Why does YEC try to disprove scientific theory?

[grmorton]

No YEC proponent believes in spite of available evidence, but because of the evidence. We do, however believe the accuracy of the Bible takes precedence over "secular scientific" or naturalistic explanations when those explanations appear to contradict what the Bible says about a supernatural event. In otherwords - in simple plain english: If the scientific community interprets some piece of evidence which suggests that the Bible needs to be reinterpeted in order to conform - then that conclusion is rejected. Instead, a YEC'ist suggests that the conclusions were based on faulty reasoning, erroneous time-tables or corrupted data (hypothesis).

Perchance you can explain in detail what the faulty reasoning is involved in concluding that the flood was quite a dry place. The following pics are from my web site http://home.entouch.net/dmd/droughts.htm. Since I can't yet upload images I can only give you the links. Before you use the exlanation that these are underwater cracks, called synaeresis cracks, you should look at the discussion on the web page above which has a picture of synaeresis cracks to compare.

Ordovician desiccation cracks http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksOrdovicianTW.jpg
Silurian desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksSilurianTW.jpg
Devonian desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksDevonianTW.jpg
Mississippian desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksMississippianTW.jpg
Permian desiccation cracks
http://www.geology.pitt.edu/GeoSites/sams%20club%202.jpg
Triassic desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/desciccationCracksTriassSloanCanyonFmNewMexicoTW.jpg
Jurassic desiccation cracks
http://scienceviews.com/dinosaurs/images/SIA0322.jpg
Cretaceous desiccation cracks (this one is in my personal fossil collection)
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/hardgr3.jpg
Tertiary desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksEoceneGreenRiverTW.jpg

The only two periods I don't have a pic for are the Cambrian and the Pennsylvanian. They exist there, but I haven't found a pic for them. Why was the global flood so dry? Why was the land left dry for several weeks in order for the cracks to form? That should say that we need to interpret the Bible as not involving a global flood. Also the slab with the dino tracks on it prove that the water of the flood could not have been deeper than the length of the dinosaur.

I await enlightenment on the fallacious reasoning.

 

[YahwehLove]

That verse leads me to believe that all this education and scientific study we have that helps us read the bible is leading us to stupidity. According to scripture it would be better that we couldn't read.
.

And all that verse leads me to believe is that God will show those men who have grown so proud of their 'wisdom' just how wise they are when He shows them how wrong they were/are.

Nothing wrong with learning.
Im even fine with teaching TE as a ''theory''
Teach it as fact and you lose my attention. Same as you probably do every time I say ''6 days'' I assume

we KNOW its taught as fact in practice.

My gf just got out of college.
She said her bio prof immediately went after anyone who didnt beleive in TE and would try to ridicule them publically to the class.

sorry, thats not teaching.
that is nothing but forced indoctrination.

 

[YahwehLove]

Perchance you can explain in detail what the faulty reasoning is involved in concluding that the flood was quite a dry place. The following pics are from my web site http://home.entouch.net/dmd/droughts.htm. Since I can't yet upload images I can only give you the links. Before you use the exlanation that these are underwater cracks, called synaeresis cracks, you should look at the discussion on the web page above which has a picture of synaeresis cracks to compare.

Ordovician desiccation cracks http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksOrdovicianTW.jpg
Silurian desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksSilurianTW.jpg
Devonian desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksDevonianTW.jpg
Mississippian desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksMississippianTW.jpg
Permian desiccation cracks
http://www.geology.pitt.edu/GeoSites/sams%20club%202.jpg
Triassic desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/desciccationCracksTriassSloanCanyonFmNewMexicoTW.jpg
Jurassic desiccation cracks
http://scienceviews.com/dinosaurs/images/SIA0322.jpg
Cretaceous desiccation cracks (this one is in my personal fossil collection)
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/hardgr3.jpg
Tertiary desiccation cracks
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/DesciccationCracksEoceneGreenRiverTW.jpg

The only two periods I don't have a pic for are the Cambrian and the Pennsylvanian. They exist there, but I haven't found a pic for them. Why was the global flood so dry? Why was the land left dry for several weeks in order for the cracks to form? That should say that we need to interpret the Bible as not involving a global flood. Also the slab with the dino tracks on it prove that the water of the flood could not have been deeper than the length of the dinosaur.

