Overwhelming Evidence for an Old Earth

[juvenissun]

I'm not in the mood for games. If you have a valid point to make about the age of the earth make it, otherwise you are just wasting people's time.

I am serious. The validity of my argument depends on the acceptance of one or two simple Biblical concepts.
Some TE people do not think the Garden of Eden is a true place.

 

[Geode]

I just read your personal info. Sorry to be sarcastic. In fact, I seems like to talk to you. I never work in industry, so I guess I would have a lot to learn from you. What do you do in petroleum industry?

Where do you work and what is your background and training?

I guess I could be be termed a petroleum geologist as I work in the active pursuit of developing oil and gas reserves by evaluating subsurface geology. I propose where to drill wells based upon geologic mapping and deciphering stratigraphy. I then study and evaluate the results during and after the drilling of the wells. This involves correlation of reservoir sands, etc. I also estimate volumes of gas and oil preamd post drilling.

 

[Geode]

I am serious. The validity of my argument depends on the acceptance of one or two simple Biblical concepts.
Some TE people do not think the Garden of Eden is a true place.

The validity of your argument is dependent upon what I believe or accept about this?

But you have changed your premise somewhat here. You originally posed about whether or not that the Garden of Eden still exists. I don't think one can answer that with confidence one way of the other, but a non-creationist that does not hold to a world-wide cataclysmic flood could at least allow that it could still exist in some form. I think it at least existed at one time.

 

[Geode]

It depends on how much do you understand. The more you know, the more I know.

I understand quite a lot. However, i do not think what I know has much bearing upon what you know.

 

[juvenissun]

Where do you work and what is your background and training?

I guess I could be be termed a petroleum geologist as I work in the active pursuit of developing oil and gas reserves by evaluating subsurface geology. I propose where to drill wells based upon geologic mapping and deciphering stratigraphy. I then study and evaluate the results during and after the drilling of the wells. This involves correlation of reservoir sands, etc. I also estimate volumes of gas and oil preamd post drilling.

I admire a lot on the work you do. The biggest problem to me on that is the responsibility. I think I am too coward to make that kind of decision.

I hide in the ivory tower for all my life. I like everything about geology except fossil ID and strat. correlation. However, formally, I labeled myself as a petrologist.

 

[juvenissun]

I understand quite a lot. However, i do not think what I know has much bearing upon what you know.

Well, nothing is simple. We may both stare at a piece of sandstone and have different understanding.

 

[juvenissun]

The validity of your argument is dependent upon what I believe or accept about this?

But you have changed your premise somewhat here. You originally posed about whether or not that the Garden of Eden still exists. I don't think one can answer that with confidence one way of the other, but a non-creationist that does not hold to a world-wide cataclysmic flood could at least allow that it could still exist in some form. I think it at least existed at one time.

See, I can make a complete argument for my point. But I just hate to see that someone won't even agree with the very first assumption in my argument. What we do here is a conversation, not a presentation. So I rather to do it one piece at a time.

So, let's assume the Garden of Eden still exists "today". If you accept that it existed earlier, then you have no reason to deny its existence today. Right?

The second one is: Do you think the Garden of Eden was located on this earth when it was set up (Gen 2)? Of course, the most likely place is somewhere nearby and include Iraq today.

 

[Geode]

See, I can make a complete argument for my point. But I just hate to see that someone won't even agree with the very first assumption in my argument. What we do here is a conversation, not a presentation. So I rather to do it one piece at a time.

So, let's assume the Garden of Eden still exists "today". If you accept that it existed earlier, then you have no reason to deny its existence today. Right?

The second one is: Do you think the Garden of Eden was located on this earth when it was set up (Gen 2)? Of course, the most likely place is somewhere nearby and include Iraq today.

I have no reason to accept or deny that the Garden of Eden exists today. People have pondered the location and I have seen some wildly differing places cited. But yet you still fail to make any point and I still am not in the mood for games. Either make a point or don't, as so far this has led nowhere.

