This is the question I have!

[dlamberth]

 

[Joseph G]

About as imaginative as...

*smile*

 

[AV1611VET]

This is the question I have!

Because academia "accordions out" the fossil layer timeline from 6000 years to millions of years.

Imagine a street that is one mile long.

Then, some map maker changes the scale to make the street look like it's one hundred miles long.

Now they have to account for only a few houses on that street, so they just call them "missing lots."

As one poster here is fond of saying:

The map is not the territory.

 

[chevyontheriver]

View attachment 358781

I've heard it said that God made this fossil record to trick non-believers into strong delusion. That believers know better than to go down that rabbit hole. That the world was created in 4004 BC, that faith definitively tells us that, and that anything else is of the devil.

I disagree. But that's basically their story.

 

[ozso]

View attachment 358781

If trilobite fossils are buried that deep, why have I seen people finding them on the surface?

 

[ozso]

I've heard it said that God made this fossil record to trick non-believers into strong delusion. That believers know better than to go down that rabbit hole. That the world was created in 4004 BC, that faith definitively tells us that, and that anything else is of the devil.

I disagree. But that's basically their story.

God didn't make the fossil record. That's something man came up with. And it's undergone lots of revisions.

 

[AveChristusRex]

That the world was created in 4004 BC, that faith definitively tells us that, and that anything else is of the devil.

I think more of a 'one day = one thousand years' mentality, as St. Cyprian said, “The first seven days in the divine arrangement contain seven thousand years” (Treatises 11:11). Moreover, St. Irenaeus said, “And there are some, again, who relegate the death of Adam to the thousandth year; for since ‘a day of the Lord is a thousand years,’ he did not overstep the thousand years, but died within them, thus bearing out the sentence of his sin” (Against Heresies 5:23:2).

With that, I look to St. Augustine, who said that “They are deceived by those highly mendacious documents which profess to give the history of many thousand years. Though, reckoning by the sacred writings, we find that not even 6,000 years have yet passed.” St. Theophilus said: “All the years from the creation of the world, [until now], amount to a total of 5,698 years” (120 – 183 AD). Thus, I consider the universe to be made approximately 7,539 years old, give or take. I use St. Theophilus's calculation, but it still remains in coagulation with the calculation of Augustine and Origen; making the world's creation begin in 5515 B.C. However, this could be relatively incorrect, and I am open to different [YEC] interpretations on the subject.

God didn't make the fossil record. That's something man came up with. And it's undergone lots of revisions.

I went to see 'the Ark and the Darkness' when it released in theatres, and I have to agree with ozso here, the fossil record changes every day, and I would assume even the graph cited by dlamberth is outdated. Here is the problem with science:

• Think of Student A, who believes in Belief X, and supports it congruently.
• Then there is Student B, who believes in Belief Y, and supports it congruently.

Well, at some point Belief X is the scientific consensus, and Student B is thought of as "pseudoscientific" for believing in Belief Y. However, new findings come out that say that, actually, Belief Y is correct! Now Belief Y is the scientific consensus, and the same individuals who thought of Student B as "pseudoscientific" now think of Student A as "pseudoscientific." Do you see the problem here? It seems like a game of four-square, defaming one group of believers until they are validated, then turn on those they considered right beforehand. That isn't science in my view, and the idea of "pseudoscience" goes against science in itself. We are taught about the Scientific Method, but if you actually use the Scientific Method in real life practice, the questioning of the scientific status quo will have you labeled as a "pseudoscientist..." until your right of course, then everyone wants to be your friend (I'm sure there is a better way to explain that, but I gave it my best shot).

Now they have to account for only a few houses on that street, so they just call them "missing lots."

It seems like only when it is contrary to Scripture is the science "not a theory," regardless of how much they know about what they are talking about; it seems like a factory of "quick, disprove the creationists!" without really explaining or providing clarity in their own theories. Also that graphic is misleading, noone has proven this as a reality, but everyone considers it fact because, as I said, these ideas are not thought up to evolve the human understanding, they are thought up as another tool in the skeptics toolbox to rival the scientific elements of the Scriptures.

