The creation is not under question

[Online.Gamer.79]

okay if we go by the Bible specifically down to the number the universe is not older than seven or eight thousand years old at most. Here's the problem geology has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Earth is at least several billion years old, astronomy has proven the universe is close to 13 or 14 billion years old. How do you explain that. It's really simple in the beginning God created the heavens and the Earthi says absolutely nothing on how long it took God to create the heavens and the Earth. The next several verses deal with the creation of humanity. Now I love my Bible but I also know it's a book that has been translated hundreds of times different passages have different meanings you also have to take into account it's been edited there are books missing. You take in human error, the superstitions of the people who lived back then,I mean back then diseases were not caused by germs and viruses it was caused by evil spirits. All things you can take into account. The the core of what the Bible is is how to have a relationship with God. So enough with the arguing God created the heavens and the Earth and maybe he did it with a big bang

 

[Piet Strydom]

I can not agree more, but with my opinions included in your thinking.

Yes, The Bible does not say the universe is only 6 000 years old. It says that the Earth is 6 000 plus 6 days PLUS TIME BEFORE LIGHT SHONE ON EARTH-OLD.

I came to this understanding when I realised what time is when I tried to find out how the accusation of Atheism came by accusing the Bible of not knowing that the Universe is 12.5 billion years of age. I realised that the “First day” in Genesis only started to count down to the second day and so forth, after the Sun started to shine on the earth.

Time as we measure, or as we constructed it, consists of relatively 24 hours which is the time it takes the Earth to rotate one revolution. Seconds and minutes id divisions of these hours.

Therefore, we should understand that if the Sun did not shine on the Earth, there would not have been any mechanism to measure time with. Lets assume for a moment that the sun never ignited to what we have today, and we would be living in total darkness, with no moon or planets reflecting any light, would Time exist?

Definitely yes!

Will we have measured this phenomenon with the hours and minutes we have today? I do not think so, for what mechanism would we observe the progression of Time? Perhaps looking at the stars and noticing it moves in relation to our position on Earth? Well, what if the Earth was still in its Nebular cloud and obscured the starlight? No Time will be measurable.

Therefore, the Bible actually made science understand Time and not vice versa.

Let me explain…

In 1755 Emmanuel Kant formulated the Nebular theory explaining that the whole Milky way galaxy must have been a huge cloud of dust particles which by the mechanics of gravitational points and accretion shaped solar systems with Stars and planets with all the heavenly objects such as comets, meteorites and so forth. Many Atheists would like to ascribe his “History of the Heavens” to Swedenborg and Laplace, but none of those 2 philosophers nailed it down to how Kant explained the origins of the Universe. Where did he found this idea? From Genesis 1. He was a Bible scholar and read Greek and Hebrew. What he found was only confirmed in 1925 with the mount Wilson telescope.

If we were to read Genesis today we will see it say:

· Before time existed with the word “Day” when there was light, there was a period of Time that was not measurable called, In the Beginning God created the heavens and earth!

· This is also a scientific reality, because science dictates the Solar system is only 5 billion years old, but the universe in excess of 12 billion.

· Now, if there was no Sun to shine on an Earth turning on its axis in 24 Hrs, how does one measure more than 7 billion years without a clockwork in a solar system that did not exist?

· The Biblical explanation says the Earth took a shapeless form of wet matter. This is in agreement that science discovered that the Nebular cloud, and pre solar system matter was dust and water. There are much water as ice in the solar system and beyond. Therefore, before the first day, before light, the Earth took a spherical shape turning around its axis.

· Then light appeared, but the Bible also say that the Sun Moon and Stars became luminaries in the Earth’s atmosphere on the 4th day. This means the Bible knew the Sun at first had a dim red glow due to it falling into its own gravitation and mass, and only 4 days later ignited to its fullest clearing the space in the solar system of any dust matter resulting in clear light falling on the Earth.

· Science agrees to this description.

· On the first day the Earth was still a soggy collection of solid space dust, water and gasses escaping from this accreted matter.

· As the gasses escaped from this gigantic sphere, it created an atmosphere on the second day.

· On the third day, water and solids continued to separate from each other, resulting in Land and sea.

· On the 4th day, the sun eventually reached its equilibrium on nuclear fusion, and shone bright. This radiation flash from the sun cleared space from the Sun throughout the solar system and for the first time the Moon and planets reflected light back to the Earth’s first heaven, the atmosphere.

