My experience...Ken Ham and YEC.

[TLK Valentine]

Something of an omission from the bible as well.

Indeed -- it seems the Bible only mentions omnicidal catastrophes when God causes them.

 

[lasthero]

Just to drive the point home, here's a list of confirmed and unconfirmed craters.

List of impact craters on Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ED, you might notice that there are about 50 of these and they all dwarf the 85 foot impact you're talking about. The smallest one is about 1,200 times bigger than the impact you mentioned. The largest is about 19,000 times bigger. You do understand the concept that the larger a crater is, the bigger the explosion and resulting damage, correct? And that's not even getting into the unconfirmed ones.

Just look at this:

They're all over the place. And nobody thought this was worth writing down? You keep saying the Bible is some accurate history book, but it's funny how it missed the days when HELLFIRE WAS RAINING FROM THE SKY.

And I'd also like to point out the reason the meteorite you're talking about didn't kill anyone was because it landed in a sparsely populated area. If it had hit in a major city, there would have been casualties. I honestly don't even get your argument. It's like you don't understand that asteroids vary in size, and some of them are really, REALLY big.

 

[And-U-Say]

What I was referencing was scientific assumptions about what happened in the past and common ancestry ideas. Much different than operational science in the here and now which you study.

There is no such thing as operational Science vs. historical Science. That is a lie manufactured by AIG when it became clear that they sounded like idiots.

 

[freezerman2000]

Just to drive the point home, here's a list of confirmed and unconfirmed craters.

List of impact craters on Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ED, you might notice that there are about 50 of these and they all dwarf the 85 foot impact you're talking about. The smallest one is about 1,200 times bigger than the impact you mentioned. The largest is about 19,000 times bigger. You do understand the concept that the larger a crater is, the bigger the explosion and resulting damage, correct? And that's not even getting into the unconfirmed ones.

Just look at this:

They're all over the place. And nobody thought this was worth writing down? You keep saying the Bible is some accurate history book, but it's funny how it missed the days when HELLFIRE WAS RAINING FROM THE SKY.

And I'd also like to point out the reason the meteorite you're talking about didn't kill anyone was because it landed in a sparsely populated area. If it had hit in a major city, there would have been casualties. I honestly don't even get your argument. It's like you don't understand that asteroids vary in size, and some of them are really, REALLY big.

I'm wondering if any one else has noticed that Asia,the eastern section of Russia and the equatorial areas have been mostly spared by the biggies?

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm wondering if any one else has noticed that Asia,the eastern section of Russia and the equatorial areas have been mostly spared by the biggies?

You are assuming that all of them have been found. Is it really that surprising that the areas of the world that are most sparsely populated and least studied have the fewest known impact craters?

 

[freezerman2000]

Most have been found from the air..population numbers may have a roll in the discoveries of them,but I don't think it would be an overwhelming factor.
The truly ancient ones are almost indistinguishable from the surrounding areas at ground level.

 

[Loudmouth]

Most have been found from the air..

Some others have not. Some are the result of intensive geologic surveys.

population numbers may have a roll in the discoveries of them,but I don't think it would be an overwhelming factor.

The other overwhelming factor is conditions such as the Siberian traps covered massive areas of Asia in lava, covering up the impact craters below. The geologic history of the region also weighs heavily on the ease of discovery.

 

[freezerman2000]

Some others have not. Some are the result of intensive geologic surveys.



The other overwhelming factor is conditions such as the Siberian traps covered massive areas of Asia in lava, covering up the impact craters below. The geologic history of the region also weighs heavily on the ease of discovery.

One of the tools that geologists have at their disposal is aerial photography.

and those impacts that came later?Surly there were more than what the map shows.

Japan and China are without impacts and India has one...and they are all highly populated.


I wasn't arguing with you,I agree with what you said to ED..I was merely making an observation.

 

[CabVet]

I'm wondering if any one else has noticed that Asia,the eastern section of Russia and the equatorial areas have been mostly spared by the biggies?

They haven't been spared. Craters are harder to find in places where forests grow (Amazon) or where there is a lot of erosion. Did you notice that oceans have been spared?

 

[freezerman2000]

I'm going to pull an AV and say that God put a protective dome over them..nah,that's to easy...
The oceans being spared?..nobody in their right mind would expect craters on the water's surface..

Not much escapes the aerial tools at the disposal of geologists..that is how some of the most eroded craters have been found.
Giant Ancient Impact Crater Confirmed in Iowa
Looking at the picture of the town,who would suspect such a violent past?

 

[CabVet]

I'm going to pull an AV and say that God put a protective dome over them..nah,that's to easy...
The oceans being spared?..nobody in their right mind would expect craters on the water's surface..

Neither would they expect them in a FOREST SURFACE.

Not much escapes aerial the tools at the disposal of geologists..that is how some of the most eroded craters have been found.
Giant Ancient Impact Crater Confirmed in Iowa

Yes, a lot escapes, under forest growth, or under snow, or under water, or in places where there is a lot of erosion. All of the "gaps" in your map are tropical forest growth area, where is almost impossible to find craters. But no, the fact that trees are constantly growing over those craters and breaking the soil and obscuring the crater has nothing to do with it. Those areas were "spared".

