Taking questions of the Different state past (2)

[PsychoSarah]

The past operated under physical laws? Strange claim. That might be hard to find in the bible, you apparently made it up.

I suspect that the future state and former state operated with more than just physical laws. The angels used to marry women and have babies here. Something apparently is different now. No? There are many instances of things that simply make no sense in our present nature both in the bible future and past.

Probably because the bible isn't accurate, dingus

 

[dad]

Okay. How do you know that the prophecy was made BEFORE the events that are claimed to have fulfilled it?

I have no reason to question the public servants of Israel that had the job of meticulously copying Scripture for generations. I have no reason to think Jesus was a liar for verifying the Scriptures. Do you?

So prophecy doesn't count. Particularly when it is often vague.

So drop the prophecy thing, okay? I won't accept it as evidence.

It counts, and most is already known history. Actually much prophesy is detailed as well, not vague. Rent a clue before posting maybe?

You know nothing about science. It means that the evidence indicates something, but even if there is a 99% certainty, they won't say for sure. It does NOT mean it's a wild guess!

They feel confident of their belief based guesses. Whoopee do.

They had leaves IDENTICAL in structure to the leaves we have today. They are attached to plants that also have the same features as what we see today.

Oh? So how did they grow in the dark!?



"
But Antarctica was still at a high latitude, meaning that just as today, the land is bathed in round-the-clock darkness during winter and 24/7 light in the summer.

The question, said Patricia Ryberg, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Kansas Biodiversity Institute, is how plants coped with photosynthesizing constantly for part of the year and then not at all when the winter sun set. ...


The implication is that ancient Antarctic forests may have been a mix of deciduous and evergreen.

"It's not one or the other," she said. "It's actually both."

Much of the ring structure looks tropical, Ryberg added. Tropical trees that are not exposed to seasons experience a sort of short-term dormancy that echoes what is seen in the Antarctic wood.

"But they weren't growing in the tropics, so obviously it's two different environmental characteristics," Ryberg said.

Ryberg is now investigating how much plant matter these strange Antarctic forests produced. It's not yet clear whether the forests grew more densely than those seen in modern forests."


Weird Forests Once Sprouted in Antarctica



Be amazed.

We see this today, and we see how it works. When we see fossils that have the same structures, that shows that the fossils did the same thing.

Fossil leaves kinda look similar. You need more, obviously!

Jericho has evidence that it has been the site of human habitation for at least 12,000 years, from the 10th millenium BC. SOURCE 1 SOURCE 2

How long ago was the flood? Was it before the 10th millenium BC? I've never heard that. Most YECs claim the world is 6000 years old. And they claim the flood was about 4000 years ago. So Jericho comes from a time BEFORE the flood, but 6000 - 8000 years.

So if Jericho came from before the flood, when we date it, we should get dates OLDER than the KT boundary. After all, the flood caused the KT boundary, and Jericho is older than the flood. And yet, when we date ANYTHING from Jericho, we get dates that do not match with what we should get if it was before the KT boundary. A 10,000 - 12,000 year old town that was formed BEFORE the flood consistantly dates to younger than the KT boundary.

You know!!? Prove it. Paleeeese, do not offer same state past dates.


Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence

You are offering religion, and the belief that our state existed.

So we know that the KT boundary happened before Jericho, because Jericho is above the KT boundary, and the dating from Jericho is always much younger than the dating from the KT boundary.

We also know that Jericho must be OLDER than the flood, because it dates to 10,000 - 12,000 years old or so, and YECs claim that the flood happened about 4,000 years ago.

So we know that the order of events must have been KT boundary, Jericho founded, Flood. Therefore Jericho satisfies your demand for a town that comes from before the flood.

If Jericho came from before the flood, then it was founded in the different past state, and you can use this as a source to get real-world evidence that plants grew faster and people lived longer. So go do it!

Therefore, the KT boundary is older than the flood. You are beaten once again.

Nope. Obviously Jerico was post flood. The issue is how do you get 12000 year 'dates'? Let's see what you got. Be brave. I enjoy winning.

In some places, yes. But what sedimentary rock we see is not consistant with what we'd find if the entire world had been covered by a global flood. It is consistant with what we'd find from sedimentary deposits laid down in rivers, etc.

?? You see sedimentary rock near the KT now? Did this come in a dream or through research? Which area in the KT samples we have do you claim is not consistent exactly and whey? Did you think we had some uniform KT layer all over the earth?? You seem to be groping in the dark.

Rubbish. You want to explain how we got that much sedimentary deposit and then massive amounts of erosion in such a short time?

Where!? One minute there isn't enough, the next minute you think it is so massive! You guys seem unstable and desperate.

 

[dad]

Probably because the bible isn't accurate, dingus

If it is, then the past was different can you agree on this much??

