Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
EasternI'd expect to see something like these giant current ripples from the Ice Age floods that ran through western Washington.
View attachment 297762
ID does not just claim that "God designed science." ID claims that "God designed science" but that the "science" which God "designed" is not always adequate to explain the results which we observe.No ID doesn't claim a pencil should hit the floor differently if God designed science.
No, ID claims that that the quarterback can't always throw the ball accurately by himself.Intervention? That's like saying that the quarterback throwing the ball is interfering with the game.
ID proposes that there will be a difference. Just like evolution: ID proposes that natural laws as science describes them cannot explain the emergence of certain biological structures thus they require the intervention of a designer. What you persist in calling "ID" is actually theistic evolution--the idea that evolution proceeds according to natural laws because that's the way God "designed" it to happen.
Yes the post flood ice age.I'd expect to see something like these giant current ripples from the Ice Age floods that ran through western Washington.
View attachment 297762
My understanding of ID is different. I sometimes refer to it as a belief that God is constantly fiddling with evolution and that ID can be detected if it looks designed.What you persist in calling "ID" is actually theistic evolution--the idea that evolution proceeds according to natural laws because that's the way God "designed" it to happen.
I only understand ID as floated by the Discovery Institute. What you are proposing in the name of ID is what I believe myself and which I have always understood to be called theistic evolution.No it doesn't. You just don't understand ID at all.
Massive erosion. And not long term erosion, short term erosion. It is possible to tell the difference between the two. Then there is the fact that ice floats. There are quite a few other lines of evidence that refute that tale.Actions like what exactly?
No, the rate of uplift is not rapid. The river only needed to cut down as fast as the land rose.Yes the post flood ice age.
Maybe something like deep canyons that could not have formed gradually?
Like how the Grand Canyon developed through a major uplift. The river should have flowed around it, but it didn’t.
Your link says that human blood cells were collected but that
they contained no DNA.
Did you ever think to question how they could identify them
as human?
Massive erosion. And not long term erosion, short term erosion. It is possible to tell the difference between the two. Then there is the fact that ice floats. There are quite a few other lines of evidence that refute that tale.
Oh! And then there is my favorite. You have heard about the urban myth of a person waking up in a seedy hotel bathtub filled with ice and missing a kidney. Do you now why that does not happen in real life?
And also the evidence exists that tells us that the Earth is old. Creationists have no answer against that evidence except for falsehoods.
There are several tests for blood and human blood which are used at crime scenes. The blood was identified as human.
The lack of pcr amplification is part of the mystery , but also part of the validation. If it was a fraud , it would amplify as the DNA of the person it was taken from . There is only one person cited in history without paternal DNA. That has surprised all the pathologists.
Read the reports and interviews also of such as so called Eucharistic miracle analysis. Impossible to explain or fake. Many pathologists involved not just one. All come to similar conclusion.
Thanks for the correction. Having been on several field trips exploring the floods in Eastern Washington and here in Oregon with the Ice Age Institute, I don't know how that popped in. Where I live it's been estimated that my house would have been under 250 feet of water.Eastern
Some of them will try to claim that sedimentary rocks are from the flood when it can be shown easily that they could not be.For every yard of material eroded here, there's a yard of deposition
there.
There would be a distinct flood layer in the strata.
The " flood" is a igger event than the asteroid that
ended the cretaceous. We can find that boundary 60
some million years later.
I don't think even a creationist believes they found the flood layer.
You try to claim that this is "science" an important part of science is peer review. Why didn't he publish his findings in a well respected professional peer reviewed journal? I can think of one very good reason not to.There are several tests for blood and human blood which are used at crime scenes. The blood was identified as human.
The lack of pcr amplification is part of the mystery , but also part of the validation. If it was a fraud , it would amplify as the DNA of the person it was taken from . There is only one person cited in history presumed to have no paternal DNA. Guess who, That has surprised all the pathologists: samples as good as this normally yield a sequence.
Read the reports and interviews also of such as so called Eucharistic miracle analysis. Impossible to explain or fake. Many pathologists involved not just one. All come to similar conclusion on the pathology. None can explain it or indeed how there are white cells in vitro.
And what if it was found tomorrow? what then?I don't think even a creationist believes they found the flood layer.
One can find all sorts of Amazing ScienceYou try to claim that this is "science" an important part of science is peer review. Why didn't he publish his findings in a well respected professional peer reviewed journal? I can think of one very good reason not to.
How so? If there was real evidence of a flood then science would acknowledge it. Why would that be a problem?And what if it was found tomorrow? what then?
In my opinion, it would just widen the gap between science and the Bible; making things worse, not better.
Because atheist scientists are evil people and what to deceive you. /sarcHow so? If there was real evidence of a flood then science would acknowledge it. Why would that be a problem?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?