The explanation in Genesis is unique to any other religious “Revelation” on earth, and today most atheists are not aware that their “evidence against Biblical creation”, the Nebular theory, was “the Natural History of the heavens based upon Newton’s principles” written by E Kant as he understood it from the Bible.

Tell this to an atheist and you will find only one answer: “I never knew that!”

 

[Online.Gamer.79]

I can not agree more, but with my opinions included in your thinking.

Yes, The Bible does not say the universe is only 6 000 years old. It says that the Earth is 6 000 plus 6 days PLUS TIME BEFORE LIGHT SHONE ON EARTH-OLD.

I came to this understanding when I realised what time is when I tried to find out how the accusation of Atheism came by accusing the Bible of not knowing that the Universe is 12.5 billion years of age. I realised that the “First day” in Genesis only started to count down to the second day and so forth, after the Sun started to shine on the earth.

Time as we measure, or as we constructed it, consists of relatively 24 hours which is the time it takes the Earth to rotate one revolution. Seconds and minutes id divisions of these hours.

Therefore, we should understand that if the Sun did not shine on the Earth, there would not have been any mechanism to measure time with. Lets assume for a moment that the sun never ignited to what we have today, and we would be living in total darkness, with no moon or planets reflecting any light, would Time exist?

Definitely yes!

Will we have measured this phenomenon with the hours and minutes we have today? I do not think so, for what mechanism would we observe the progression of Time? Perhaps looking at the stars and noticing it moves in relation to our position on Earth? Well, what if the Earth was still in its Nebular cloud and obscured the starlight? No Time will be measurable.

Therefore, the Bible actually made science understand Time and not vice versa.

Let me explain…

In 1755 Emmanuel Kant formulated the Nebular theory explaining that the whole Milky way galaxy must have been a huge cloud of dust particles which by the mechanics of gravitational points and accretion shaped solar systems with Stars and planets with all the heavenly objects such as comets, meteorites and so forth. Many Atheists would like to ascribe his “History of the Heavens” to Swedenborg and Laplace, but none of those 2 philosophers nailed it down to how Kant explained the origins of the Universe. Where did he found this idea? From Genesis 1. He was a Bible scholar and read Greek and Hebrew. What he found was only confirmed in 1925 with the mount Wilson telescope.

If we were to read Genesis today we will see it say:

· Before time existed with the word “Day” when there was light, there was a period of Time that was not measurable called, In the Beginning God created the heavens and earth!

· This is also a scientific reality, because science dictates the Solar system is only 5 billion years old, but the universe in excess of 12 billion.

· Now, if there was no Sun to shine on an Earth turning on its axis in 24 Hrs, how does one measure more than 7 billion years without a clockwork in a solar system that did not exist?

· The Biblical explanation says the Earth took a shapeless form of wet matter. This is in agreement that science discovered that the Nebular cloud, and pre solar system matter was dust and water. There are much water as ice in the solar system and beyond. Therefore, before the first day, before light, the Earth took a spherical shape turning around its axis.

· Then light appeared, but the Bible also say that the Sun Moon and Stars became luminaries in the Earth’s atmosphere on the 4th day. This means the Bible knew the Sun at first had a dim red glow due to it falling into its own gravitation and mass, and only 4 days later ignited to its fullest clearing the space in the solar system of any dust matter resulting in clear light falling on the Earth.

· Science agrees to this description.

· On the first day the Earth was still a soggy collection of solid space dust, water and gasses escaping from this accreted matter.

· As the gasses escaped from this gigantic sphere, it created an atmosphere on the second day.

· On the third day, water and solids continued to separate from each other, resulting in Land and sea.

· On the 4th day, the sun eventually reached its equilibrium on nuclear fusion, and shone bright. This radiation flash from the sun cleared space from the Sun throughout the solar system and for the first time the Moon and planets reflected light back to the Earth’s first heaven, the atmosphere.

The explanation in Genesis is unique to any other religious “Revelation” on earth, and today most atheists are not aware that their “evidence against Biblical creation”, the Nebular theory, was “the Natural History of the heavens based upon Newton’s principles” written by E Kant as he understood it from the Bible.

Tell this to an atheist and you will find only one answer: “I never knew that!”

