Missing link was a lie

[dad]

This is hilarious coming from you. How about you supporting your claims for once? How about you doing any of the following?

1. Explain in detail how the laws of thermodynamics were different pre-split. In particular, how it was that less heat was given by faster plate tectonics. Give us the details, not just "Vague Balderdash."

Explain how they existed at all first? You seem to assume present state matter, like rock was what existed in the past, and want to explain away heat IT would have produced. Better to look at what we had here, and realize there was no to explain away. Stick to what we know.

2. Explain in detail how the laws of electromagnetism were different pre-split. In particular the physical laws that "spiritual light" operated on. Give us the details, not just "Vague Balderdash."

The melt point of rock in the river of life in New Jerusalem, is...what? You have no idea. The same is true with the atomic realities and balance of matter in another state, you just have no way of knowing, just from a present state perspective. If the spiritual is part of the mix, you MUST factor it in! How does a spiriton in the mix, for example, if there was such things, affect neutrons, or protons, or spin, etc?? All you have to look at is present matter in the temporal state, and that is physical only.

Light in New Jerusalem, or Eden, is a similar story. Obviously it is very different than what we have today. Today, we need the sun. Today, we die of skin cancers from that sunlight. Today, light is slow. Today light is used in photosyntesis a certain way, and results in slow growth of plants etc.

3. Explain how pillow lava formed pre-split. Did it form at all? Give us the details, not just "Vague Balderdash."

Show mne some, so we can establish it did form first. Otherwise you are chasing fairies.

4. Explain how stromatalites formed pre-split. Did they from at all? Give us the details, not just "Vague Balderdash."

Explain how they form today!?

5. Explain how coal and petroleum formed pre-split. What did it form from? What processes were required? Give us the details, not just "Vague Balderdash."

Creation started with a lot of things. Not all things need to be explained. That is an exercise in godless doubting. Coal, however, seems to have come from plants dying, as part of the mix. How is it you think a lot of fast growing plants is a problem, pre split???

As for oil, well, they used to think it was fossil fuel. I think it is safe to say that it contains remnants of life, so, again, no problem for a pre split world at all! Now, whether there may have been other processes at work as well, remains to be established, or whether a certain amount was part of creation. Facts. Stick to what we know.

6. Explain how chalk, which is made of minute calcite plates (coccoliths) shed from micro-organisms called coccolithophores formed pre-split. Give us the details, not just "Vague Balderdash."

Lots of organisms is, what, some problem for a hyper reproducing, fast growth enabled pre split past??

7. Explain how "rapid evolution" proceeded pre-split. What mechanisms did it operate under? Give us the details, not just "Vague Balderdash."

Well, spiritual also mechanisms, of course. If the universe, except for the earth surface where man was, was still in the created state, we must have had the different forces effecting things here still, to some degree!

8. Show us the physical evidence in the geological and astronomical record of the actual "split" as it occured during the time of Peleg. Or are you going to claim that a change in the very laws of nature left no mark whatsoever?

Show me any record at all pre split!!!??? If you can't, don't expect someone to manufacture some for you! The flood was just before the split, if you recall. That put a damper on records. Obviously. Yet, the records start just as they should, if the flood, and split were at the very dawn of civilization! Spirits are recorded as among men, long lifespans, etc.

Don't give us "well maybe," "I believe," "if perhaps," "Is it possible that." You have God's Inerrant Word that tells you and you alone the truth about the past and how science can't explain any of it. Put up now or admit you are a failure as "God's Little Echo."

The bible and the evidences and lack thereof from science is available to all. I don't make this stuff up.

 

[dad]

How do you know?

Because everything else He says proves true.

 

[Orogeny]

Dad: Ignoring my post doesn't make it disappear.

 

[Split Rock]

I think that you are dreaming. No one needs evidence for pillow lava. What we were looking at was pillow lava formed pre split, if any could be found. All that was offered was an Aussie formation, and no details, when pressed, were forthcoming.

Then there is no difference between how pillow lava formed pre-split compared to how it forms today? OK...Noted.

They are similar, and one actually exists. Do you read the claims of some posters? If stromatolites are so well known, why did the poster not discuss it?

Why are you asking me why others post or do not post what they do? Once again, you are saying there was no difference? OK... noted.

No, you are dreaming. You seem to confuse reality of the future and past with the present reality. In no way can you demonstrate that they are the same, as far as laws, and physics, and forces, and etc go.

Non sequitur.

Explain how they existed at all first? You seem to assume present state matter, like rock was what existed in the past, and want to explain away heat IT would have produced. Better to look at what we had here, and realize there was no to explain away. Stick to what we know.