 

[freezerman2000]

from the article..
Of course, most ancient impact structures on Earth go unnoticed, right beneath our feet. The advent of aerial photography just before World War II led to the discovery of several new craters such as circular Clearwater Lakes in the remote reaches of Quebec. Impact craters have even been found in the Australian Outback by dedicated sleuths using Google Earth and doubtless more are waiting to be found. One only has to look at the record preserved on the battered face of the Moon to realize it’s a cosmic shooting gallery out there.

 

[CabVet]

from the article..
Of course, most ancient impact structures on Earth go unnoticed, right beneath our feet. The advent of aerial photography just before World War II led to the discovery of several new craters such as circular Clearwater Lakes in the remote reaches of Quebec. Impact craters have even been found in the Australian Outback by dedicated sleuths using Google Earth and doubtless more are waiting to be found. One only has to look at the record preserved on the battered face of the Moon to realize it’s a cosmic shooting gallery out there.

Interesting how your quote doesn't mention anything about tropical forests, isn't it?

 

[freezerman2000]

Give them time..some are bound to be found with the level of sophistication of survey equipment ever increasing...
Who would have thought 100 years ago that Yellowstone is in fact a giant caldera?

 

[Loudmouth]

from the article..
Of course, most ancient impact structures on Earth go unnoticed, right beneath our feet. The advent of aerial photography just before World War II led to the discovery of several new craters such as circular Clearwater Lakes in the remote reaches of Quebec. Impact craters have even been found in the Australian Outback by dedicated sleuths using Google Earth and doubtless more are waiting to be found. One only has to look at the record preserved on the battered face of the Moon to realize it’s a cosmic shooting gallery out there.

The method used to find some will not find all of them. Aerial photos will not find craters buried under thousands of feet of flood basalts that make up the Siberian traps. It won't find the craters that have been filled in by the Amazon basin.

 

[EternalDragon]

There is no such thing as operational Science vs. historical Science. That is a lie manufactured by AIG when it became clear that they sounded like idiots.

Is there such a thing as a living dinosaur or are we left with only old bones? If there is no such thing as historical science then why do we have so many hypothesis as to what wiped out the dinosaurs and what they actually looked like?

If you want to call that operational science then show me a living T-Rex we can examine today. As apposed to the discovery and invention of the light bulb, testing of how volcanoes work, chasing tornadoes, discovering new vaccines, etc.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Is there such a thing as a living dinosaur or are we left with only old bones? If there is no such thing as historical science then why do we have so many hypothesis as to what wiped out the dinosaurs and what they actually looked like?

If you want to call that operational science then show me a living T-Rex we can examine today. As apposed to the discovery and invention of the light bulb, testing of how volcanoes work, chasing tornadoes, discovering new vaccines, etc.

We don't want to call it anything except "science," since that's what it is.

 

[RickG]

Is there such a thing as a living dinosaur or are we left with only old bones? If there is no such thing as historical science then why do we have so many hypothesis as to what wiped out the dinosaurs and what they actually looked like?

If you want to call that operational science then show me a living T-Rex we can examine today. As apposed to the discovery and invention of the light bulb, testing of how volcanoes work, chasing tornadoes, discovering new vaccines, etc.

The terms "historical science", "operational science", "polystrate", etc. are entirely the invention of creationists and have nothing whatsoever to do with any valid scientific terminology. The intent of this terminology is to nothing more than confuse and misrepresent.

 

[Proud Parrot]

Maybe you could ask the speaker how he feels about the majority of christians in the world believing in evolution and if he thinks they are genuine christians.

I think the speaker would ask that you prove that proclamation before he even entertained the rest of it.

 

[Dizredux]

Mr Strawberry

Maybe you could ask the speaker how he feels about the majority of christians in the world believing in evolution and if he thinks they are genuine christians.

I think the speaker would ask that you prove that proclamation before he even entertained the rest of it.

I do not know of any polls specifically on Christians but the polls we do have tend to support the idea that most Christians accept evolution in some form.

According to a 2011 IPSOS poll

Global Belief in Supreme Being(s) and Afterlife Accepted By Half (51%) of Citizens in 23 Country Survey, But Only 28% Are ‘Creationists’

41% identify as evolutionist's 28% global citizens refer to themselves as creationists 31% simply don't know.

Ipsos Global @dvisory: Supreme Being(s), the Afterlife and Evolution | Ipsos



In the US, Public?s Views on Human Evolution | Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project

A majority of white evangelical Protestants (64%) and half of black Protestants (50%) say that humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time. But in other large religious groups, a minority holds this view. In fact, nearly eight-in-ten white mainline Protestants (78%) say that humans and other living things have evolved over time. Three-quarters of the religiously unaffiliated (76%) and 68% of white non-Hispanic Catholics say the same. About half of Hispanic Catholics (53%) believe that humans have evolved over time, while 31% reject that idea.

Pew Research Center 2013 analysis, six-in-ten Americans (60%) say that “humans and other living things have evolved over time,” while a third (33%) reject the idea of evolution,

Public?s Views on Human Evolution | Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project

Gallop poll 2014

42% created in current form, 19% evolved-no God involved, 31% evolution with God involved

Evolution, Creationism, Intelligent Design | Gallup Historical Trends

So the evidence that most Christians accept evolution in some form is pretty good. The evidence that a minority of Christians are Creationist is fairly firm.

I think Mr Strawberry's contention is reasonably well supported by the evidence.



Dizredux