I think atheist are terrified that any Superior being could possibly exist. My topic came from listening to several atheists and Christians argue. I am not a theologian and I sure as hell am not a geologist or astronomist. For me it's easy to believe in both, science and God

 

[Piet Strydom]

I think atheist are terrified are there any Superior being could possibly exist. My topic came from listening to several atheists and Christians argue. I am not a theologian and I sure as hell am not a geologist or astronomist. For me it's easy to believe in both, science and God

Yip, me too.
No Theologist, no scientist.
Just someone who believed God did not exist, and the Bible was wrong, untill I was challenged to go and find scientific errors.
Well, I am gratefull that I did go and investigate most, if not all the religious books, and found that the Bible had such immence value, that it inspired the greatest of scientists to discover facts of nature and the universe things which God described thousands of years ago.

 

[coffee4u]

okay if we go by the Bible specifically down to the number the universe is not older than seven or eight thousand years old at most.

First wrong assumption:
Young Earth creationists believe anywhere from 6 to 15 thousand years. I personally believe in 12-15. We are not all the same.

Here's the problem geology has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Earth is at least several billion years old, astronomy has proven the universe is close to 13 or 14 billion years old. How do you explain that.

You may want to use a question mark on your question since reading quickly it could be overlooked.

The second assumption is 'they have prooved X' No they haven't and they won't. They have taken educated assumptions and have run tests based on those assumptions. The tests come back as 'proof' only based on the original assumptions. Now if the assumptions are correct the tests and numbers run are correct, but anything based on an assumption can be wrong and if the base is wrong the conclusion will also be wrong.

For example:
Radiocarbon dating is a method that provides objective age estimates for carbon-based materials that originated from living organisms. An age could be estimated by measuring the amount of carbon-14 present in the sample and comparing this against an internationally used reference standard.
The first assumption is that the reference table is correct.

Plants and animals assimilate carbon 14 from carbon dioxide throughout their lifetimes. When they die, they stop exchanging carbon with the biosphere and their carbon 14 content then starts to decrease at a rate determined by the law of radioactive decay.
The law of radioactive decay is another assumption and while it may show to be true now who says this decay rate was always this way. People are assuming the past is the same as the present because they are only going on what can be tested now.

The Bible, however, teaches that for one the earth was created as an 'adult'. Adam wasn't a fetus he was a man and a tree was a tree not a seedling.
Secondly, the Bible teaches that certain laws of nature literally changed at first the fall and then again at the flood.

The ball of the earth covered in water and the heavens were created first. This is not part of creation week. The world was created outside of time. There is no telling what that could do to the results. Asking how old it is is probably the wrong question.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Could be outside of time
2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Time begins

3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.

It's really simple in the beginning God created the heavens and the Earthi says absolutely nothing on how long it took God to create the heavens and the Earth.

Time taken is not the correct question to be asking as this was before God created time on the earth. For time to pass on the earth, the earth had to be turning while a large light source shone on it. Also, God himself is also outside of time. This is not something as humans that we can ever understand because we are bound by time.

The next several verses deal with the creation of humanity.

The creation account deals with the entirety of creation upon the earth including dry land, plants, all types of creatures, the sun, moon and stars (at least the ones we can see.) and last of all was man.

Now I love my Bible but I also know it's a book that has been translated hundreds of times different passages have different meanings you also have to take into account it's been edited there are books missing.You take in human error, the superstitions of the people who lived back then

You are overlooking one important detail. The bible is God's word to us and as such he would ensure we always have at least one version as correct as humanly possible. It's a cope out so that people can say, God's word isn't true.

As to 'hundreds', there were eleven English translations of the Bible before the King James Version. So if you are unsure of later translations you can always read the account in there. Then you could also read it in a slightly more modern version, but even there you will still find 6 days of creation, in the same order.

King James Bible
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

New International Version
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Good News Translation
In six days I, the LORD, made the earth, the sky, the seas, and everything in them, but on the seventh day I rested. That is why I, the LORD, blessed the Sabbath and made it holy.

New Heart English Bible
for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the seventh day, and made it holy.

Four versions from oldest to more modern. Wording may change slightly but the core message that God created in 6 days does not change. This is why you should always have a few versions to hand, but to say God would allow his word to be corrupted beyond measure is simply untrue and would make God out to be a liar. He expects us to read, believe and teach diligently from his word.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

I mean back then diseases were not caused by germs and viruses it was caused by evil spirits.