No answer to my question. FAIL.

The melt point of rock in the river of life in New Jerusalem, is...what? You have no idea. The same is true with the atomic realities and balance of matter in another state, you just have no way of knowing, just from a present state perspective. If the spiritual is part of the mix, you MUST factor it in! How does a spiriton in the mix, for example, if there was such things, affect neutrons, or protons, or spin, etc?? All you have to look at is present matter in the temporal state, and that is physical only.

You seem to have trouble with pronouns, dad. Let me help you. I = yourself. You = me or multiple others. We = yourself + others. You are the one that apparently has no idea of the answer... not me. You are the one that must factor in the spiritual in order to answer my question. You cannot. Do not expect me to answer the questions I am asking you. You are the one and only "expert" on the split/merge idea. FAIL.

Light in New Jerusalem, or Eden, is a similar story. Obviously it is very different than what we have today. Today, we need the sun. Today, we die of skin cancers from that sunlight. Today, light is slow. Today light is used in photosyntesis a certain way, and results in slow growth of plants etc.

Again no answer to my question... just "vague balderdash." FAIL.

Show mne some, so we can establish it did form first. Otherwise you are chasing fairies.

You are contradicting your previous post, where you indicated pillow lava formed pre-split. You are the one who should be able to tell me if something is "pre-split" or not, since only you know. FAIL.

Explain how they form today!?

Google it, then get back to me about if it formed "pre-split" or not and how.

Creation started with a lot of things. Not all things need to be explained. That is an exercise in godless doubting. Coal, however, seems to have come from plants dying, as part of the mix. How is it you think a lot of fast growing plants is a problem, pre split???

OK, so it did form from dying plants pre-split? That's a start, anyway. Now, tell us how the process went, pre-split.

As for oil, well, they used to think it was fossil fuel. I think it is safe to say that it contains remnants of life, so, again, no problem for a pre split world at all! Now, whether there may have been other processes at work as well, remains to be established, or whether a certain amount was part of creation. Facts. Stick to what we know.

I am asking you what you know about how oil formed pre-split... which is apparently, nothing. FAIL.

Lots of organisms is, what, some problem for a hyper reproducing, fast growth enabled pre split past??

So, the oceans were filled from top to bottom with coccolithophores?

Well, spiritual also mechanisms, of course. If the universe, except for the earth surface where man was, was still in the created state, we must have had the different forces effecting things here still, to some degree!

What were these forces? You are the one who is supposed to know! FAIL.

Show me any record at all pre split!!!??? If you can't, don't expect someone to manufacture some for you! The flood was just before the split, if you recall. That put a damper on records. Obviously. Yet, the records start just as they should, if the flood, and split were at the very dawn of civilization! Spirits are recorded as among men, long lifespans, etc.

I asked for physical evidence in the geological and astronomical record, not man-made records. FAIL.

The bible and the evidences and lack thereof from science is available to all. I don't make this stuff up.

LOL!! Of course you do, dad! You make all of it up as you go along!

You disappoint me, dad. As God's very own representative on earth and the only one who understands the "truth" of the presplit, non-PO world, I expected more from you. You have provided no answers whatsoever. You cannot tell us how the pre-split world was different (only that it was), how it worked, or provide any physical evidence for any of your speculation concerning it. All you have is your peculiar interpretation of scripture and nothing else. Any science you don't like, because it doesn't fit with your interpretation of scripture, must be wrong and you insist should not be taught. This is nothing more than an extreme example of special pleading.

I hereby declare the following:

1. You are now defeated.
2. You have failed as God's Little Echo.
3. Your split/merge idea is nothing but special pleading based on your speculations about scripture. It is trash.

In the word's of a famous creationist: "/thread"

 

[dad]

Then there is no difference between how pillow lava formed pre-split compared to how it forms today? OK...Noted.

First you need to establish that there is pillow lava from before the universe fabric change. Can you do that?

You seem to have trouble with pronouns, dad. Let me help you. I = yourself. You = me or multiple others. We = yourself + others. You are the one that apparently has no idea of the answer... not me. You are the one that must factor in the spiritual in order to answer my question.

God factored in the spiritual in Eden, and the flood, and in the future new heavens. No way round it. Don't blame me. The spiritual MUST be factored in when dealing out of this present state.

You are contradicting your previous post, where you indicated pillow lava formed pre-split. You are the one who should be able to tell me if something is "pre-split" or not, since only you know. FAIL.

Nope. I have no idea if it was or not. Pass. IF you can prove there is some that was, we can look at it. What's wrong, don't really know what you are talking about?

