. They cannot be used to count generations because they are king lists and some kings ruled simultaneously, others ruled for short periods, and still others ruled for longer than a generation (40 years).

Error #2 Ussher did not recognize that some of the genealogical lists are telescopic. Telescopic lists leave out some names. Such lists give the names of only the most famous rulers. This means that we cannot use the genealogies to date the earth.

Error #3: Ussher did not understand that the rulers listed had two wives so there were two first-born sons. Ussher did not take this complication into consideration, which is another reason his chronology can't be used to determine the age of the earth.
End Quote


Link:
http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2007/04/bishop-usher-goofed.html

 

[Dale]

Nice straw man. How easily they fall under any argument.

Try this. There were no large mountains before the flood;
no deep ocean trenches and the earth's diameter was much
smaller. One or two miles of vertical water would have been
more than enough to drown every land dwelling creature.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674984715000518
http://creationconcepts.org/resources/PREFLOOD.pdf

You are saying that the earth's diameter changed after the Flood? Wow, just when I thought I'd heard everything. That's a new one. Why would God change the diameter of the earth?

You deny that there were large mountains before the Flood. I found out several years ago that mountains are one reason that creationists insist on using the KJV, which only refers to hills before the Flood. A crucial point is that Noah and the Ark landed on Mt. Ararat, or the Ararat range. The ancient Israelites thought that Mt. Ararat, or the whole range, was the largest and tallest mountain in the world. The idea is that as the floodwaters recede, the tallest mountain is the first to be exposed.

Now Mt. Ararat, and the whole range, is volcanic. If it was created by a volcano during the Flood, Noah and the Ark would have landed on a mountain of rapidly cooling lava. It would have been solid rock, not suitable for farming. Yet the Bible tells us that Noah came out of the Ark and planted a vineyard.

Please explain how all of this adds up because it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Abraxos]

You are saying that the earth's diameter changed after the Flood? Wow, just when I thought I'd heard everything. That's a new one. Why would God change the diameter of the earth?

You deny that there were large mountains before the Flood. I found out several years ago that mountains are one reason that creationists insist on using the KJV, which only refers to hills before the Flood. A crucial point is that Noah and the Ark landed on Mt. Ararat, or the Ararat range. The ancient Israelites thought that Mt. Ararat, or the whole range, was the largest and tallest mountain in the world. The idea is that as the floodwaters recede, the tallest mountain is the first to be exposed.

Now Mt. Ararat, and the whole range, is volcanic. If it was created by a volcano during the Flood, Noah and the Ark would have landed on a mountain of rapidly cooling lava. It would have been solid rock, not suitable for farming. Yet the Bible tells us that Noah came out of the Ark and planted a vineyard.

Please explain how all of this adds up because it doesn't make sense to me.

Actually, volcanoes have some of the best fertile grounds around.