You do realize God gave the ancient Israelites laws about quarantine?

All things you can take into account. The the core of what the Bible is is how to have a relationship with God. So enough with the arguing God created the heavens and the Earth and maybe he did it with a big bang

You're the one coming here arguing, I am merely answering.
So you believe in the miracle of the Virgin birth, that Jesus was both fully man and fully God who died and rose again, yet you would not believe that God could create in 6 days?
Or perhaps you don't yet believe that.

Tell me which is harder for God to do, create a man from clay or raise the body of a man from the gave?
I hope you realize that references back to creation are all through the Bible not just in Genesis.

How did sin come to be? What answer is there if it wasn't Adam who brought it in?

Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned--

The New Testament says sin came into the world by one man, I'm sure you can guess what man this is referring back to. If Adam didn't literally fall and bring in literal sin then our sin isn't literal either but he was and so is sin. As literal as Jesus who came to save us.
1 Corinthians 15
45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.
47 The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven.
The whole Bible hangs together or the whole bible falls apart.

 

[Piet Strydom]

I am always amaised at how people demand the Bible says the Universe and everything in it was made in 6 days, when clearly the Bible say there was no time before the first day, and everything in and on the Earth was made in 6 days, but the universer was created before these 6 days when time did not exist.

Secondly, I am also just as stunned on how scientific dating of organic ages with C14 are misrepresented as to say Life existed and can be scientifically tested to be in excess of 45 000 years.

And you are correct, the assumption that the atmosphere was in C14 C12 equilibreum millions of years ago is erroneous.
I am not even talking of theories of Volcanic influences or such, but about another fact described in the Bible.
The ages of man!
The Bible is clear that plants, animals and man exists only 6 000 years.
Secondly, that the Atmosphere was covered in a Mist, which eventually was the waters which fell from the heaven and resulted in a Flood.
Now think about this one.
If there was a wet atmosphere before the flood, there would have been very little C14 and other radiation which ages life.
Everything would live longer.
This was why people lived to be almost 1 000 years old.
If this atmosphere cleared after this water fell on the Earth, one will for the first time see refraction of light, and for the first time Rainbows would appear!
If the atmosphere cleared to what we have today, C14 would systematicaly increase, and life will not live as long as it did, and taking the ages of the man in Genesis, you will see on a graph that it slowly de escalated to 70 years. This means as C14 and other radiation increased, people died quicker.

Now lets look at the Atmosphere in this regard. The organisms living before 1950 will be exposed to levels of C14 which we regard as the Equilibreum levels of today.
As we go back to about 2000Bc, we need a correction factor, which Libby himself constructed, because we find very old organisms seem to have less C14 than anticipated. Why, because there was less C14 in the atmosphere.

Now, this is the noose of Atheism who demands ancient archaeological sites such as Tibliki Tepe and others are 12 000 years + older.
The answer is simple.
Anything realy older than 4000 years would have lived in an atmosphere where the C14 levels were very low!
Therefore, with less C14 consumption before its death, a dating using 1950 C14 levels will test much less C14 and the age will be falsly assigned in great excess of pre 4000 years.

All C14 does is to prove the fact that the Earth had a change in its atmosphere, and the Creationist does have evidence to a Global flood and the recent creation of life not older than 6000 years.
Greetings.

 

[coffee4u]

If there was a wet atmosphere before the flood, there would have been very little C14 and other radiation which ages life.
Everything would live longer.
This was why people lived to be almost 1 000 years old.
If this atmosphere cleared after this water fell on the Earth, one will for the first time see refraction of light, and for the first time Rainbows would appear!

That was what I thought but wasn't sure of. I don't normally use science, would rather stick with scripture, but sometimes it's needed.

