User Tag List

Page 110 of 110 FirstFirst ... 1060100107108109110
Results 1,636 to 1,647 of 1647

Thread: Isn't it reasonable to doubt Young Earth Creationism?

  1. #1636
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    6,216
    Thanks
    19,091
    Thanked 5,483 Times in 3,473 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147587
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Thanks! that is helpful. But it makes TWO gathering of waters, not just one.

    I can't guarantee such quick results for my visual.
    Keep in mind that that's only a 2D representation, and the "gathering of the waters" didn't happen until after he put the firmament in the midst of the waters.
    @Stripe it's amazing how similar that is to something Bryan Nickel sent me in a conversation I was a part of recently on a related matter. I've asked him if I can share it, and I'm waiting for a response.

  2. #1637
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    6,216
    Thanks
    19,091
    Thanked 5,483 Times in 3,473 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147587
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    By the way, here is an image I made ages ago that describes what we believe. I've been meaning to improve it:



    One day...

    Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Thanks! that is helpful. But it makes TWO gathering of waters, not just one.

    I can't guarantee such quick results for my visual.
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Never mind about the TWO waters. I understand what you're getting at.
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Keep in mind that that's only a 2D representation, and the "gathering of the waters" didn't happen until after he put the firmament in the midst of the waters.
    @Stripe it's amazing how similar that is to something Bryan Nickel sent me in a conversation I was a part of recently on a related matter. I've asked him if I can share it, and I'm waiting for a response.
    Just got permission from Bryan, so I'll post my initial question along with his response:

    Me:

    Watched your overview video (parts 1-6 combined) on the HPT recently (what an excellent video you made), and was wondering if you have a model for what the earth would have looked like prior to the flood, as far as Pangea is concerned...I'm having a hard time imagining where it would be and it's orientation on the pre-flood earth.



    Bryan (to me, Doug McBurney, and Bob Enyart, who I CC'd in my initial email):

    All,

    Good questions. Not all that easy to answer with certainty as far as what pre-flood earth would look like. But I'll explain why I don't show where Pangea was and why I show the graphics as I imagine in the videos. I have been working on something too that I'll show some screen shots of below. Someday it and your questions may result in a follow on video.

    Pangea basically means "all land" is the idea that all continents were once connected and concentrated on one side of the planet as one land mass...usually shown with the rest of the globe as an ocean. In this Pangea scenario the continents are assumed to be siting directly on the dry mantle rock. No water under them. No "great deep" as HPT shows. Continents from Pangea are then shown to be carried to their current positions by the circulation of the mantle as proposed by evolutionary Plate Tectonics. HPT is quite different from the Pangea concept. So I don't refer to anything as "Pangea" because it has become so tied to the faulty concepts of Plate Tectonics and AIG/ICR's Catastrophic Plate Tectonics. CPT calls it "Rodinia" (Russian for "motherland") for some reason. I guess one sounds more credentialed if you give it a mysterious sounding name. Walt shows that the Pangea arrangement has a lot of problems...Africa is too small, Central America doesn't exist, N. and S. America are inexplicably rotated ad-hoc into Africa and Europe, etc. You've watched my videos, so I'm sure you know HPT proposes an entirely different scenario where the entire globe (not just one side) is covered by a shell of granite that portions of...would become our continents of today. I will not re-describe this as the videos show much better...and again assuming you already know. If I've assumed wrong...let me know if you don't understand. In any case, that's why I don't really bother to show where Pangea/Rodinia was ...because I dont' think it (as arranged and presented) ever existed.

    Now for what I imagine pre-flood earth to have looked like if HPT is remotely correct. I show this in the video:



    The idea is that if there was only half as much water above the granite (earth/raqia) shell and that shell had warped down in many places when pillars made contact with the mantle, then there would be much more pre-flood surface land and many small seas in the depressed areas.....no dominating, wide oceans. And it is important to clarify that these pre-flood surface seas all rode ON TOP of the granite continental shell. Not adjacent to it as Pangea/Rodinia shows.

    So day 1 would look something like this...



    Then day 2, the pillars form, seas run into depressions, and dry land rises up out of the waters. Of course the scale is all exaggerated so we can see.



    How many seas? I don't know. I seem to have imagined 20-30 in the video graphic but that is just a notional guess. Maybe we should give them all latin/Greek names and then.... Ha! Depending on how the granite flexed down there could have been less, or 2x-3x more seas than I show.

    I've begun to work on a graphic to show the orientation of continents pre-flood along with the pre-flood north pole orientation but it is very much a work in progress.

    We are used to looking at earth in the following orientation w/ the north pole (red) up and equator (red line):



    However, pre-flood it would have been oriented more like this along the blue equator line:



    As you can see I've begun to show the rough path of the initial rupture of the granite shell (transparent tan) and initial erosion.

    I've yet to figure out how to get an image to show how current continent shapes would have been closer together so you'll have to use your imagination to

    see that N and S. America would have been a few hundred miles further east and Africa/Europe would have been a few hundred miles further West. Both staying inside the transparent tan pre-flood plate boundaries.


    Anyway, hope this helps and did not confuse.