Google it, then get back to me about if it formed "pre-split" or not and how.

If you mean the Aussie formation, it wasn't me that brought it up. When I asked pointed questions to the one that did bring it up, they failed to bring anything at all to the table.

OK, so it did form from dying plants pre-split? That's a start, anyway. Now, tell us how the process went, pre-split.

Name the formation.

I am asking you what you know about how oil formed pre-split... which is apparently, nothing. FAIL.

Science doesn't even know how it forms now! Some feel it is fossil fuel, others think it is naturally produced by the earth. Get your act together, before asking how it came down before this state came to exist!

Remember, however, that the flood was only something like 1600 years after creation. Not a lot of time.

So, the oceans were filled from top to bottom with coccolithophores?

Why, what evidence exactly leads you to think that?

What were these forces? You are the one who is supposed to know! FAIL.

How would I know? Man knows just this physical state we are in here and now. How the spiritual interacts with the physical in the eternal state is not something we need to know about now in great detail. You fail to take this state into the past.

I asked for physical evidence in the geological and astronomical record, not man-made records. FAIL.

You can ask for a moon made of blue cheese if you like too. The great variety and order of the life in the geo record fits like a glove to a different state past. The stars also fit. The evidence is not the issue, it is your belief based take on the evidence that is the issue.

....You cannot tell us how the pre-split world was different (only that it was), how it worked, or provide any physical evidence for any of your speculation concerning it.

How the spiritual works is not something we can know here, in detail. Science is in denial, so it can know zero about the spiritual. The distinctions between the present, and the future are dealt with in the bible, however, and we can see how the spiritual affects the mix to some degree. Long lifespans, fast evolving, lack of killing heat in moving land masses, or water, fast plant growth, different light properties, and etc.

Physical evidence alone cannot and does not cover it though.

1. You are now defeated.
2. You have failed as God's Little Echo.
3. Your split/merge idea is nothing but special pleading based on your speculations about scripture. It is trash.

I hereby overrule you, and declare that you fail to prove that this present state existed before the flood, or will exist in the future. Your special pleading for a present state you cannot prove existing in an unknown time is trash. It can't even get up on it's feet long enough to get knocked back down, because it isn't even up to the level of contender. You are in no position whatsoever to bad mouth the truths of the word, or my solid bible case.

In the word's of a famous creationist: "/thread"

Maybe I'll paraphrase...../Splitrock

 

[dad]

So what? How does that make them the same as stromatolites? You've introduced an organism that wasn't even remotely part of the conversation to try to make a point, which you ultimately failed at. If you'd like to discuss stromatolites, I'm more than happy to do so.

They originally thought that the Pavilion Lake deposits were related to stromatolites.


"We thought the growths in Pavilion Lake might be related to ancient stromatolites ..."
Underwater Research Lab--Pavilion lake project

So, it is quite reasonable to ask you to tell us how you claim they were formed. It is also reasonable to use the Pavilion Lake stuff as a comparison, since they admit not knowing! Get over it


"The structures, called microbialites, are similar to stromatolites, and are rare on today's earth. .."

Mission Objectives - Pavilion Lake Research Project

 

[Orogeny]

They originally thought that the Pavilion Lake deposits were related to stromatolites.


"We thought the growths in Pavilion Lake might be related to ancient stromatolites ..."
Underwater Research Lab--Pavilion lake project

Emphasis mine.

Notice the past tense there, dad. They originally thought they were related to stromatolites. The current thought is that they bare a stronger resemblance to Epiphyton and Gervanella:

What sets Pavilion Lake apart from other lakes with microbialites is that the Pavilion Lake microbialites have a resemblance to Epiphyton and Girvanella. These are Early Cambrian microbialites whose genesis is poorly understood because before the Pavilion Lake discovery there was no modern analog.~Underwater Research Lab--Pavilion lake project

So you are wrong. Thank you, though, for turning me on to this project. The thesis that I am working on just so happens to be an analysis of Early Cambrian rocks that contain Epiphyton.

So, it is quite reasonable to ask you to tell us how you claim they were formed.

Since that is currently the topic of study for the Underwater Research Lab, and I am not a part of that study, no, it is not reasonable to ask me how they were formed. They aren't sure yet how the Pavilion Lake microbialites formed. Also, I never claimed to know how they formed, so your argument is just one big strawman. Fail.

It is also reasonable to use the Pavilion Lake stuff as a comparison, since they admit not knowing!

They do admit not knowing. That's why they are studying it. Comprehension fail.

Get over it

Over what?

