Creation vs. Evolution

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DavisBJ

New member
In response from 6days statement:
6days said:
… History books are considered as part of the evidence and help to confirm events of the past
Click to expand...
I asked:
DavisBJ said:
If you were presented with a purported history book (not the Bible) that affirmed an entire river was suddenly loaded with hemoglobin, wooden sticks transforming into serpents, serpents and donkeys with the capability of human speech, etc. etc., would you consider that history book as a reliable source of evidence?
Click to expand...
6days said:
Haha... not likely!!
Click to expand...
That is almost exactly the response I have heard several times regarding the Christian Old Testament when I lived in non-western cultures.
6days said:
However, if the events were supported by other corroborating evidence and witnesses, I would certainly at least consider it.
Click to expand...
So far, the only corroborating evidence I have seen you come up with is the claim that a New Testament author named a bunch of countries correctly. A multitude of fictional books do that – accurately describe geographic details - just as reliably as what you alluded to. (In a similar vein, I can attest to the truthfulness of “The Bourne Identity” because I have not only personally seen many of the places portrayed in that story, but can attest to the architecture, the local customs, the modes of transportation, the cuisine, and so on – in much more detail than your New Testament does. Evidently "The Bourne Identity" has just got to be true, with that degree of accuracy in the story.)

Keep in mind, I only listed a few samples of highly questionable claims in the Old Testament – claims that wouldn’t raise any eyebrow in fantasy stories. As offensive as it is to almost everyone’s morality, the accounts in the Old Testament of killing all but the virgins in battle, and then passing out these innocent young ladies to the conquering soldiers and priests is much more likely to be based on true events than the magician-type hocus-pocus. So far, your “history book” that you want accorded the status of evidence ain’t looking so good.
 
patrick jane

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
DavisBJ said:
In response from 6days statement:
I asked:


“The Bourne Identity” because I have not only personally seen many of the places portrayed in that story, but can attest to the architecture, the local customs, the modes of transportation, the cuisine, and so on – in much more detail than your New Testament does. Evidently "The Bourne Identity" has just got to be true, with that degree of accuracy in the story.)
Click to expand...

View attachment 20979
 
J

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
6days said:
The Bible does have many authors who do give personal first hand eye witness accounts of various other historical events.*


However, if the events were supported by other corroborating evidence and witnesses, I would certainly at least consider it.*


.
Click to expand...

Any corroborating evidence for Matthew 27:52? All those zombies emerging from their graves.
 
D

DavisBJ

New member
For 6days, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing

For 6days, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing

6days said:
Thanks for your answer. The article I quoted did give one possible answer.
Gaines Johnson, a Christian geologist and author of “The Bible, Genesis and Geology” explains this occurrence from a scientific standpoint: “Geysers occur when waters in underground chambers are heated by the surrounding host rock until the pressure and temperature cause them to flash to steam and erupt upwards. When the chamber is emptied, replacement water flows back into the chamber, the replacement water is heated, and the cycle repeats. An excellent example of this is seen in Yellowstone National Park’s “Old Faithful” geyser.!
Click to expand...
Gaines Johnson is presenting a very simple and long-understood explanation for how most geysers work. But for most geysers, the chambers in which the water is replenished are relatively shallow – perhaps a few hundred feet in depth (Probes lowered into Old Faithful reached down less than 100 feet.)