 

[Geode]

Well, nothing is simple. We may both stare at a piece of sandstone and have different understanding.

We may have a different understanding but the nature and properties of the sandstone will remain the same. One of us will probably be closer to figuring out its nature than the other. But once again, do you have a point to make or would you prefer to continue to talk in riddles?

 

[Geode]

I admire a lot on the work you do. The biggest problem to me on that is the responsibility. I think I am too coward to make that kind of decision.

I hide in the ivory tower for all my life. I like everything about geology except fossil ID and strat. correlation. However, formally, I labeled myself as a petrologist.

You have labeled yourself a petrologist, or you are a petrologist? I think my question was about what your job entails and your background and training. Do you work as a petrologist? Hard rock or soft rock? Do you have a degree with a specialization in petrology?

 

[juvenissun]

You have labeled yourself a petrologist, or you are a petrologist? I think my question was about what your job entails and your background and training. Do you work as a petrologist? Hard rock or soft rock? Do you have a degree with a specialization in petrology?

I am a petrologist. I do not use my knowledge in real geologic work. Too bad.
Forget about this and, if you like to, focus on the age of the earth.

 

[juvenissun]

I have no reason to accept or deny that the Garden of Eden exists today. People have pondered the location and I have seen some wildly differing places cited. But yet you still fail to make any point and I still am not in the mood for games. Either make a point or don't, as so far this has led nowhere.

I told you that my conclusion MUST be built on the acceptance of the premise. Otherwise, it won't work.

You must accept that the Garden of Eden existed before. And you must accept that the Garden of Eden exists now. In order to continue, you just can not turn back and question these two premises.

If you do accept them, then as you said, we have a problem to solve. Where is the Garden of Eden? In one word, it can not be on the earth as we know it. But it has to be on the earth. Can this dilemma be solved?

So far, there seems to be only one way to solve this problem: The age of the earth is not as simple as we know it. This is, in fact, a space-time problem.

I am not playing game to you. Do not say that again, even you do not know what I am talking about.

 

[Geode]

I told you that my conclusion MUST be built on the acceptance of the premise. Otherwise, it won't work.

You must accept that the Garden of Eden existed before. And you must accept that the Garden of Eden exists now. In order to continue, you just can not turn back and question these two premises.

If you do accept them, then as you said, we have a problem to solve. Where is the Garden of Eden? In one word, it can not be on the earth as we know it. But it has to be on the earth. Can this dilemma be solved?

So far, there seems to be only one way to solve this problem: The age of the earth is not as simple as we know it. This is, in fact, a space-time problem.

I am not playing game to you. Do not say that again, even you do not know what I am talking about.

The existence or non-existence of the Garden of Eden in the past or now has no bearing on the age of the earth. I can believe that your conclusion will only have meaning depending upon acceptance of the premise one way or another, but it would have no bearing on the scientific basis for the earth's age. So state your opinion and be done with it, for my opinion (which I have already given) has no effect on this what-so-ever.The only conclusion I can think of that could be drawn from finding the Garden of Eden today (which nobody has pulled off) would be to rule out a destructive flood such as postulated by YECs, but I already stated that.

 

[Geode]

I am a petrologist. I do not use my knowledge in real geologic work. Too bad.
Forget about this and, if you like to, focus on the age of the earth.

I thought I might get another evasive answer, and here it is. Or are you stating in your own way that the label "petrologist" is self-applied and not a job title or the result of any formal study?

My answers regarding petrology or any other discipline within the umbrella of geology would be formed differently in terms of terminology, etc. depending upon the knowledge and background of the person that I might be engaged with in conversation. Do we discuss ternary phase diagrams (which I always found fascinating in their complexity) or just limit ourselves to terms like "volcanic rock"...?

 

[juvenissun]

The existence or non-existence of the Garden of Eden in the past or now has no bearing on the age of the earth. I can believe that your conclusion will only have meaning depending upon acceptance of the premise one way or another, but it would have no bearing on the scientific basis for the earth's age. So state your opinion and be done with it, for my opinion (which I have already given) has no effect on this what-so-ever.The only conclusion I can think of that could be drawn from finding the Garden of Eden today (which nobody has pulled off) would be to rule out a destructive flood such as postulated by YECs, but I already stated that.