"The structures, called microbialites, are similar to stromatolites, and are rare on today's earth. .."

and your point would be...?

Really dad, just stick to 'goddidit'. You're out of your depth here.

 

[dad]

Emphasis mine.

Notice the past tense there, dad. They originally thought they were related to stromatolites. The current thought is that they bare a stronger resemblance to Epiphyton and Gervanella:

What sets Pavilion Lake apart from other lakes with microbialites is that the Pavilion Lake microbialites have a resemblance to Epiphyton and Girvanella. These are Early Cambrian microbialites whose genesis is poorly understood because before the Pavilion Lake discovery there was no modern analog.~Underwater Research Lab--Pavilion lake project

So you are wrong. Thank you, though, for turning me on to this project. The thesis that I am working on just so happens to be an analysis of Early Cambrian rocks that contain Epiphyton.


Since that is currently the topic of study for the Underwater Research Lab, and I am not a part of that study, no, it is not reasonable to ask me how they were formed. They aren't sure yet how the Pavilion Lake microbialites formed. Also, I never claimed to know how they formed, so your argument is just one big strawman. Fail.

They do admit not knowing. That's why they are studying it. Comprehension fail.

If they or you comprehended even the stuff growing there now, then they would not admit ignorance as they do, and you should.

Have you any point on the actual stromatolites that existed in the early part of our history on earth? Is there something specific in the way you think they formed that could mean that they had to form in a present state? Or are you just blowing smoke here?

Seems to me that the present state is not very deep, and science hasn't been here very long. So, all we really have is godless conjecture about an unknown past.

When they speak of the far past, they are way out of their depth.

 

[Tomatoman]

Do you actually know any scientists, dad? Or are all your friends like you?

 

[Split Rock]

Please vote in my new Poll here: http://www.christianforums.com/t7458623/

Dad's Split/merge theory is included!

 

[dad]

Do you actually know any scientists, dad? Or are all your friends like you?

Since most of em are ignorant of all that counts in the weightier matters of life, I do not persue friends, just because they may be scientists, no.

 

[dad]

Please vote in my new Poll here: http://www.christianforums.com/t7458623/

Dad's Split/merge theory is included!

..We interrupt this thread for a shameless commercial....) i

 

[Split Rock]

..We interrupt this thread for a shameless commercial....) i

Shameless? No. Your Split/Merge pet theory is Front and Center. Come on over and explain to all of us why we should pick your pet theory over the other creationist pet theories, all of which have no evidence to support them whatsoever. You can at the very least, vote in the poll for your own pet theory.

 

[dad]

Shameless? No. Your Split/Merge pet theory is Front and Center. Come on over and explain to all of us why we should pick your pet theory over the other creationist pet theories, all of which have no evidence to support them whatsoever. You can at the very least, vote in the poll for your own pet theory.

Why would you pretend most evos would pick any idea set that isn't pagan based? Facts and evidence and history have nothing to do with it at all for them. They wave off facts that don't suit their beliefs. They accept only dyed in the wool God and spiritual omitting sort of things.

 

[Orogeny]

If they or you comprehended even the stuff growing there now, then they would not admit ignorance as they do, and you should.

If we understood completely the way that the Pavilion Lake microbialites formed, we wouldn't need to study them, would we? Our 'ignorance' is exactly why we strive so hard to learn about the world around us.

Why is it that you are so scared of being wrong, of not knowing everything? Benjamin Franklin once said “Being ignorant is not so much a shame as being unwilling to learn.”

You embody that perfectly, dad.

Have you any point on the actual stromatolites that existed in the early part of our history on earth? Is there something specific in the way you think they formed that could mean that they had to form in a present state? Or are you just blowing smoke here?

All indications are that every stromatolite has formed in a similar manner to the ones living today. It is your hypothesis that there was a different state past, not mine. Since it is an untested and unevidenced hypothesis, and since all physical evidence is counter to this hypothesis, it is not necessary for me to try to fit science into your framework. If you would like me to do so, please present physical evidence that corroborates your 'state change' hypothesis. Until you do this, there is no reason for any evidence to be passed through your 'state change' filter.

Seems to me that the present state is not very deep, and science hasn't been here very long.

Your perception is, according to all physical evidence, wrong. Also, the duration of existence of modern science does not in any way, shape, or form have an effect on the validity of its conclusions.

So, all we really have is godless conjecture about an unknown past.

Anything you disagree with/don't understand is godless. What a sad little life.

When they speak of the far past, they are way out of their depth.

You have no evidence to back this claim. Fail.