 

[Online.Gamer.79]

The farthest Galaxy that has been spotted with the Hubble telescopeis over 13 billion light years away that basically means what we're seeing is light from the Galaxy from 13 billion years ago. That's how long it took for the light from it to get to Hubble. that's how I know the universe is billions and billions and billions and billions of years old math says the universe is billions and billions and billions of years old and math doesn't lie 1+1 will always equal two. And there's more ways to tell how old the Earth is than carbon dating. But you know what if there was a line in the Bible that said 1 + 1 equals 23 even though we know for a fact beyond a shadow of a doubt it's two fundamental Christians would argue it's 23 lol. The Bible also believed diseases were caused by evil spirits. I think the fundamental problem with Christianity today is it cannot separate the prejudices, Myths...yes I say that because many of the beliefs of the Bible times have been proven to be false, the number of times the Bible has been edited and books have been added and removed don't forget the Bible your reading even though it is based off the King James Bible the book your reading were edited and translated by the Catholic Church.and it has been edited in translated hundreds if not thousands of times in the last two thousand years. I believe in God I believe in Jesus Christ, I am not a fundamental with my head in the clouds Christian. The Earth is not flat that is a fact, diseases are caused by viruses and germs, the Earth is not the center of the universe, the universe is billions of years old and it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. And I'm done with the argument you all have a nice day

 

[coffee4u]

The farthest Galaxy that has been spotted with the Hubble telescopeis over 13 billion light years away that basically means what we're seeing is light from the Galaxy from 13 billion years ago. That's how long it took for the light from it to get to Hubble. that's how I know the universe is billions and billions and billions and billions of years old math says the universe is billions and billions and billions of years old and math doesn't lie 1+1 will always equal two. And there's more ways to tell how old the Earth is than carbon dating. But you know what if there was a line in the Bible that said 1 + 1 equals 23 even though we know for a fact beyond a shadow of a doubt it's two fundamental Christians would argue it's 23 lol. The Bible also believed diseases were caused by evil spirits. I think the fundamental problem with Christianity today is it cannot separate the prejudices, Myths...yes I say that because many of the beliefs of the Bible times have been proven to be false, the number of times the Bible has been edited and books have been added and removed don't forget the Bible your reading even though it is based off the King James Bible the book your reading were edited and translated by the Catholic Church.and it has been edited in translated hundreds if not thousands of times in the last two thousand years. I believe in God I believe in Jesus Christ, I am not a fundamental with my head in the clouds Christian. The Earth is not flat that is a fact, diseases are caused by viruses and germs, the Earth is not the center of the universe, the universe is billions of years old and it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. And I'm done with the argument you all have a nice day

Nope, God simply stretched them out, including the light.
Isaiah 45:12
It is I who made the earth and created mankind on it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts.

So while physically it might take light billions of years to get here if the light had to start from where the star is now, it didn't because God himself took each star and stretched it out from here to its place in the universe. And he named them as he did that. Psalm 147:4He determines the number of the stars and calls them each by name.

And the world's core was made outside of time and sat for an undetermined length of time. The core could be 100 billion years, it doesn't matter. The creation that God made upon it is recent.

 

[The Barbarian]

So while physically it might take light billions of years to get here if the light had to start from where the star is now, it didn't because God himself took each star and stretched it out from here to its place in the universe. And he named them as he did that. Psalm 147:4He determines the number of the stars and calls them each by name.

There's a problem with that. For example, we see some remnants of supernovae millions of light years away. If God stretched out space with the light in transit, then one of two things occurred:
1. there never was a supernova, and God is showing us faked evidence of something that never existed.

2. there was a supernova a few thousand years ago, and the Earth's atmosphere was blown away and all living things killed when the light was stretched out and hit the Earth.

The first option attributes dishonesty to God.
The second isn't consistent with what we see here.

So an intractable problem.

 

[DaveISBA]

okay if we go by the Bible specifically down to the number the universe is not older than seven or eight thousand years old at most. Here's the problem geology has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Earth is at least several billion years old, astronomy has proven the universe is close to 13 or 14 billion years old. How do you explain that. It's really simple in the beginning God created the heavens and the Earthi says absolutely nothing on how long it took God to create the heavens and the Earth. The next several verses deal with the creation of humanity. Now I love my Bible but I also know it's a book that has been translated hundreds of times different passages have different meanings you also have to take into account it's been edited there are books missing. You take in human error, the superstitions of the people who lived back then,I mean back then diseases were not caused by germs and viruses it was caused by evil spirits. All things you can take into account. The the core of what the Bible is is how to have a relationship with God. So enough with the arguing God created the heavens and the Earth and maybe he did it with a big bang