 

[dad]

However, the Yucatan crater has features which are entirely consistent with an impact event and not with a bunch of water coming up from underground.

Do your homework. Get back to us when you do. These fluffy vague statements are silly.


In case you don't, for the lurkers I will say this..the shocked quartz..can it be demonstrated from the site and samples that the direction of the shock was up to down?? Yes or no?

How sweet it is

Got a source for this?

And are you talking about the Walt Brown who makes "mistaken claims about what others have written." SOURCE? Please, the man does not use valid research methods. He is no scientist. SOURCE

How many are there!!? The guy that made a case for a post flood lake draining formation of the Grand Canyon. In your own words...what about it??!

The KT boundary was caused by the flood. The KT boundary dates to about 65 milion years ago.

You cannot date it. Don't pretend. The daughter material could have been there already and not in any decay scenario at the time. You are offering belief only. You want to claim your state dunnit for the daughter materials rather than creation. Lame.

The state change was shortly after this time.

So if we can find a rock that dates to significantly younger than 65 million years, it must be from the present state. Here's an article about some scouts who broke a rock formation 20 million years old: Ancient Goblin Valley rock toppled by Boy Scout leaders | Daily Mail Online

Now, how old is this? By radiometric dating, it is 20 million years old. It MUST be present state, because if it was past state, then it would date to closer to 65 million years old, where the KT boundary is. However, this is less than a third the age of that. So it must be present state, and you can't use your DSP idea to explain away the fact that it dates to much older than it could be if you were right. Therefore, this rock formation proves beyond any doubt that you are wrong.

So besides some sentence claiming this Goblin thing was millions of years old, where is the evidence? Based on what? In what was is this known to be post flood?


Some source!!! Scouts cavorting on a rock claimed in the Daily Mail to be real old!!

Pitiful.

 

[PsychoSarah]

If it is, then the past was different can you agree on this much??

If the bible is word for word true, you still wouldn't need a prior state. All powerful deity = god could have sneezed out the universe, magic, whatever. Throw logic out the window, could be anything. In fact, nothing could make your prior state ideal less likely than the bible word for word being true.

 

[Kunjax]

I suspect that the future state and former state operated with more than just physical laws. The angels used to marry women and have babies here. Something apparently is different now. No? There are many instances of things that simply make no sense in our present nature both in the bible future and past.

Or, instead of the past/future operating differently, a far more reasonable explanation is that the bible isn't an accurate source of information about our world. Or any number of other more reasonable explanations.

 

[Kunjax]

The past operated under physical laws? Strange claim. That might be hard to find in the bible, you apparently made it up.

Could you answer my question please? Do you have any support from your scripture about your different state past?

 

[dad]

If the bible is word for word true, you still wouldn't need a prior state.

Would to.

All powerful deity = god could have sneezed out the universe, magic, whatever. Throw logic out the window, could be anything. In fact, nothing could make your prior state ideal less likely than the bible word for word being true.

Except the life of man and angels on earth described in Scripture did not say it was the long series of special miracles in every leaf and tree and creature! The issue is believing the record---or not. You can't explain it with our present nature.

 

[dad]

Could you answer my question please? Do you have any support from your scripture about your different state past?

Yes. Tons. You care to make a case for a same state past from the bible??!

 

[dad]

Or, instead of the past/future operating differently, a far more reasonable explanation is that the bible isn't an accurate source of information about our world.

That is not reasonable to those that know the Way the Truth and the Life. Jesus affirmed that Scripture was holy.

Or any number of other more reasonable explanations.

You do not get to define reason as any unreasonable unsupported doubt that you may like!

 

[Kunjax]

Yes. Tons. You care to make a case for a same state past from the bible??!

I am not a Christian soI don't hold the hold the bible to the same regard as you do. I see it as a book written about 2000 by uneducated individuals (by today's standard) about the world around them.

Care to give some examples?

 

[Kunjax]

That is not reasonable to those that know the Way the Truth and the Life. Jesus affirmed that Scripture was holy.




You do not get to define reason as any unreasonable unsupported doubt that you may like!

That's some circular reasoning you've got there. So because a guy in a book, said that same book can't be wrong, everything is the book is right? I could write a book claiming that everything contained in it was correct. It doesn't mean that it is actually correct.

I view reasonable as what has the most evidence supporting it. Currently you have a certain book about which you have a certain interpretation of a certain passage. And this interpretation of yours is thought as incorrect by members of your own faith. As someone who doesn't share your faith, why should I trust your interpretation of this book? (Not that the bible holds any sway over what I think)

 

[Kylie]

Do your homework. Get back to us when you do. These fluffy vague statements are silly.

Oh please. There are a ton of evidences that the Yucatan crater is an impact crater.