 

[dad]

If we understood completely the way that the Pavilion Lake microbialites formed, we wouldn't need to study them, would we? Our 'ignorance' is exactly why we strive so hard to learn about the world around us.

I don't mind you learning about the world around you. Kids do that. However, making stuff up, based on fantasy worlds in the past is not allowed any more. We're onto you.

Why is it that you are so scared of being wrong, of not knowing everything? Benjamin Franklin once said “Being ignorant is not so much a shame as being unwilling to learn.”

I am not scared in any way of being wrong. I am trying to scare you out of being wrong.

All indications are that every stromatolite has formed in a similar manner to the ones living today.

What sort of vague gobbledygook is that!? What indication, specifically!!? Ridiculous.

It is your hypothesis that there was a different state past, not mine. Since it is an untested and unevidenced hypothesis, and since all physical evidence is counter to this hypothesis,

Nonsense, you are totally off base. NO evidence is contrary to it, in any way. None. It is the position of the bible that the future will be another universe state. That state happens to be eerily similar, in detail, to the early history of man in the same book. ALL evidence agrees, NONE opposes. ONLY your belief based godless selective interpretations are at odds.

... If you would like me to do so, please present physical evidence that corroborates your 'state change' hypothesis. Until you do this, there is no reason for any evidence to be passed through your 'state change' filter.

Say what?? Science assumes that the present is the key to the past and future. That means it passes all things through the same state filter, as part of what it is, and what it does. In fact, nothing it babbles on about in the future or past is based on anything else at all. It is 100% myth, and fables. Pure, uncut fantasy. It can have no physical evidence for any universe state, past or future! All the poor little guy can do is assume. End of story.

Your perception is, according to all physical evidence, wrong.

Prove it..show ius this mysterious physical evidence! You are busted. It doesn't exist.

Also, the duration of existence of modern science does not in any way, shape, or form have an effect on the validity of its conclusions.

Does to! It limits it's scope and range of observations. ALL it observes is in this state now!

Anything you disagree with/don't understand is godless. What a sad little life.

What a sad little misrepresentation. Either something is based on godly principles, or not. Homosexuality, for example, is not godly. Neither is some fantasy that opposes the truth of creation. Get over i

 

[driewerf]

Dad, you are confirming what I wrote earlier.

Claiming that "slow evolution" is unproven, is in no way a proof for rapid evolution.
So, I ask you again: show me how the fossil record sustains rapid evolution.

Likewise you admitting you have no idea what you are talking about, in knowing whether it was slow or fast evolving, in no way proof of slow evolution.
You merely admit you do not know. That leaves a lot of room for the bible to be right, after all.

So, I ask you again: show me how the fossil record doesn't sustain rapid evolution??? Otherwise, you are out of the debate on the sidelines, and unable to comment on what God said about it

Apparantly the one who's English needs improvement is you.
I don't pretend I cannot sustain slow (actually, normal) evolution. I asked you to give evidence for rapid evolution, as you claimed.
And (not that I expect that this will change your answer): rapid evolution isn't proven by default.

 

[dad]

Dad, you are confirming what I wrote earlier.



Apparantly the one who's English needs improvement is you.
I don't pretend I cannot sustain slow (actually, normal) evolution.

Say what??? Does that mean you admit that you cannot sustain the unholy grail of evo doctrine...slow evolving in the past?? Is this what you are admitting here? Or is your English so pathetic that you are claiming you can? If so, then do it. If not, you lose.

I asked you to give evidence for rapid evolution, as you claimed.
And (not that I expect that this will change your answer): rapid evolution isn't proven by default.

The evidence for the timeframe of what came down is outside the little rabbit hole of science. So that means, for those slow to get it, that the proofs are also outside of science. The records of the bible, and history are outside of science. They indicate a world so different from this state, that our rules don't apply there. That is where it is at.

 

[Tomatoman]

dad:

Since most of em are ignorant of all that counts in the weightier matters of life, I do not persue friends, just because they may be scientists, no.

You do not pursue friends who may be scientists? Or you do not pursue friends at all? The above sentence is very difficult to decipher. Had you been drinking when you wrote it?

What exactly are you struggling to articulate?

 

[Split Rock]

Why would you pretend most evos would pick any idea set that isn't pagan based?

Pagan religions have nothing to do with scientific theories. FAIL.

Facts and evidence and history have nothing to do with it at all for them. They wave off facts that don't suit their beliefs.

That describes you, not us... but I think you already know that

They accept only dyed in the wool God and spiritual omitting sort of things.

You mean stuff that doesn't fit with your faulty interpretation of scripture.... correct?