You have to ignore polystrate fossils to claim the earth layers were laid down over billions of years! Fossils running in and through layers of sediments that were supposedly laid down over millions of years.
The Chalk deposits, laid down in water, assigned to the Cretaceous geologic period, supposedly took 35 million years to form, are found throughout the world but also includes the Niobrara chalk beds in America. Fossils of the large, swimming reptiles called mosasaurs are common in the Niobrara chalk beds! The longest one found in Kansas was about 40 feet long.
From the (Kansas Geological Survey Bulletin 225), commenting on Niobrara Chalk formations: “The deposition of this material took place at a rate of approximately 0.036 mm per year”. Using the measurement of a 40 foot mosasaur the height is about 5 ft. it would take about 42,000 years to bury at that rate!
Bodies from the Titanic sank to the ocean floor but after only about 100 years, according to those who have spent the most time exploring the wreckage insist that, "any bodies at the site have long since decomposed"!
The most plausible explanation is that these Niobrara chalk beds mosasaurs, like fossils found in other sedimentary layers, were buried rapidly before scavenging or decomposition could take place indicating these layers were not laid down over millions of years but in a very short period of time!

 

[The Barbarian]

You have to ignore polystrate fossils to claim the earth layers were laid down over billions of years!

No. You just have to be aware that rates of sedimentation vary widely. You didn't know that?

From the (Kansas Geological Survey Bulletin 225), commenting on Niobrara Chalk formations: “The deposition of this material took place at a rate of approximately 0.036 mm per year”. Using the measurement of a 40 foot mosasaur the height is about 5 ft. it would take about 42,000 years to bury at that rate!

Unless large, heavy objects sink into soft sediment. One of those.

Bodies from the Titanic sank to the ocean floor but after only about 100 years, according to those who have spent the most time exploring the wreckage insist that, "any bodies at the site have long since decomposed"!

Yes, so did the vast majority of mosasaurs. Fossilization is a pretty rare thing for vertebrates. This one got buried and so the bones remained intact.

This is why we find fossils so often where the environment was conducive to some kind of rapid burial.

 

[DaveISBA]

No. You just have to be aware that rates of sedimentation vary widely. You didn't know that?

A simple search on how fossils are formed shows that the organisms most be buried rapidly in wet sediment before scavenging or decomposition occurs! The point being there could be no rate of sedimentation because the layers would have had to been laid down all at once in order to quickly bury living organisms!

Unless large, heavy objects sink into soft sediment.

Large animals such as whales are observed to settle to the bottom and are scavenged while they decompose and do not completely disappear into the sediment!

Yes, so did the vast majority of mosasaurs. Fossilization is a pretty rare thing for vertebrates. This one got buried and so the bones remained intact.

The vast majority of mosasaurs wouldn't have been fossilized because only those that were around to be rapidly buried in wet sediment and fossilized would be found!
Evidence of vertebrate life is common throughout the formation and mosasaurs are the most common marine reptiles in the Niobrara Chalk!
Fossilization is a pretty rare thing at present because you would need a worldwide, watery, sediment laden, cataclysmic occurrence in order to create the untold billions of fossils, said to be buried around the world!
There are so many fossils just in Kansas that evolutionary biology professor Bruce Lieberman stated that "there are millions of fossils in Kansas. All you have to do is find some exposed rocks and look."
A variety of marine animal fossils have been found in the Kansas Niobrara Chalk including corals, bryozoans, brachiopods, crinoids, clams, snails, squid, jellyfish, trilobites, eurypterids, turtles, fish, sharks and aquatic birds!

 

[d taylor]

okay if we go by the Bible specifically down to the number the universe is not older than seven or eight thousand years old at most. Here's the problem geology has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Earth is at least several billion years old, astronomy has proven the universe is close to 13 or 14 billion years old. How do you explain that. It's really simple in the beginning God created the heavens and the Earthi says absolutely nothing on how long it took God to create the heavens and the Earth. The next several verses deal with the creation of humanity. Now I love my Bible but I also know it's a book that has been translated hundreds of times different passages have different meanings you also have to take into account it's been edited there are books missing. You take in human error, the superstitions of the people who lived back then,I mean back then diseases were not caused by germs and viruses it was caused by evil spirits. All things you can take into account. The the core of what the Bible is is how to have a relationship with God. So enough with the arguing God created the heavens and the Earth and maybe he did it with a big bang

You want to show me in the Bible where it states that God created a universe.

 

[The Barbarian]

A simple search on how fossils are formed shows that the organisms most be buried rapidly in wet sediment before scavenging or decomposition occurs! The point being there could be no rate of sedimentation because the layers would have had to been laid down all at once in order to quickly bury living organisms!

