My Goosenecks challenge.

[Subduction Zone]

Hey chief, FYI:


SOURCE

Note especially the "global fall in sea level."

The Flood was global.

And the meander could not have formed in the flood itself. Fast moving receding flood waters, and they would have had to be to clear the Earth in a year, would not have formed meanders. Even if there was a flood the meander itself could not have formed until after it. The steep slopes tell us that the erosion that occurred was relatively slow and through consolidated sediments. In other words solid rock. The picture debunks the Noah's Ark story.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's not covered with a mile of moondust, either.

And only one person made such an error. Why do you keep referring back to old arguments that you lost thousands of times over?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Excuse me, but I don't see you meeting his challenge:

So let's see your explanation of that feature, and other features similar around the world by using a Flood.

Since everything is "in your favor," as you say, how about you bestow some favor on us and give us your explanation (with, of course, respect to the OP).

That is because it is a bit of trick question. It can't be answered using a flood. The picture tells us that the Noah's Ark story is simply a tale adopted by the early Hebrews from another older culture.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ihop an Starbucks are made of moodust.

Starbucks has a filthy logo.

No doubt created by some design scientist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Starbucks has a filthy logo.

No doubt created by some design scientist.

How so? And I have never heard of a "design scientist".

 

[AV1611VET]

The only way that you can get deeply incised gooseneck meanders over a very short geologic period is by suspending the laws of physics.

Didn't I say that in so many words?

 

[Loudmouth]

Didn't I say that in so many words?

Didn't we say that this means you have failed the challenge?

 

[AV1611VET]

This is a meaningless statement and gives no explanation. Another utter failure.

Right.

Another scientific ploy.

Ask for an explanation; then, when given one, just say it wasn't an explanation.

That's real cute.

I take it your assessment is so as to keep your challenge from being met?

 

[AV1611VET]

And again, this does not explain how the features formed at all.

Of course not.

 

[juvenissun]

Sorry, but this challenge is for flood believers to explain first. Perhaps we can discuss your situation later.

I AM a Flood believer.
I bet you do not know how to answer my "situation".

Well, please don't bother. I can see this thread is screwed already.

 

[AV1611VET]

This failure is so bad on your part that it seems to border on blasphemy..

If you say so.

 

[AV1611VET]

The contradiction tells us that the canyon has to be extremely old. A young Earth model cannot explain this unless you posit a dishonest God and that would seem to be blasphemy to me.

Did you want your challenge met or not?

Or, as I suspect, was it issued so you can use our answers to let us know what you think of God?

If you hate Him that much, tell Him yourself -- don't [try to] talk behind His back.

 

[AV1611VET]

And the meander could not have formed in the flood itself. Fast moving receding flood waters, and they would have had to be to clear the Earth in a year, would not have formed meanders. Even if there was a flood the meander itself could not have formed until after it. The steep slopes tell us that the erosion that occurred was relatively slow and through consolidated sediments. In other words solid rock. The picture debunks the Noah's Ark story.

God can't meander a stream right through the Smoky Mountains and out the other side with fast-moving water, if He wanted to?

And if so, could He direct the water to write: "Jesus saves"?

In fact, can God direct a single stream of fast-moving water to etch a cross in the Nevada desert?

 

[AV1611VET]

That is because it is a bit of trick question.

No, it's not.

It's a good question.

I like it.

Your problem -- apparently -- is that you forgot the power of: GOD DID IT.

It can't be answered using a flood.

Bet me.

The picture tells us that the Noah's Ark story is simply a tale adopted by the early Hebrews from another older culture.

Whether you think it's just a tale or not, it's been used to meet your challenge.

Got anymore?

 

[AV1611VET]

Didn't we say that this means you have failed the challenge?

Who's "we"?

 

[Loudmouth]

Who's "we"?

Every rational person. If you have to invoke unevidenced violations of basic physics, then you don't have an explanation.

 

[AV1611VET]

Every rational person. If you have to invoke unevidenced violations of basic physics, then you don't have an explanation.

I was told in the challenge to use the Flood.

Are you saying his challenge is in violation of basic physics?

 

[AV1611VET]

I can see this thread is screwed already.

Scientists claim our DNA is twisted.

Then they wonder why this world is in the shape it is in.

 

[Loudmouth]

I was told in the challenge to use the Flood.

Are you saying his challenge is in violation of basic physics?

Implicit in the challenge is the use of basic physics and geology.

 

[AV1611VET]

Implicit in the challenge is the use of basic physics and geology.

I used basic physics when I said the water did the etching.

Like using a power sprayer to make a serpentine design in dirt.

Notice too that, implicit in the challenge, is a global Flood?