My New Apple Challenge

[Split Rock]

Maturity without age?

That's like a newborn baby quoting Pi to the 20th decimal place.

An apple needs to grow to be an apple. Creating one would mean some sort of embedded age. Otherwise it would not/could not be created ex nihilo (a fully grown apple).

Maybe it would be clearer if the apple were a twenty year old human male. If you created a fully grown human male it would not look like a baby. It would look like an adult of twenty years. Hence have embedded age. Otherwise it wouldn't be, act or look like a twenty year old.

We are talking about the molecular/ atomic structure of the apple. Embedding age, according to AVET, means it is aged just like it was grown. That means it has the molecular signature of a mature, aged apple... not one that was created to look and behave mature, which is what is required to eat it and gain sustenance from it. God could, presumably, create a mature apple, with the same size, sugars, etc. as one ripened by age. He could do this without giving it an aged signature.

If we go back to what the whole apple argument is about.. the earth... this means that God created the earth with a very old signature at the molecular/atomic level. This was not necessary in order to create an earth with all the characteristics necessary to support life. It does not need rocks with an isotope ratio of one billions of years old, for example. It does not need vast segments of volcanic rock that look like it was made via volcanism over millions of years, such as the Siberian and Deccan Traps.

Embedded age is an ad hoc rationalization to reconcile young earth dogma with reality. Nothing more.

 

[Belk]

We are talking about the molecular/ atomic structure of the apple. Embedding age, according to AVET, means it is aged just like it was grown. That means it has the molecular signature of a mature, aged apple... not one that was created to look and behave mature, which is what is required to eat it and gain sustenance from it. God could, presumably, create a mature apple, with the same size, sugars, etc. as one ripened by age. He could do this without giving it an aged signature.

If we go back to what the whole apple argument is about.. the earth... this means that God created the earth with a very old signature at the molecular/atomic level. This was not necessary in order to create an earth with all the characteristics necessary to support life. It does not need rocks with an isotope ratio of one billions of years old, for example. It does not need vast segments of volcanic rock that look like it was made via volcanism over millions of years, such as the Siberian and Deccan Traps.

Embedded age is an ad hoc rationalization to reconcile young earth dogma with reality. Nothing more.

At which it fails entirely. We do not measure age through some "molecular signature". We measure it via it's history. The very thing AV says it should not have if embedded age were correct.

 

[EternalDragon]

We are talking about the molecular/ atomic structure of the apple. Embedding age, according to AVET, means it is aged just like it was grown. That means it has the molecular signature of a mature, aged apple... not one that was created to look and behave mature, which is what is required to eat it and gain sustenance from it. God could, presumably, create a mature apple, with the same size, sugars, etc. as one ripened by age. He could do this without giving it an aged signature.

If we go back to what the whole apple argument is about.. the earth... this means that God created the earth with a very old signature at the molecular/atomic level. This was not necessary in order to create an earth with all the characteristics necessary to support life. It does not need rocks with an isotope ratio of one billions of years old, for example. It does not need vast segments of volcanic rock that look like it was made via volcanism over millions of years, such as the Siberian and Deccan Traps.

Embedded age is an ad hoc rationalization to reconcile young earth dogma with reality. Nothing more.

Why does radioactive decay not have to be necessary during creation? How do you know? It would seem to me that you think God just produces things out of thin air, without natural properties.

The entire bible is filled with examples that God does create that way. God could have just created himself as a fully grown human. But instead he went through the process of being born and growing up.

Also, those supposed dates have an assumed starting ratio. No one knows what the starting rates were or the decay rates. It's assumed by backtracking. Volcanic rock taking millions of years to form is also an assumption.

 

[lasthero]

Your wrong on a lot of points, but especially that one about volcanoes. Not only is it not an assumptions, but in order for volcanoes to produce that much ash in 6000 years, they would have to be erupting at a ridiculous rate. When volcanoes erupt, they spew ash into the air. All that ash at one time would be devastating to life on this planet.

 

[EternalDragon]

Your wrong on a lot of points, but especially that one about volcanoes. Not only is it not an assumptions, but in order for volcanoes to produce that much ash in 6000 years, they would have to be erupting at a ridiculous rate. When volcanoes erupt, they spew ash into the air. All that ash at one time would be devastating to life on this planet.

What ash are we talking about?

 

[lasthero]

Look into 'large igneous provinces'. And I know you probably won't watch this, but here's a short video on the subject.

Claire's Geology Brief No 14: Why Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) Disprove Young Earth Creationism Claire's Geology Brief No 14: Why Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) Disprove Young Earth Creationism - YouTube

 

[EternalDragon]

Look into 'large igneous provinces'. And I know you probably won't watch this, but here's a short video on the subject.

Claire's Geology Brief No 14: Why Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) Disprove Young Earth Creationism Claire's Geology Brief No 14: Why Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) Disprove Young Earth Creationism - YouTube

Watched it. A spoken idea does not disprove something. It provided no real evidence. (And making fun of people is rather childish.)

There are like a hundred or more active volcanoes around the earth and under the sea right now.

 

[Split Rock]

Why does radioactive decay not have to be necessary during creation? How do you know? It would seem to me that you think God just produces things out of thin air, without natural properties.

How do YOU know how God created? According to you guys, God can do anything. Explain why he would need to have created isotope ratios appropriate to rocks billions of years old.