How is it, then, that we find fossils of desert organisms buried in lithified sand dunes?

Large animals such as whales are observed to settle to the bottom and are scavenged while they decompose and do not completely disappear into the sediment!

Most of them do. On the other hand, some sink into sediment. That's why only a small number of whales become fossilized. They have to be buried (or sink into anoxic waters where scavengers won't go).

The vast majority of mosasaurs wouldn't have been fossilized because only those that were around to be rapidly buried in wet sediment and fossilized would be found!

Yes, so did the vast majority of mosasaurs. Fossilization is a pretty rare thing for vertebrates. This one got buried and so the bones remained intact.

Fossilization is a pretty rare thing at present because you would need a worldwide, watery, sediment laden, cataclysmic occurrence in order to create the untold billions of fossils, said to be buried around the world!

No, that's an unwarranted superstition. In the Karoo Formation, for example, a river delta has huge numbers of vertebrate fossils. Animals died in the river, or were washed into the river, and then were carried downstream and deposited at the delta.

The Burgess shale is the result of a huge underwater landslide that buried countless organisms.

You've been misled on this issue. There is no evidence whatever for a worldwide flood.

There are so many fossils just in Kansas that evolutionary biology professor Bruce Lieberman stated that "there are millions of fossils in Kansas. All you have to do is find some exposed rocks and look."

Not surprising, since Kansas was covered by a great inland sea during the Cretaceous. That's what you'd expect in a shallow sea.

 

[DaveISBA]

How is it, then, that we find fossils of desert organisms buried in lithified sand dunes?

Key word "lithified" meaning the sand turned into stone and you need water for that "Lithification is the process by which sediments combine to form sedimentary rocks. ... With compaction, sediment grains get squished together, reducing the size of the original pore space that divided them. Cementation is the process by which (dissolved minerals) crystallize and glue sediment grains together"

No, that's an unwarranted superstition. In the Karoo Formation, for example, a river delta has huge numbers of vertebrate fossils. Animals died in the river, or were washed into the river, and then were carried downstream and deposited at the delta. The vast majority of fossils are The Burgess shale is the result of a huge underwater landslide that buried countless organisms.

Fossils are primarily found, not in river deltas but, in worldwide sedimentary rock formation that cover 75% of the earth’s surface!

You've been misled on this issue. There is no evidence whatever for a worldwide flood.

There is plenty historical and physical evidence that confirm a worldwide flood! Evidence such as in the sedimentary layer which are worldwide and cover about 75% of all the worlds land surface. These layers were laid down by water because of the preponderance of marine fossils in them! Marine fossils found on every continent to the highest mountain ranges like the Himalayas and Mt Everest! The layers are separated, by the action of water, into almost pure deposits of certain minerals!

Dr. James Perloff holds PhDs from Harvard, MIT and Oxford., awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics, researched historical accounts of the flood and wrote: “Legends have been reported from nations such as China, Babylon, Mexico, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Persia, India, Norway, Wales, Ireland, Indonesia, Romania, etc.—composing a list that could go on for many pages”
“In 95 percent of the more than (two hundred flood legends), the flood was worldwide; in 88 percent, a certain family was favored; in 70 percent, survival was by means of a boat; in 67 percent, animals were also saved; in 66 percent, the flood was due to the wickedness of man; in 66 percent, the survivors had been forewarned; in 57 percent, they ended up on a mountain; in 35 percent, birds were sent out from the boat; and in 9 percent, exactly eight people were spared “

Not surprising, since Kansas was covered by a great inland sea during the Cretaceous. That's what you'd expect in a shallow sea.

Not surprising! But not just Kansas...the whole world was once under water! Any cursory study of how the sedimentary layers, that cover 75% of earth's land mass, where formed will show that materials were transported, by water, then separated by density into layers making up their own almost pure deposits of certain minerals as observed in the worldwide geological strata!

 

[The Barbarian]

Key word "lithified" meaning the sand turned into stone and you need water for that

No, that's not true. Tuff and aeolian sandstones are deposited by wind/gravity and often lithification happens without any more water than is present in those "dry" sands like desert sands. Rare rainfall seeping into the sand is more than enough over the ages to produce rock. Moreover, after the deposits containing the fossils are buried, groundwater often intrudes so, even though there was never any water involved in burying the organism, moisture can later fuse the grains further.