But let me turn to another Christian I already mentioned who looked at the physics relating to the Biblical “fountains of the deep” – Walt Brown. He says:
At a pressure of one atmosphere—about 1.01 bar or 14.7 psi (pounds per square inch)—water boils at a temperature slightly above 212°F (100°C). As pressure increases, the boiling point rises. At a pressure of 3,200 psi (220.6 bars) the boiling temperature is 705°F (374°C). Above this pressure-temperature combination, called the critical point, water is supercritical and cannot boil.​
Drawing on what he then says, if a crack somehow made it down to some huge body of free-standing water at a depth of 300 miles, there would not be a geyser of water, there would be a jet of superheated gasses so hot and violent that it would be a mixture of molecules and single atoms. The escape velocity would be enormous, and the walls of the crack would be stripped away and carried up like ice cream behind the exhaust of a 747 jumbo jet engine at full power. (In fact Walt offers this as an explanation for why the near side of the moon has a higher crater density than the far side. The ejecta is thrown clear out of the earth's atmosphere.) Does that sound like Old Faithful to you?
6days said:
Also keep in mind that Bible deniers / evolutionists in the past made statements like this ""Additionally, because only 1.7% of the earth's water is stored underground, there is not nearly enough water in groundwater storage beneath the earth's surface to account for the amount of water necessary to flood the entire earth to the extent described in the Bible."
Click to expand...
You just can’t exhibit the Christian decency to avoid using the term “evolutionist” as a derogatory descriptor to be applied to anyone in science you want to disparage. Since your mind is incapable of looking at science objectively, let me inform you that old estimates about the volume of groundwater, inaccurate as they might be, came primarily from geologists and geophysicists - and those scientists did what you resolutely refuse to do, evaluate the available evidence on its own merits.

As I alluded to in a recent post, directly investigating what is in the interior of the earth is almost impossible due to the pressure and temperatures encountered only a few miles down. An enormous amount of study, including the article that you indirectly linked to, has led to substantial revisions in previous ideas. That’s called – science. It means being open to having to revise your ideas as new data becomes available. I know that is almost anathema for those who can’t tolerate any degree of ambiguity in what they personally believe the Bible to say. If you are unwilling to admit that ideas you once held might be in error, then forever sealing yourself deep in a well-equipped underground bunker might insulate you from actually learning and advancing.
6days said:
It's an exciting time to be a Christian!
Click to expand...
It probably is. I too would be really excited if I were a Christian seeing the last vestiges of a scientifically bankrupt creation story being stripped away.
6days said:
Also... keep in mind that the water trapped underground now, is likely far, far less than it was before the flood. The Bible tells us that the earth that existed then was destroyed.
Click to expand...
In light of how silly your Bible Genesis story has been seen to be so far, I am not much concerned with what the Bible tells us. I am far more interested in what the evidence shows. And if the deep subterranean water is now vastly less than it was pre-flood (and presuming the water from the “fountains of the deep” stayed on the earth), then were the pre-flood oceans nearly empty? Any scientific evidence to back that whopper of a story up?

And, the article you linked to says:
At the end of the flood, the Bible again accounts for the fountains of the deep being ‘stopped’ and the water returning back into the ground​
You really ought to keep your story straight with what your article says.
 
6days

6days

New member
DavisBJ.... wow! You are hard to keep up with.:)
I just came to answer some of your other posts from the past two days and now you have another new one!
Slow down!... you might wear me out :)
 
patrick jane

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
DavisBJ said:
In response from 6days statement:
I asked:


That is almost exactly the response I have heard several times regarding the Christian Old Testament when I lived in non-western cultures.

So far, the only corroborating evidence I have seen you come up with is the claim that a New Testament author named a bunch of countries correctly. A multitude of fictional books do that – accurately describe geographic details - just as reliably as what you alluded to. (In a similar vein, I can attest to the truthfulness of “The Bourne Identity” because I have not only personally seen many of the places portrayed in that story, but can attest to the architecture, the local customs, the modes of transportation, the cuisine, and so on – in much more detail than your New Testament does. Evidently "The Bourne Identity" has just got to be true, with that degree of accuracy in the story.)

Keep in mind, I only listed a few samples of highly questionable claims in the Old Testament – claims that wouldn’t raise any eyebrow in fantasy stories. As offensive as it is to almost everyone’s morality, the accounts in the Old Testament of killing all but the virgins in battle, and then passing out these innocent young ladies to the conquering soldiers and priests is much more likely to be based on true events than the magician-type hocus-pocus. So far, your “history book” that you want accorded the status of evidence ain’t looking so good.
Click to expand...

