Lake Suigetsu, the Flood and Objects of Known Age

[rmwilliamsll]

You're welcome.

YECs often claim they look at the same data and interpret it differently but in many cases such as this one they actually provide no logical scientific interpretation. This is one of many cases wher I have never seen a scientific interpretation that fits with a young earth and recent global flood.

people can not visualize big numbers. that is why those guessing games with objects in containers are so popular.

venice is sinking, or the sea is rising a matter of inches.

a global flood is MILES.

the age of the earth to YECism is like the rise of the sea in Venice to a global flood covering Mt. Everest. off by a half a dozen orders of magnitude.

4.5B/10k ~.5*10^6
1*12*5200*5~.3*10^6
i think, just rough back of the envelope, in your head comparisions.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

The question for this thread is whether any believer in a recent global flood that covered the entire earth at the same time about 5,000 years ago can explain the data in the OP and the data linked in post 10 and those presented in post 20. using "flood geology". It appears not.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

 

[USincognito]

The question for this thread is whether any believer in a recent global flood that covered the entire earth at the same time about 5,000 years ago can explain the data in the OP and the data linked in post 10 and those presented in post 20. using "flood geology".

Don't forget in Ussher's chronology it was only 4,000 years ago. YECs... any takers? Anyone?

 

[AV1611VET]

As I understand it, God created the universe with age embedded in it.

 

[USincognito]

Which god? Loki?

 

[Baggins]

As I understand it, God created the universe with age embedded in it.

Why on earth would he want to do that?

Isn't that lying to, or playing tricks on his creation?

Is a god who'd do that worthy of worship?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why on earth would he want to do that?

Isn't that lying to, or playing tricks on his creation?

Is a god who'd do that worthy of worship?

Hi, Baggins, nice to meet you.

A young earth would, of course, not support life. When you see pictures of the Garden of Eden, what do you see? Fully-grown vegetation and flora. Same with Adam and Eve: fully-grown and walking around. If Adam and Eve hadn't been created without age embedded, then they wouldn't have been able to walk with God and talk with God.

 

[AV1611VET]

Which god? Loki?

Hello, USincognito

I was referring to Elohim, the God of Creation.

 

[USincognito]

But you don't see Adam with an apendecthomy scar for a surgery when he was a boy do you? That's what your suggestion of the appearance of age is analogous to. We don't just see "fully formed" mountains, we see mountains that occured due to geological activity that took place over time, activity you are saying didn't take place.

Why do we see the evidence for that activity having taken place?

 

[steen]

As I understand it, God created the universe with age embedded in it.

Hmm, wouldn't that be deceptive, deliberately make things look different than reality?

And I must have missed where in the Bible this is explained?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why do we see the evidence for that activity having taken place?

IF mountains existed on the 6th day of Creation (and I suspect they did), geologic activity most certainly did not put them there. I would venture a guess and say God put them there, as they serve a purpose as far as hydrology and other sciences are concerned.

 

[steen]

Hi, Baggins, nice to meet you.

A young earth would, of course, not support life. When you see pictures of the Garden of Eden, what do you see? Fully-grown vegetation and flora. Same with Adam and Eve: fully-grown and walking around. If Adam and Eve hadn't been created without age embedded, then they wouldn't have been able to walk with God and talk with God.

Ah, but why would Adam & Eve need distant suns to be red-shifted? And why would they need radioactive isotope decay at varying stages? And why would they need genetic differences in DNA of organisms fitting so perfectly with an evolutionary history of almost 4 bill years?

Why would Adam and Eve need everything so detailed created that it makes scientists consistently find evidence of origin as science has consistently found its pattern to be?

That really doesn't make sense and therefore again leaves us with a deceptive God, which certainly is a concept I have serious problems with.

 

[steen]

IF mountains existed on the 6th day of Creation (and I suspect they did), geologic activity most certainly did not put them there. I would venture a guess and say God put them there, as they serve a purpose as far as hydrology and other sciences are concerned.

But not for the science of plate techtonics?