 

[timothyu]

What is a day, or more accurately an age, in God's realm where there is no time? Which realm, His or ours, did these early scribes exist?

 

[Astrid]

If trilobite fossils are buried that deep, why have I seen people finding them on the surface?

Seriously?

 

[Shemjaza]

If trilobite fossils are buried that deep, why have I seen people finding them on the surface?

Because rock formations don't just get built up by stuff going on top.

There are also other geological effects that leave evidence that warp and distort the structure.

God didn't make the fossil record. That's something man came up with. And it's undergone lots of revisions.

The fossil record is a part of the physical world, so I'd assume a Christian would believe that God was ultimately responsible for it.

However the interpretation of the evidence has been made by humans to support the Earth being billions of years old.

I think more of a 'one day = one thousand years' mentality, as St. Cyprian said, “The first seven days in the divine arrangement contain seven thousand years” (Treatises 11:11). Moreover, St. Irenaeus said, “And there are some, again, who relegate the death of Adam to the thousandth year; for since ‘a day of the Lord is a thousand years,’ he did not overstep the thousand years, but died within them, thus bearing out the sentence of his sin” (Against Heresies 5:23:2).

With that, I look to St. Augustine, who said that “They are deceived by those highly mendacious documents which profess to give the history of many thousand years. Though, reckoning by the sacred writings, we find that not even 6,000 years have yet passed.” St. Theophilus said: “All the years from the creation of the world, [until now], amount to a total of 5,698 years” (120 – 183 AD). Thus, I consider the universe to be made approximately 7,539 years old, give or take. I use St. Theophilus's calculation, but it still remains in coagulation with the calculation of Augustine and Origen; making the world's creation begin in 5515 B.C. However, this could be relatively incorrect, and I am open to different [YEC] interpretations on the subject.

Why are you so convinced that your personal interpretation of a Young Earth is correct?

Aside from personal preference do you have an objective method of making your interpretation correct?

How do you feel about Flat Earth believers who also claim that they are supported by a literal reading of the Bible?

I went to see 'the Ark and the Darkness' when it released in theatres, and I have to agree with ozso here, the fossil record changes every day, and I would assume even the graph cited by dlamberth is outdated. Here is the problem with science:

• Think of Student A, who believes in Belief X, and supports it congruently.
• Then there is Student B, who believes in Belief Y, and supports it congruently.

Well, at some point Belief X is the scientific consensus, and Student B is thought of as "pseudoscientific" for believing in Belief Y. However, new findings come out that say that, actually, Belief Y is correct! Now Belief Y is the scientific consensus, and the same individuals who thought of Student B as "pseudoscientific" now think of Student A as "pseudoscientific." Do you see the problem here? It seems like a game of four-square, defaming one group of believers until they are validated, then turn on those they considered right beforehand. That isn't science in my view, and the idea of "pseudoscience" goes against science in itself. We are taught about the Scientific Method, but if you actually use the Scientific Method in real life practice, the questioning of the scientific status quo will have you labeled as a "pseudoscientist..." until your right of course, then everyone wants to be your friend (I'm sure there is a better way to explain that, but I gave it my best shot).

You have made an accusation... I'f be very interested if you can support it with any kind of specifics?

The definition of pseudoscience isn't that it is contrary to the mainstream consensus... it's a description of a flawed methodology.

Creationism is typically built around axioms that can not be questioned and are frequently not even hypothetically disprovable.

It seems like only when it is contrary to Scripture is the science "not a theory," regardless of how much they know about what they are talking about; it seems like a factory of "quick, disprove the creationists!" without really explaining or providing clarity in their own theories. Also that graphic is misleading, noone has proven this as a reality, but everyone considers it fact because, as I said, these ideas are not thought up to evolve the human understanding, they are thought up as another tool in the skeptics toolbox to rival the scientific elements of the Scriptures.

The graphic is absolutely demonstrated by evidence.

Geology has a multitude of streams of evidence, and they happen to line up with evidence from physics, astronomy and biology.