Another home run from Davis BJ
 
6days

6days

New member
DavisBJ said:
Gaines Johnson is presenting a very simple and long-understood explanation for how most geysers work. But for most geysers, the chambers in which the water is replenished are relatively shallow – perhaps a few hundred feet in depth (Probes lowered into Old Faithful reached down less than 100 feet.)
Click to expand...
Old Faithful was used as an example, but this is more of his answer...
"According to what is written in the Scriptures, the fountains of Noah’s flood may have been a similar form of geyser activity on a massive, world-wide scale, concentrated along the mid-oceanic ridge system. A careful reading of Genesis 7:6-10 seems to indicate that the flood waters were already rising for about seven days before the fountains “were broken up” (verse: 11)….
Careful parsing of the above passage indicates that great amounts of water were already being added to the Earth’s seas at least seven days before the rains even began. This means that sea level was already rapidly rising, flooding low lying coastal areas and sending panicked low-land inhabitants inland from the rising seas. Meanwhile, presumably up on much higher ground, Noah and his family took shelter on the Ark and waited, while the massive gopher wood vessel remained firmly nested in its construction frame, unmovable and secure until the rising waters lifted it from its resting place.
The great volume of water this early in the flood event could only come from massive undersea “fountains” beginning to breech the crust all along the mid-oceanic ridge system. But this preliminary out-flow was still insufficient to breech the ocean’s surface. The volume of underwater displacement would, however, be sufficient enough to generate global tsunami (tidal waves) activity, quickly drowning inhabitants who lived near the seas.

Seven days into the flood the undersea fountains broke through the crust in full fury, and the pressure of the flow sent scalding columns of superheated waters upwards, breeching the ocean’s surface and erupting skyward as a globe-encircling curtain of steam rocketing into the upper atmosphere. As the steam came into contact with the colder air it would condense and produce cloud cover and relentless rainfall on a planetary scale. This is precisely the sequence of events described in this part of the passage:
‘In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month,*the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.'” (Gen 7:11-12 KJV)* (source)."[/quote]

Are Johnsons 'theories' correct? Possibly. He is saying that the God's Word is consistent with fountains of the deep and mechanisms we are familiar with.

*
DavisBJ said:
But let me turn to another Christian I already mentioned who looked at the physics relating to the Biblical “fountains of the deep” – Walt Brown. He says:

At a pressure of one atmosphere—about 1.01 bar or 14.7 psi (pounds per square inch)—water boils at a temperature slightly above 212°F (100°C). As pressure increases, the boiling point rises. At a pressure of 3,200 psi (220.6 bars) the boiling temperature is 705°F (374°C). Above this pressure-temperature combination, called the critical point, water is supercritical and cannot boil.

Drawing on what he then says, if a crack somehow made it down to some huge body of free-standing water at a depth of 300 miles, there would not be a geyser of water, there would be a jet of superheated gasses so hot and violent that it would be a mixture of molecules and single atoms. The escape velocity would be enormous, and the walls of the crack would be stripped away and carried up like ice cream behind the exhaust of a 747 jumbo jet engine at full power. (In fact Walt offers this as an explanation for why the near side of the moon has a higher crater density than the far side. The ejecta is thrown clear out of the earth's atmosphere.) Does that sound like Old Faithful to you?
Click to expand...

No... that doesn't sound like Old Faithful, and neither did Johnsons explanation.

*
DavisBJ said:
You just can’t exhibit the Christian decency to avoid using the term “evolutionist” as a derogatory descriptor to be applied to anyone in science you want to disparage. [//quote]

??? Some scientists are creationists....some are evolutionists. What term do you wish to use to differentiate them?

*
DavisBJ said:
Since your mind is incapable of looking at science objectively, let me inform you that old estimates about the volume of groundwater, inaccurate as they might be, came primarily from geologists and geophysicists - and those scientists did what you resolutely refuse to do, evaluate the available evidence on its own merits.
Click to expand...