 

[USincognito]

IF mountains existed on the 6th day of Creation (and I suspect they did), geologic activity most certainly did not put them there. I would venture a guess and say God put them there, as they serve a purpose as far as hydrology and other sciences are concerned.

Did you actually take a look at the OP and the other posts Fruminous Bandersnatch pointed out on the previous page? These geological activities can only be explained as having occured with the changes of seasons as millions of years passed.

You don't worship a trickster like Loki. You might want to think about this stuff for a bit and dig around some of the links that have already been provided relating to the Opening Post of this thread.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why would Adam and Eve need everything so detailed created that it makes scientists consistently find evidence of origin as science has consistently found its pattern to be?

Hi Steen,

Many questions! Good ones, too!

The Anthropic Principle explains the fine-tuned Universe you're alluding to; and Evolution is not "patterned", as the Cambrian Explosion and Punctuated Equilibrium testify.

But I'm basically referring to this Universe, as it existed at Day Six.

 

[AV1611VET]

Did you actually take a look at the OP and the other posts Fruminous Bandersnatch pointed out on the previous page? These geological activities can only be explained as having occured with the changes of seasons as millions of years passed.

You don't worship a trickster like Loki. You might want to think about this stuff for a bit and dig around some of the links that have already been provided relating to the Opening Post of this thread.

No, I didn't. I just wanted to make the point that in my opinion --- God created the Universe with age embedded.

Any science that disagrees with the Bible is wrong - including plate tectonics, if it disagrees.

 

[USincognito]

No, I didn't. I just wanted to make the point that in my opinion --- God created the Universe with age embedded.

Any science that disagrees with the Bible is wrong - including plate tectonics, if it disagrees.

O.k. I guess you don't have anything to add otherwise then. You might find time in the Origins Theology subforum a more productive use of your Christian Forums time. Hope to see you over there.

 

[steen]

The Anthropic Principle explains the fine-tuned Universe you're alluding to;

how?

and Evolution is not "patterned", as the Cambrian Explosion and Punctuated Equilibrium testify.

For one, I reject your claim of the "Cambrian explosion" as anything unusual or outside of patterns, and secondly, I reject you claiming PE as unusual. In fact, I see the "C.E." as one example of a punctuated equilibrium. A mutation opens up new niches, and there is a myriad of new species evolving to occupy all aspects of that niche. Nothing unusual or outside of "pattern" in that.

But I'm basically referring to this Universe, as it existed at Day Six.

But then, I also reject a literal "day 6," so that doesn't bring any meaning across to me.

And none of this explains how God needed the unique aspects of the universe to appear aged. Certainly, Adam and Eve did not have any benefit of stars having been "created" with a left-shift.

 

[AV1611VET]

And none of this explains how God needed the unique aspects of the universe to appear aged.

Hi, Steen

Who said God needed the universe to "appear" anything? My point is that He created the Universe with age embedded in it --- not: He created the Universe to appear that it has age embedded in it.

Again, according to the well-documented tenets of the Anthropic Principle, it is Adam (as well as you and I) --- not God --- that need the "unique aspects of the universe" to survive.

But then, I also reject a literal "day 6," so that doesn't bring any meaning across to me.

How then did the flora survive without the benefit of the Sun, which was created on the Fourth Day, if, say, the days were n years?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

As I understand it, God created the universe with age embedded in it.

The Omphalos hypothesis has severe philosophical problems but even so it does not rescue YEC from the main problem presented on this thread. Do you think that God recreated Lake Suigetsu and the Lake in Poland that Loudmouth refered to in Post 20 after the flood with the appearance of age embedded in it? Did He create these varve sequences after the flood so that they would appear to be annual and appear to have C14 dates that correlate with tree ring chronologies, coral couplets and ice cores as I pointed out in Post 10?

If God went to so much trouble to recreate an earth that looked like it was not flooded why did he inspire his "chosen people" supposed record the story in their holy book? Was He just trying to be confusing?

Now does any YEC who thinks the entire world was under the waters of a global flood that totally rearranged the earth's geology a few thousand years ago have any actual explanation for the data presented in this thread?