    Bryan


  3. The Following User Says Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Stripe (July 20th, 2018)

  4. #1638
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    16,450
    Thanks
    185
    Thanked 9,167 Times in 6,992 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147813
    He copied mine, obviously.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Blablaman

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (July 20th, 2018)

  6. #1639
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    16,450
    Thanks
    185
    Thanked 9,167 Times in 6,992 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147813
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Just got permission from Bryan, so I'll post my initial question along with his response:
    This is awesome. Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bryan
    I don't refer to anything as "Pangea" because it has become so tied to the faulty concepts of Plate Tectonics and AIG/ICR's Catastrophic Plate Tectonics.
    This is a vastly underused and underappreciated tactic. Establishment ideas use language that assume the truth of those assertions. Adopting that language just leads to confusion and promotion of the "status quo."

    It is much better to be precise and exclusive with terms that refer to your own ideas.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Blablaman

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    6days (July 20th, 2018),JudgeRightly (July 20th, 2018)

  8. #1640
    Over 1500 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,711
    Thanks
    383
    Thanked 715 Times in 491 Posts

    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    212276
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Just got permission from Bryan, so I'll post my initial question along with his response:

    Me:

    Watched your overview video (parts 1-6 combined) on the HPT recently (what an excellent video you made), and was wondering if you have a model for what the earth would have looked like prior to the flood, as far as Pangea is concerned...I'm having a hard time imagining where it would be and it's orientation on the pre-flood earth.



    Bryan (to me, Doug McBurney, and Bob Enyart, who I CC'd in my initial email):

    All,

    Good questions. Not all that easy to answer with certainty as far as what pre-flood earth would look like. But I'll explain why I don't show where Pangea was and why I show the graphics as I imagine in the videos. I have been working on something too that I'll show some screen shots of below. Someday it and your questions may result in a follow on video.

    Pangea basically means "all land" is the idea that all continents were once connected and concentrated on one side of the planet as one land mass...usually shown with the rest of the globe as an ocean. In this Pangea scenario the continents are assumed to be siting directly on the dry mantle rock. No water under them. No "great deep" as HPT shows. Continents from Pangea are then shown to be carried to their current positions by the circulation of the mantle as proposed by evolutionary Plate Tectonics. HPT is quite different from the Pangea concept. So I don't refer to anything as "Pangea" because it has become so tied to the faulty concepts of Plate Tectonics and AIG/ICR's Catastrophic Plate Tectonics. CPT calls it "Rodinia" (Russian for "motherland") for some reason. I guess one sounds more credentialed if you give it a mysterious sounding name. Walt shows that the Pangea arrangement has a lot of problems...Africa is too small, Central America doesn't exist, N. and S. America are inexplicably rotated ad-hoc into Africa and Europe, etc. You've watched my videos, so I'm sure you know HPT proposes an entirely different scenario where the entire globe (not just one side) is covered by a shell of granite that portions of...would become our continents of today. I will not re-describe this as the videos show much better...and again assuming you already know. If I've assumed wrong...let me know if you don't understand. In any case, that's why I don't really bother to show where Pangea/Rodinia was ...because I dont' think it (as arranged and presented) ever existed.

    Now for what I imagine pre-flood earth to have looked like if HPT is remotely correct. I show this in the video:



    The idea is that if there was only half as much water above the granite (earth/raqia) shell and that shell had warped down in many places when pillars made contact with the mantle, then there would be much more pre-flood surface land and many small seas in the depressed areas.....no dominating, wide oceans. And it is important to clarify that these pre-flood surface seas all rode ON TOP of the granite continental shell. Not adjacent to it as Pangea/Rodinia shows.

    So day 1 would look something like this...



    Then day 2, the pillars form, seas run into depressions, and dry land rises up out of the waters. Of course the scale is all exaggerated so we can see.



    How many seas? I don't know. I seem to have imagined 20-30 in the video graphic but that is just a notional guess. Maybe we should give them all latin/Greek names and then.... Ha! Depending on how the granite flexed down there could have been less, or 2x-3x more seas than I show.

    I've begun to work on a graphic to show the orientation of continents pre-flood along with the pre-flood north pole orientation but it is very much a work in progress.

    We are used to looking at earth in the following orientation w/ the north pole (red) up and equator (red line):



    However, pre-flood it would have been oriented more like this along the blue equator line:



    As you can see I've begun to show the rough path of the initial rupture of the granite shell (transparent tan) and initial erosion.

    I've yet to figure out how to get an image to show how current continent shapes would have been closer together so you'll have to use your imagination to

    see that N and S. America would have been a few hundred miles further east and Africa/Europe would have been a few hundred miles further West. Both staying inside the transparent tan pre-flood plate boundaries.


    Anyway, hope this helps and did not confuse.


    Bryan
    Great diagrams! I appreciate the work that went into them.