I already posted the question which might lead to the true answer to the age of the earth. If you do not see the question seriously, then my argument is in vain. I have no more to say until you give some positive input.

 

[juvenissun]

I thought I might get another evasive answer, and here it is. Or are you stating in your own way that the label "petrologist" is self-applied and not a job title or the result of any formal study?

My answers regarding petrology or any other discipline within the umbrella of geology would be formed differently in terms of terminology, etc. depending upon the knowledge and background of the person that I might be engaged with in conversation. Do we discuss ternary phase diagrams (which I always found fascinating in their complexity) or just limit ourselves to terms like "volcanic rock"...?

There is nowhere on any official paper which says that I am a petrologist even I do teach a course of rock. I do not work in industry and get a title like that. I only took 4 courses which have the word petrology in the title. No certificate on those courses.

Ternary phase diagram can be applied to both igneous and metamorphic rocks. I assume you mean igneous rocks. I do not make such diagram. But I have no problem to read it. It usually scared people away because we have no better way to squeeze large amount of information into a single diagram (you could tear down a ternary diagram into several binary ones and expanded that section into a textbook chapter, so it would be easy to read). I guess it has minimum use to you. Right? However, you might stretch it a little bit so it might also apply to sedimentary rocks (for example, the change of sandstone composition would become a line on the diagram). It is simply a tool like a hammer.

 

[Geode]

There is nowhere on any official paper which says that I am a petrologist even I do teach a course of rock. I do not work in industry and get a title like that. I only took 4 courses which have the word petrology in the title. No certificate on those courses.

Ternary phase diagram can be applied to both igneous and metamorphic rocks. I assume you mean igneous rocks. I do not make such diagram. But I have no problem to read it. It usually scared people away because we have no better way to squeeze large amount of information into a single diagram (you could tear down a ternary diagram into several binary ones and expanded that section into a textbook chapter, so it would be easy to read). I guess it has minimum use to you. Right? However, you might stretch it a little bit so it might also apply to sedimentary rocks (for example, the change of sandstone composition would become a line on the diagram). It is simply a tool like a hammer.

One can be an academic and have a title like that. One does not need to work in industry to be a petrologist. I only had two formal courses with petrology in the title. Unlike yourself I found ternary phase diagrams rather difficult to read, but have not had the necessity to do so since leaving school and starting work as I have dealt almost exclusively with sedimentary rocks. I am much better with a hammer and it would take me some time to get back up to speed to be able to read many of them properly. On the other hand I have dealt with ternary diagrams of sandstone composition but these are not nearly as complicated to interpret as ternary phase diagrams, since there is not an equilibrium relationship between the three components in terms of the chemical composition.

 

[Geode]

I already posted the question which might lead to the true answer to the age of the earth. If you do not see the question seriously, then my argument is in vain. I have no more to say until you give some positive input.

I answered your questions to the best of my ability and I cannot see how any further comment from me has any bearing at all. You brought the subject up and I see absolutely no way that the Garden of Eden has any bearing on the age of the earth. Quite frankly I don't care whether or not you post further on the subject, since all you have done so far is play games regarding whatever you have in mind.

 

[Orogeny]

Told you.

 

[juvenissun]

One can be an academic and have a title like that. One does not need to work in industry to be a petrologist. I only had two formal courses with petrology in the title. Unlike yourself I found ternary phase diagrams rather difficult to read, but have not had the necessity to do so since leaving school and starting work as I have dealt almost exclusively with sedimentary rocks. I am much better with a hammer and it would take me some time to get back up to speed to be able to read many of them properly. On the other hand I have dealt with ternary diagrams of sandstone composition but these are not nearly as complicated to interpret as ternary phase diagrams, since there is not an equilibrium relationship between the three components in terms of the chemical composition.

No, you can not.