No scientific theory is ever "proven" in the mathematical context, but in the common use of "beyond reasonable doubt" then evolution and geology are absolutely proven.

 

[AaronClaricus]

If trilobite fossils are buried that deep, why have I seen people finding them on the surface?

What rocks are at the surface is determined by geological processes. Some places are eroded enough to see deep into the geological column. Other places, the geological column is lifted.

 

[AaronClaricus]

It seems like only when it is contrary to Scripture is the science "not a theory," regardless of how much they know about what they are talking about; it seems like a factory of "quick, disprove the creationists!" without really explaining or providing clarity in their own theories. Also that graphic is misleading, noone has proven this as a reality, but everyone considers it fact because, as I said, these ideas are not thought up to evolve the human understanding, they are thought up as another tool in the skeptics toolbox to rival the scientific elements of the Scriptures.

Here's a diagram of the geologic column from an actual lecture.

 

[ozso]

There's a simple answer to this in my opinion. Better than Genesis was using figurative language. How long does it take for a human being to become a fully grown adult? Are there a lot of stages a human goes through in the process? Is it a complicated development process?

When God created Adam, did he start out as a zygote and did it take 18-21 years for God to create him? Or was Adam created fully formed? 18-21 years of growth and development that took place instantaneously.

Why couldn't God create the Earth the same way?

 

[BCP1928]

There's a simple answer to this in my opinion. Better than Genesis was using figurative language. How long does it take for a human being to become a fully grown adult? Are there a lot of stages a human goes through in the process? Is it a complicated development process?

When God created Adam, did he start out as a zygote and did it take 18-21 years for God to create him? Or was Adam created fully formed? 18-21 years of growth and development that took place instantaneously.

Why couldn't God create the Earth the same way?

God could have done it any way He wanted. The question is, what did He actually do?

 

[AaronClaricus]

There's a simple answer to this in my opinion. Better than Genesis was using figurative language. How long does it take for a human being to become a fully grown adult? Are there a lot of stages a human goes through in the process? Is it a complicated development process?

When God created Adam, did he start out as a zygote and did it take 18-21 years for God to create him? Or was Adam created fully formed? 18-21 years of growth and development that took place instantaneously.

Why couldn't God create the Earth the same way?

Even early creationists believed sedimentary rocks to be part of a "secondary" cause. Different from primary rocks which were created by god.

The main issue is early creationists believed the secondary cause to be one singular event: Noah's flood. As opposed to Aristotelians who believed the secondary causes to be a very slow process.

 

[Lost4words]

View attachment 358781

Science has it all wrong as its just guess work when it comes to ageing things.

Also, everyone knows Corgi's were created first in the animal kingdom as we were needed to keep control of all the 'dumb' animals!!!

 

[AaronClaricus]

Science has i all wrong as its just guess work when it comes to ageing things.

Also, everyone knows Corgi's were created first in the animal kingdom as we were needed to keep control of all the 'dumb' animals!!!

There's not a lot of guess work in absolute dating. In fact there's none in modern practices. They take 40lbs of rock and sort out 50 flawless gem crystals the size of dust grains. Them inspect them under electron microscopes to make sure they are a singular crystal versus composites. From that very precise dates are determined.

 

[Job 33:6]

If trilobite fossils are buried that deep, why have I seen people finding them on the surface?

Because rock layers are tilted at angles. If you have layers of a cake and you tilt that cake at a 45 degree angle, then those deeper layers will be exposed at the surface.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Because academia "accordions out" the fossil layer timeline from 6000 years to millions of years.

This does not address the question. Regardless of accordioning, human fossils are not found in the same rocks that dinosaur fossils are found in.

 

[Lost4words]

There's not a lot of guess work in absolute dating. In fact there's none in modern practices. They take 40lbs of rock and sort out 50 flawless gem crystals the size of dust grains. Them inspect them under electron microscopes to make sure they are a singular crystal versus composites. From that very precise dates are determined.

Flaws in that though...how do they determine the age of those?