    If that's the picture of the gathering of the waters into one place, I guess I have to walk back my walking back of the comment about multiple gathering places. If I'm reading the scriptures correctly, it says the waters under the heavens (which you guys are saying is above the crust/firmament) were gathered into one place so that the dry land appeared. But that's not what the diagram shows--it's showing multiple seas and a single dry land. The scripture doesn't require the dry land to be all connected, although it allows for it. But the majority of the waters must be connected, it seems, unless "one place" really means "several places". I recognize the word "seas" is plural, but that is easily reconciled with normal usage in English ("sail the seven seas" is talking about connected oceans), and I imagine it might be so for Hebrew.

    This is not a big critique, but should be considered in model drawing.

  9. #1641
    Over 4000 post club Jose Fly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,240
    Thanks
    41
    Thanked 603 Times in 436 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    189612
    "Evolutionary plate tectonics".....that's one of the funniest things I've heard.
    "The way to deal with superstition is not to be polite to it, but to tackle it with all arms, and so rout it, cripple it, and make it forever infamous and ridiculous." --H.L. Mencken

  10. #1642
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    16,450
    Thanks
    185
    Thanked 9,167 Times in 6,992 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147813
    Quote Originally Posted by Jose Fly View Post
    "Evolutionary plate tectonics".....that's one of the funniest things I've heard.
    "Dynamite drop-in, Monty. That broadcast school has really paid off."

    The top five results on Google Scholar when searching for "evolution plate tectonics":


    Implications of plate tectonics for the Cenozoic tectonic evolution of western North America.

    Plate tectonics and the evolution of the Alpine system.

    Plate tectonics & crustal evolution.

    Plate tectonics and the evolution of the British Isles: Thirty-fifth William Smith Lecture.

    Cenozoic plate tectonics and basin evolution in Indonesia.





    Those are pretty funny.
    Last edited by Stripe; July 21st, 2018 at 06:27 AM.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Blablaman

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (July 20th, 2018),way 2 go (July 21st, 2018)

  12. #1643
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    6,216
    Thanks
    19,091
    Thanked 5,483 Times in 3,473 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147587
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Great diagrams! I appreciate the work that went into them.

    If that's the picture of the gathering of the waters into one place, I guess I have to walk back my walking back of the comment about multiple gathering places. If I'm reading the scriptures correctly, it says the waters under the heavens (which you guys are saying is above the crust/firmament) were gathered into one place so that the dry land appeared. But that's not what the diagram shows--it's showing multiple seas and a single dry land. The scripture doesn't require the dry land to be all connected, although it allows for it. But the majority of the waters must be connected, it seems, unless "one place" really means "several places". I recognize the word "seas" is plural, but that is easily reconciled with normal usage in English ("sail the seven seas" is talking about connected oceans), and I imagine it might be so for Hebrew.

    This is not a big critique, but should be considered in model drawing.
    You got me thinking, and it turns out, scripture does not require the "Seas" to be interconnected.

    Here's why:

    There are (afaik) three words for the word "one" in Hebrew. "yachad" "bad" "echad"

    The first two (and again, afaik; I'm no Hebrew scholar) indicate one of singularity. "one car" one house" "one mountain"

    The third, "echad," means one of plural unity. It's the same word used every time when used in the phrase "one God" (because God is triune, so 'one of plural unity'), the two become "one flesh", the people spoke with "one voice," the LORD our God, the LORD is "one."

    Ergo, "let the waters be gathered into 'one (ehad) place'" means (not just "could" mean) that there are multiple places being referred to as one.


  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Stripe (July 20th, 2018),way 2 go (July 21st, 2018)

  14. #1644
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,555
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 845 Times in 558 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    324213
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    "Dynamite drop-in, Monty. That broadcasting school is really paying off."

    The top five results on Google Scholar when searching for "evolution plate tectonics":


    Implications of plate tectonics for the Cenozoic tectonic evolution of western North America.

    Plate tectonics and the evolution of the Alpine system.

    Plate tectonics & crustal evolution.

    Plate tectonics and the evolution of the British Isles: Thirty-fifth William Smith Lecture.

    Cenozoic plate tectonics and basin evolution in Indonesia.





    Those are pretty funny.
    Than again, I'll bet if you read those Google references they deal with science, with nary a word of The Hydroplate Theory. Why do you think that might be?

  15. #1645
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    16,450
    Thanks
    185
    Thanked 9,167 Times in 6,992 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147813
    Darwinists want everything to be evolution, unless a YEC points out that they use evolution for everything. Then they pretend evolution should be restricted to biology.

    At what point are they going to quit warbling and contribute something sensible?
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Blablaman

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (July 21st, 2018),way 2 go (July 21st, 2018)

  17. #1646
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,555
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 845 Times in 558 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    324213
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    Darwinists want everything to be evolution, unless a YEC points out that they use evolution for everything. Then they pretend evolution should be restricted to biology.

    At what point are they going to quit warbling and contribute something sensible?
    And in all those Google Scholar references, any mention of The Hydroplate Theory? Bueller? Bueller?
    Or a 6000 year old universe? Bueller again?
    Or are they all just nonsense and Dr. Brown is the expert? Ferris, please.

  18. #1647
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    16,450
    Thanks
    185
    Thanked 9,167 Times in 6,992 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147813
    I guess no time soon.

    Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Blablaman

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (July 21st, 2018),way 2 go (July 21st, 2018)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us