My Goosenecks challenge.

[Subduction Zone]

I think the real question is not 'could God do it', but 'would God do it?"

What would be the point of deliberately molding the land (and everything else in the universe) to look exactly as it would if it were acted on by natural processes over vast timescales if none of that ever actually happened?

Consider the following scenario: A man leaves a fresh steak on his kitchen counter, and his dog in the backyard, then leaves the house. When he returns, the back door is open, there are muddy pawprints leading from it to the kitchen, more mud on the kitchen counter, and the steak is gone.

Someone accuses the man of leaving the back door unlocked so the dog could get in and eat the steak. He replies by saying that what must have happened was that a burglar snuck into his backyard, picked the lock, took prints of his dog's paws, put them in mud, placed them on the floor and the counter, and stole the steak and left. To defend this position, he points out that it's completely possible and that it can't be disproven.

But does that make it likely or sensible?

Exactly. To believe that God made the Earth look old on purpose implies that one believes in a dishonest God. That always seemed blasphemous to me.

In other words is it okay if God purposely misleads people? Would he do so?

 

[AV1611VET]

Exactly. To believe that God made the Earth look old on purpose implies that one believes in a dishonest God. That always seemed blasphemous to me.

And if God made a loaf of raisin bread in an instant, would the same logic apply?

 

[Loudmouth]

And if God made a loaf of raisin bread in an instant, would the same logic apply?

Would God add features to the raisin bread that only old raisin bread would have, but not freshly made raisin bread? Would God go out of his way to make the raisin bread look old, for no apparent reason?

 

[AV1611VET]

Would God go out of his way to make the raisin bread look old, for no apparent reason?

It's a fresh loaf of raisin bread.

If the question is too hard for you, let's simplify it.

If God created a raisin, would you accuse Him of being deceptive?

(I might make this into a challenge thread.)

 

[Strathos]

Didn't you already do that?

 

[Loudmouth]

It's a fresh loaf of raisin bread.

Then why do we see geologic features in the Earth that only an old planet would have?

 

[AV1611VET]

Didn't you already do that?

I made a raisin bread challenge thread.

I create a loaf of raisin bread ex nihilo.

Am I being deceptive? if so, how?

Evidently raisin bread is too hard for educated people to understand.

So I'll try paring it down to a raisin.

 

[Strathos]

Then why do we see geologic features in the Earth that only an old planet would have?

Apparently AV thinks he knows better than the entire international scientific community that has been studying these things for centuries. All he needs to do is present his findings and overturn all establish geology and win his Nobel Prize.

 

[Strathos]

I made a raisin bread challenge thread.

Evidently raisin bread is too hard for educated people to understand.

So I'll try paring it down to a raisin.

Skavau answered that other thread quite clearly.

 

[driewerf]

I think the real question is not 'could God do it', but 'would God do it?"

What would be the point of deliberately molding the land (and everything else in the universe) to look exactly as it would if it were acted on by natural processes over vast timescales if none of that ever actually happened?

Consider the following scenario: A man leaves a fresh steak on his kitchen counter, and his dog in the backyard, then leaves the house. When he returns, the back door is open, there are muddy pawprints leading from it to the kitchen, more mud on the kitchen counter, and the steak is gone.

Someone accuses the man of leaving the back door unlocked so the dog could get in and eat the steak. He replies by saying that what must have happened was that a burglar snuck into his backyard, picked the lock, took prints of his dog's paws, put them in mud, placed them on the floor and the counter, and stole the steak and left. To defend this position, he points out that it's completely possible and that it can't be disproven.

But does that make it likely or sensible?

Exactly. To believe that God made the Earth look old on purpose implies that one believes in a dishonest God. That always seemed blasphemous to me.

In other words is it okay if God purposely misleads people? Would he do so?

Worse.
How many old features do we see?
We have the Deccan traps, with 2000 meter of lava layers gradually old at the bottom and young at the top.
We have the magnteic revearsals in the oceanic floor.
We have ice layers, where the O18/O16 ratio reflects the climate change, and mirrored in forams.

 

[AV1611VET]

Then why do we see geologic features in the Earth that only an old planet would have?

Because the earth is old?

That's like asking why we would see Adam as an adult.

It is because Adam was created an adult.

 

[AV1611VET]

Apparently AV thinks he knows better than the entire international scientific community that has been studying these things for centuries.

They've been doing more than studying.

They've been calibrating their equipment, programming their computers, and cross-referencing their finds for corroboration purposes.

 

[AV1611VET]

Skavau answered that other thread quite clearly.

We'll see how a raisin works.

Forget the bread.

 

[Loudmouth]

I made a raisin bread challenge thread.

Evidently raisin bread is too hard for educated people to understand.

So I'll try paring it down to a raisin.

If we measured the 14C, 13C, and 12C content of the raisin, what would it be, and why? If the raisin was made from nothing, should it have carbon isotope ratios that match what naturally made raisins would have? Why would the ex nihilo raisins have a carbon isotope makeup consistent with long term carbon fixation in Earth's atmosphere if they never went through this process?

Would the newly created raisin bread have large clumps of mold that take weeks to develop?

 

[Loudmouth]

Because the earth is old?

You keep telling us it is only 6k years old. That is young, not old.

So how do you explain geologic features that take millions of years to form on an Earth that was supposedly created just 6k years ago?

That's like asking why we would see Adam as an adult.

These river channels are just like scars on a body. Would a newly created Adam have scars from injuries he never experienced?

 

[AV1611VET]

You keep telling us it is only 6k years old.

Link please?

 

[Loudmouth]

Link please?

You are agreeing that the Earth was created 4.5 billion years ago?

 

[AV1611VET]

You are agreeing that the Earth was created 4.5 billion years ago?

I'm calling you out on your false accusation.

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm calling you out on your false accusation.

I will ask again.

Do you think the Earth was created 4.5 billion years ago?

 

[AV1611VET]

I will ask again.

Do you think the Earth was created 4.5 billion years ago?

Right now, what I think would get me moderated.