How old is the world?

[Mr.Cheese]

Wow.
This thread is a piece of work.
All I wanted to know from the resident flood expert is how many of each animal was placed in the ark.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

Devastation and delicate features can co -exist it merely means that consideration needs to be given to the circumstances surrounding the event and its location. I am not in a position to give a finite opinion on any scenario but as you know I will express an opinion of possibilities.

Another strawman fallacy not to mention completely ignoring the relationship between a variety of these evidences.

 

[notto]

Devastation and delicate features can co -exist it merely means that consideration needs to be given to the circumstances surrounding the event and its location. I am not in a position to give a finite opinion on any scenario but as you know I will express an opinion of possibilities.

Then why don't creationists explain things like dinosaur footprints in coal, mature soils, root structures, and dinosaur egg nests piled one on top of the other for 15 feet?

All we hear is 'the flood did it'. We never hear the specifics. They never give it the considertaion of the circumstances thta you claim is needed.

Can you find me anywhere a creationist explanation of fossil dinosaur footprints inbetween sedimentary layers and a creationist explanation of how they got there, how the sediment they are in and above got there, and how the sediment above them got there preserving them in a global deluge?

 

[f U z ! o N]

Yes it does

please tell me where.

 

[A4C]

Actually I do, and that's why there should be no superposition of paleosols separated by a shale formation, sandstone formation, and a limestone formation.

I have no idea why anti flood advocates present this as a "problem" for us to answer. Surely it is possible for plant life to be inbedded in many layers of sediment based on the circumstances of that particular area. ie was there seismic activity present?, was there sedment washed from mountain areas nearby?, what was the circumstances of receeding water ? etc. etc.

 

[A4C]

please tell me where.

Simply do a time line of all the geneologies and events and you will see there is sufficient information

 

[notto]

I have no idea why anti flood advocates present this as a "problem" for us to answer. Surely it is possible for plant life to be inbedded in many layers of sediment based on the circumstances of that particular area. ie was there seismic activity present?, was there sedment washed from mountain areas nearby?, what was the circumstances of receeding water ? etc. etc.

Again, ignoring HOW they are embedded. They have undisturbed root structures, insect burrows, and other trace fossils.

Can we conclude that the soil below them was preflood if they were buried by the flood? Why or why not? If they were not preflood, how did the layers that contain these things get there without delicate features being distrubed? You said that the flood model can explain it yet no explanation has been forth coming.

 

[random_guy]

I'm gone for 2 days and this thread is completely trashed. I think that Floodnut just gave GodsSamus a "get of out jail free card" because everyone has forgotten that GodsSamus never was able to defend his use of false information.

Only purpose this thread now serves is to show the fanatical beliefs Creationists have to keep in order to shore up their faith.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Wow.
This thread is a piece of work.
All I wanted to know from the resident flood expert is how many of each animal was placed in the ark.

oops

Gen 7:2 "You shall take with you of every clean animal by sevens, a male and his female; and of the animals that are not clean two, a male and his female;
Gen 7:3 also of the birds of the sky, by sevens, male and female, to keep offspring alive on the face of all the earth.

 

[A4C]

Can you find me anywhere a creationist explanation of fossil dinosaur footprints inbetween sedimentary layers and a creationist explanation of how they got there, how the sediment they are in and above got there, and how the sediment above them got there preserving them in a global deluge?

Without much deliberation on this matter I cannot perceive why a dinosaur could not have walked in peat moss prior to the flood which subsequently got covered by layers of sediment thus promoting the formation of the coal deposit (ie not a deposit laid down by vegetation washed out by the flood)
You could also in this scenario have an undisturbed "layer" below the "coal" but this could obviously be the original ground cover and not be a laid down layer by the flood .

 

[f U z ! o N]

Simply do a time line of all the geneologies and events and you will see there is sufficient information

of course it does not directly say how old it is. we are interpreting that to fit a 6000 year. however, where were dinosaurs during these 6000 years, what about what history says about ancient civilizations?

 

[A4C]

of course it does not directly say how old it is. we are interpreting that to fit a 6000 year. however, where were dinosaurs during these 6000 years, what about what history says about ancient civilizations?

Are you suggesting that "infallible" man wrote history books while a "fallible God wrote the Bible?
God forbid!!!

 

[f U z ! o N]

im not saying that. im saying God DID NOT directly say how old the earth is. we are left to assume.

 

[A4C]

im not saying that. im saying God DID NOT directly say how old the earth is. we are left to assume.

Yes you are. Yes He did. No we're not.

 

[f U z ! o N]

ok i want to know a verse than where God says THE EARTH IS 6000 YEARS OLD!
then i will believe it.

 

[A Freethinker]

...but I suppose you're just going to latch onto the tsunami just like you did to a sinkhole event to erroneously explain meteorite craters.

This guy tried to play off meteorite craters as sinkholes? Now I understand why his posts sound so stupid. It's because they actually are.

Ever heard of Shock Quartz?

Come on Creationists, you aren't doing God any favors by lying "for him". The evidence is there and you've seen it, what this has devolved into is Creationists straight up refusing to believe the obvious.

Please stop wasting time by posting the same irrelevant crock that I've seen over and over on this thread (read "The Bible"). It proves nothing. Please address the scientific evidence at hand; otherwise you are simply wasting time and dodging questions, proving to us and yourselves that you really do understand the evidence against your case.

 

[Floodnut]

By your response, are you not further "derailing" this thread? My post isn't stopping anybody from continuing the discussion. Nobody made you read it.

Anyway, for kicks, let's get back on track. Some very good points have been brought up by the... Non-Creationists (not necessarily evolutionists) which have gone unanswered by Creationists. I'd like Creationists to backtrack and try to answer some of these challenges.

Here's another: How can we see light from distant galaxies (over 100 million lightyears away) if the universe is only 6000 years old? The light takes hundreds of millions of years to reach us. For all we know, a star 100 million lightyears away could have died 99 million years ago, and we wouldn't know for another million years.

Your calculations must be incorrect since the earth and the universe were created only 6000 years ago. But you base your interpretation of Scripture on what you perceive to be facts (which are only interptetations).

 

[Floodnut]

who are you to judge? what if we are all wrong?

Is something wrong with judging?

 

[f U z ! o N]

considering God says not to judge someone

 

[Valkhorn]

Your calculations must be incorrect since the earth and the universe were created only 6000 years ago. But you base your interpretation of Scripture on what you perceive to be facts (which are only interptetations).

Stop the Press!!!

We have a live one here!

-------------------------------------

So get this - A creationist argues that any evidence that points to the Earth being older than 6000 years has to be wrong because the Earth is 6000 years old.

We are provided no evidence to say the Earth is 6000 years old other than the Bible.

I can't believe it. This is too funny to pass up.

To formulate a valid argument you develop a premise based on the evidence, NOT formulate a premise and pick and choose what evidence you want!!!

Why do Creationists think they are exempt to logic?
​