From Chicxulub crater - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Evidence for the impact origin of the crater includes shocked quartz, a gravity anomaly, and tektites in surrounding areas.​

Show me a source that says these things can come from a bunch of water spewing from the ground, dad.

In case you don't, for the lurkers I will say this..the shocked quartz..can it be demonstrated from the site and samples that the direction of the shock was up to down?? Yes or no?

How sweet it is

Show me how shocked quartz can come from a bunch of water, dad.

How many are there!!? The guy that made a case for a post flood lake draining formation of the Grand Canyon. In your own words...what about it??!

He's wrong. And not just in my words. In the words of every reputable scientist who has studied his works.

You cannot date it. Don't pretend. The daughter material could have been there already and not in any decay scenario at the time. You are offering belief only. You want to claim your state dunnit for the daughter materials rather than creation. Lame.

Completely irrelevant. We don't need to get a specific age for it. All we need to do is show that it is older than Jericho, which is easily established by the fact that the KT boundary is in lower layers of rock than Jericho is.

So besides some sentence claiming this Goblin thing was millions of years old, where is the evidence? Based on what? In what was is this known to be post flood?

It is known to be post KT boundary because the layers of rock that form it are ABOVE the layers of rock that contain the KT boundary. This is only possible if the formation was formed AFTER the KT boundary.

Or do you think that there is a method of rocks forming UNDERNEATH rocks that already exist?

Some source!!! Scouts cavorting on a rock claimed in the Daily Mail to be real old!!

Pitiful.

What's pitiful is that I gave you exactly what you asked for - a rock that is younger than the KT boundary - and you are having a hissy fit about it.

You are beaten for the third time by me!

 

[Kylie]

Yes. Tons. You care to make a case for a same state past from the bible??!

Oh, lovely. You claim there is tons of evidence, yet you never actually provide it for some reason.

Your claims that evidence exists are meaningless and nothing but noise until you actually produce that evidence so we can see how it stands up to investigation.

 

[dad]

I am not a Christian soI don't hold the hold the bible to the same regard as you do. I see it as a book written about 2000 by uneducated individuals (by today's standard) about the world around them.

Care to give some examples?

Nevertheless, the issue is whether the bible describes a past and future nature that is different from that which exists today. Whether some were brainwashed to deny that Jesus fulfilled prophesy and rose from the dead is another issue.

 

[dad]

That's some circular reasoning you've got there.

On the contrary, it is wisdom from above to below! Science is from below to above..and then it goes round and round.

So because a guy in a book, said that same book can't be wrong, everything is the book is right? I could write a book claiming that everything contained in it was correct. It doesn't mean that it is actually correct.

Jesus fulfilled HUNDREDS of precise prophesies and rose from the dead and was seen of many witnesses. Those who deny this have NO witnesses! It is the year of our Lord 2014 for good reasons...not because 'some guy wrote' in a book.

I view reasonable as what has the most evidence supporting it.

The issue is what we accept as evidence. To deny all spiritual beings and events in history has NO support!


The evos on this forum are an excellent example of how education today have produced propagandized deniers of almost all that isn't in a school lab.

 

[dad]

You only imagine you know 'the Way the Truth and the Life.'

YOU only imagine I don't!!! Find something you know a little about, rather than engaging in wild baseless speculation.

but you don't know anything, and there is only one source that tells you that a person named Jesus ever existed or said anything and even then it is nothing but hearsay.

History is not hearsay, nor was Jesus. The many witnesses cannot be waved away, no matter how desperate some may be to do so.

If you think I have it wrong please tell me how the writers of the Bible knew what Jesus is supposed to have said?

John was there, Paul met Him, and the apostles all left their testimony, some even having their stuff preserved as sacred till we could get er in a book together with the rest!

the only way they could have known is if someone told them what they remembered Jesus said, which is known as hearsay.

Can you remember what I said last post? Or are you posting hearsay!!?

 

[dad]

Oh, lovely. You claim there is tons of evidence, yet you never actually provide it for some reason.

Your claims that evidence exists are meaningless and nothing but noise until you actually produce that evidence so we can see how it stands up to investigation.

Try to focus before posting. The context was that in the bible there is oodles of evidence the past was different.

 

[dad]

The apostles left their testimony? who were the apostles who left their testimony then, they were not the Matthew, Mark, Luke and John of the Bible, no one knows who wrote those books but it most certainly was not those four.

Yes, I think they were. John talks of being with Jesus and Peter and etc...you think another 'John' did all that!!!? Peter wrote books, you think there was another Peter? Etc...

Everything in the Bible accredited to Jesus is hearsay, even the resurrection was added to the Bible much later

False. The records were here, and passed down, and well known. You are misinformed.

 

[Kunjax]

Try to focus before posting. The context was that in the bible there is oodles of evidence the past was different.

Care to quote those "oodles of evidence"?