I await enlightenment on the fallacious reasoning.

Except that if the TE can say that polystrate trees and the layers THEY are found in was some catastophic flood(s), then I think we can say that what youre showing could have been a result of something OTHER than Noahs flood.
No one said there wasnt other major flooding early in the earths history.

 

[versastyle]

And all that verse leads me to believe is that God will show those men who have grown so proud of their 'wisdom' just how wise they are when He shows them how wrong they were/are.

That applies to everyone, not just people who are proud of their knowledge.

Nothing wrong with learning.
Im even fine with teaching TE as a ''theory''
Teach it as fact and you lose my attention. Same as you probably do every time I say ''6 days'' I assume

No, you get my attention because its so vigorously annoying.

we KNOW its taught as fact in practice.
My gf just got out of college.
She said her bio prof immediately went after anyone who didnt beleive in TE and would try to ridicule them publically to the class.
sorry, thats not teaching.
that is nothing but forced indoctrination.

I agree. I don't think any biological evolutionary theory should be taught. I think I'm pretty clear on that.

 

[versastyle]

No one said there wasnt other major flooding early in the earths history.

Exactly the reason polystrate trees are not evidence for anything but flooding, layering and fossilization.

 

[YahwehLove]

Exactly the reason polystrate trees are not evidence for anything but flooding, layering and fossilization.

And exactly why the links he provided are useless as any sort of proof.

 

[versastyle]

And exactly why the links he provided are useless as any sort of proof.

They don't concern polystrate trees.

Plus, these aren't intended to be proofs of anything. They are falsifications of a global flood.

 

[YahwehLove]

They don't concern polystrate trees.

Plus, these aren't intended to be proofs of anything. They are falsifications of a global flood.

uhh. yes I know they dont concern polystrate trees

I think you overlooked the point.

And you are correct, they arent '''proofs'' of anything.
They are ''interpreted'' as falsifications for a global flood, but as I said, they dont do anything of the sort.
those could have come from a multitude of other catastrophic floods in the area they were found in.
Floods happen every day on this planet.

 

[grmorton]

Except that if the TE can say that polystrate trees and the layers THEY are found in was some catastophic flood(s), then I think we can say that what youre showing could have been a result of something OTHER than Noahs flood.
No one said there wasnt other major flooding early in the earths history.

Then say what it is the result of. THese mudcracks are scattered throughout the entire fossil record, and we even find them in oil well cores when we drill thousands of feet down.If they aren't due to the flood, then neither are the rocks which contain them.

 

[YahwehLove]

Then say what it is the result of. THese mudcracks are scattered throughout the entire fossil record, and we even find them in oil well cores when we drill thousands of feet down.If they aren't due to the flood, then neither are the rocks which contain them.

uh. ok.
Didnt I just say that Noahs flood wasnt the only flood?
Its just the only global one.

 

[versastyle]

those could have come from a multitude of other catastrophic floods in the area they were found in.
Floods happen every day on this planet.

Why don't you try to address the question instead of hand-waving? I think we have nothing more to say if you can't even research the problem.

 

[YahwehLove]

Why don't you try to address the question instead of hand-waving? I think we have nothing more to say if you can't even research the problem.

youre a card guy.
what about the handwaving with the polystrate trees?
what about the handwaving that rejects that the bible says 6 DAYS?

at least I am researching the retrovirus issue to see how it fits INTO Gods word.
what are you doing but waving your hand and pretending it doesnt say 6 days?

 

[versastyle]

Are you intentionally being ignorant? I never said the bible does not say 6 days.

What exactly was I hand-waving that you wanted me to research?

 

[YahwehLove]

Are you intentionally being ignorant? I never said the bible does not say 6 days.

What exactly was I hand-waving that you wanted me to research?

so youre a YEC, I take it?