If we're just thinking about the deposition of the sediment, then we don't necessarily need water. Some counterexamples are:

• Aeolian sandstones, such as the Lower Permian Rotliegend sandstone of the North Sea. These are deposited by wind, not water.
• Some types of sedimentary breccia, which are chiefly deposited by gravity, not water.
• Tuff, which are deposited by gravity and wind, not water. They also undergo substantial compaction and lithification with or without water.

No sedimentation without water?

No flood required. In fact, this couldn't happen in a flood.

Fossils are primarily found, not in river deltas but, in worldwide sedimentary rock formation that cover 75% of the earth’s surface!

Most of those fossils are invertebrates, mostly forams and other small organisms with shells. Most land vertebrates are found in river deposits. Which is what we see happening today.

There is plenty historical and physical evidence that confirm a worldwide flood! Evidence such as in the sedimentary layer which are worldwide and cover about 75% of all the worlds land surface.

We still see such sedimentation forming rock today. So today's conditions are entirely sufficient to account for the same sort of sediment we find in the rocks. And its difficult to see how the Grand Canyon sediments were laid down in a flood, when you can find fossil deserts and forests in between the supposed "flood sediments." How do you think entire desert and forest ecostystems had time to develop and be buried in the short time you think the Flood happened?

Marine fossils found on every continent to the highest mountain ranges like the Himalayas and Mt Everest!

There aren't just marine fossils on Mt. Everest. Mount Everest is made of marine fossils. It is continental shelf crust, pushed up when India moved north and pushed into Asia. The process is still going on, and the Himalaya mountains are still rising. So again, you see marine fossils only forming in oceans, not some supposed flood.

Dr. James Perloff holds PhDs from Harvard, MIT and Oxford., awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics, researched historical accounts of the flood and wrote: “Legends have been reported from nations such as China, Babylon, Mexico, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Persia, India, Norway, Wales, Ireland, Indonesia, Romania, etc.—composing a list that could go on for many pages”

So we can conclude either that there was a single great flood, or that there have been a lot of floods in human history. The data supports a lot of floods, some of them big enough that people started legends about them. Sorry, that doesn't work for you, either.

There was a huge regional flood in the Middle East about the right time, when the Black sea was filled. It wasn't global of course, and the Bible doesn't say that Noah's flood was global either, so that might be it.

And the fact that seas have covered the parts of the earth at different places and times, doesn't support a global flood, either. There's neither historical, nor Biblical, nor physical evidence for a global flood.

 

[SkyWriting]

okay if we go by the Bible specifically down to the number the universe is not older than seven or eight thousand years old at most. Here's the problem geology has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Earth is at least several billion years old, astronomy has proven the universe is close to 13 or 14 billion years old. How do you explain that. It's really simple in the beginning God created the heavens and the Earthi says absolutely nothing on how long it took God to create the heavens and the Earth. The next several verses deal with the creation of humanity. Now I love my Bible but I also know it's a book that has been translated hundreds of times different passages have different meanings you also have to take into account it's been edited there are books missing. You take in human error, the superstitions of the people who lived back then,I mean back then diseases were not caused by germs and viruses it was caused by evil spirits. All things you can take into account. The the core of what the Bible is is how to have a relationship with God. So enough with the arguing God created the heavens and the Earth and maybe he did it with a big bang

That estimate must take into account that the earth was full-formed and aged when Adam was re-made into human form. And Adam was no infant either.

 

[The Barbarian]

That estimate must take into account that the earth was full-formed and aged when Adam was re-made into human form.

Problem with that is, there is neither scientific nor scriptural support for such a belief.

 

[Online.Gamer.79]

Wow the flood argument....I started searching the flood had according to the bible happened roughly 4300 years ago give or take 100 years ago. Here is the problem..the first great world empire was roughly 6000 years ago and the great pyramids about 5000 years ago, the great flood of the bible happened after both of those incidents. And we have human evidence dating 100 k years. The point a flood the covered the entire earth 20 feet over the tallest mountain would mean roughly 4 to 5 miles high, a global flood of the magnitude would have wiped out every man made object. Now have there been massive flood disasters that two a people of 4000 years would seem like the end world yeah. But history, geology, biology, and physics had debunked much of the old testament. I remember reading a guy say he believed the bible was part history, part myth, and a guide on having a relationship with god.