The entire bible is filled with examples that God does create that way. God could have just created himself as a fully grown human. But instead he went through the process of being born and growing up.

HUH????? I assume you mean Jesus. He was also a man, if you recall. But this supports what we are saying, as he did indeed become "mature" the normal way, rather than being created mature ex nihilo. I don't see how this helps your argument...

Also, those supposed dates have an assumed starting ratio. No one knows what the starting rates were or the decay rates. It's assumed by backtracking. Volcanic rock taking millions of years to form is also an assumption.

No. Isochron dating makes no such assumptions.

 

[crazyforgod1212]

Watched it. A spoken idea does not disprove something. It provided no real evidence. (And making fun of people is rather childish.)

There are like a hundred or more active volcanoes around the earth and under the sea right now.

Nothing she said was an idea. There are traps, they do have ash, and if it all spewed out at the same time, it would be rather disastrous.

And yes, there are plenty of active volcanos. You do realize active volcanoes aren't always erupting, right?

 

[EternalDragon]

Nothing she said was an idea. There are traps, they do have ash, and if it all spewed out at the same time, it would be rather disastrous.

And yes, there are plenty of active volcanos. You do realize active volcanoes aren't always erupting, right?

So you admit that the volcano in the video could have been "not erupting" and therefore the premise of the video is non-existent?

 

[crazyforgod1212]

So you admit that the volcano in the video could have been "not erupting" and therefore the premise of the video is non-existent?

It did erupt. That's where the ash came from.

I don't care for her tone any more than you, but her facts are correct.

 

[EternalDragon]

How do YOU know how God created? According to you guys, God can do anything. Explain why he would need to have created isotope ratios appropriate to rocks billions of years old.

HUH????? I assume you mean Jesus. He was also a man, if you recall. But this supports what we are saying, as he did indeed become "mature" the normal way, rather than being created mature ex nihilo. I don't see how this helps your argument...

It shows that although God "could have" created himself as a human being in many different ways, he chose to be born of a virgin, via natural processes. So while God "could have" created the earth any number of ways, he created it one way and told us how so that anyone could understand it and clearly know it.

Just as the apple created today appears to have grown for months on a tree, the earth appears to have aged isotope ratios. Adam appeared with 20 year old muscles, brain and bones, etc. etc.

The facts are that no one knows how the earth formed or what the starting ratios were. All we can do is measure levels today.

 

[PsychoSarah]

It shows that although God "could have" created himself as a human being in many different ways, he chose to be born of a virgin, via natural processes. So while God "could have" created the earth any number of ways, he created it one way and told us how so that anyone could understand it and clearly know it.

Just as the apple created today appears to have grown for months on a tree, the earth appears to have aged isotope ratios. Adam appeared with 20 year old muscles, brain and bones, etc. etc.

The facts are that no one knows how the earth formed or what the starting ratios were. All we can do is measure levels today.

Except it apparently wasn't clear, as people argue about it.

 

[lasthero]

When Adam was made, did he have scars from cuts he never took? Did he have food in his stomach he never ate? A belly button from an umbilical cord that was never cut?

Because those and other things are what we'd expect on a person who lived 20 years.

 

[EternalDragon]

When Adam was made, did he have scars from cuts he never took? Did he have food in his stomach he never ate? A belly button from an umbilical cord that was never cut?

Because those and other things are what we'd expect on a person who lived 20 years.

He is not here to examine. But even with those, the fact would still remain that he was a 20 some year old male, that was just created with no history, yet with embedded history since he appeared that old from day one. (Aged bones, fully formed organs and muscles, language and thinking abilities built in....etc.)

 

[lasthero]

He is not here to examine. But even with those, the fact would still remain that he was a 20 some year old male, that was just created with no history, yet with embedded history since he appeared that old from day one. (Aged bones, fully formed organs and muscles, language and thinking abilities built in....etc.)

But we would be able to tell the difference, unless he was made with features that are unneeded for him to live, but are what we would expect on someone who's been alive for twenty years.

 

[PsychoSarah]

But we would be able to tell the difference, unless he was made with features that are unneeded for him to live, but are what we would expect on someone who's been alive for twenty years.

Like a belly button. Or ERVs. Or moles.

 

[EternalDragon]

But we would be able to tell the difference, unless he was made with features that are unneeded for him to live, but are what we would expect on someone who's been alive for twenty years.

Some differences, yes. I really don't think Adam is a good example to be put against the earth's creation.

There are things that don't appear to be from natural processes. Like the formation of the moon, the stability of the sun and the apparent young sun paradox to name a few.

 

[lasthero]

Some differences, yes. I really don't think Adam is a good example to be put against the earth's creation.

There are things that don't appear to be from natural processes. Like the formation of the moon, the stability of the sun and the apparent young sun paradox to name a few.

Not knowing something about a process doesn't give you care blanch to say its not natural. There was a time we don't know how lightning formed. Now we do.

And the Earth does have scars, of a sort, in things that aren't needed for life to function, but nonetheless show old age.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Some differences, yes. I really don't think Adam is a good example to be put against the earth's creation.

There are things that don't appear to be from natural processes. Like the formation of the moon, the stability of the sun and the apparent young sun paradox to name a few.

Stability of the sun? I guess you forgot about sunspots and solar flares, the latter which at any time could potentially wipe out life on earth if they get big enough.