You are missing the point. It is true that 1.7% groundwater was the best estimate at the time. But, the problem for 'evolutionists' is that they used that figure to mock the Bible. Science later has shown that the 1.7% figure was out of the ball park wrong. (And may be over 100%). If your argument used to mock the Bible is proven false...then, perhaps you should acknowledge the Bible might be correct......OR, admit that you never should have made the original argument.

Evolutionists have a history of making arguments against the Bible, which science later proves wrong. For example: Evolutionists made the argument that since such a low % of our DNA was functional, this was evidence for common ancestry and against creation. So....do you think that if it turns out a very high percentage of our DNA is functional, the evolutionist argument is wrong, so now the functional DNA should be used as evidence for creation and against common ancestry?

*
DavisBJ said:
As I alluded to in a recent post, directly investigating what is in the interior of the earth is almost impossible due to the pressure and temperatures encountered only a few miles down. An enormous amount of study, including the article that you indirectly linked to, has led to substantial revisions in previous ideas. That’s called – science. It means being open to having to revise your ideas as new data becomes available. I know that is almost anathema for those who can’t tolerate any degree of ambiguity in what they personally believe the Bible to say. If you are unwilling to admit that ideas you once held might be in error, then forever sealing yourself deep in a well-equipped underground bunker might insulate you from actually learning and advancing.
Click to expand...
I am pretty much in total agreement with that statement. Yes as Christians we need to be able to admit that we are wrong sometimes. Brown and Johnson may be wrong, but they are interpreting the evidence with what they believe to be true, based on education, experience, scripture etc. However, as Christians there are things in God's Word stated as absolute truth that we should adhere to and be unwilling to compromise on.*

*
DavisBJ said:
And if the deep subterranean water is now vastly less than it was pre-flood (and presuming the water from the “fountains of the deep” stayed on the earth), then were the pre-flood oceans nearly empty? Any scientific evidence to back that whopper of a story up?
Click to expand...

Brown ( and possibly Johnson) don't claim all the water stayed on the earth. The Bible doesn't say, but it does tell us that the earth as it existed, was destroyed.*

*
DavisBJ said:
And, the article you linked to says:
At the end of the flood, the Bible again accounts for the fountains of the deep being ‘stopped’ and the water returning back into the ground

You really ought to keep your story straight with what your article says.
Click to expand...
The article does say that. But that isn't exactly what God's Word tells us.*The article quotes Genesis 8 "And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged;**The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped,and the rain from heaven was restrained;* And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.* And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.* And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen."

Also a verse from Psalm 104 is relevant. "At your command, the water fled; at the sound of your thunder, it hurried away.*Mountains rose and valleys sank to the levels you decreed.Then you set a firm boundary for the seas, so they would never again cover the earth."
Click to expand...
 
6days

6days

New member
DavisBJ said:
So far, the only corroborating evidence I have seen you come up with is the claim that a New Testament author named a bunch of countries correctly.
Click to expand...
You are referring to this previous post...
Dr Luke (Gospel of Luke) was perhaps the world's greatest historian. The research Luke did is reflected in the accuracy of his account. The Gospel of Luke is just one of many historically accurate Books in God's Word.

The Gospel of Luke besides numerous mentions of things with historical and archaeological significance also mentions;
32 countries*
54 cities*
9 islands.*
Because of the numerous mention to countries and cities, Sir William Ramsay thought that this book would be the easiest one to disprove. He along with his archaeological team set out to Asia Minor to prove the Bible wrong. But... a funny thing happened. "Ramsay became so overwhelmed with the evidence he eventually converted to Christianity"*

Ramsey said*"I began with a mind unfavorable to it...but more recently I found myself brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth"

Dr. Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians."
http://www.bibleevidences.com/archeology.htm*

Interesting how so many people say the Bible is filled with errors. Yet for many who are willing to study it with an open mind, such as Sir William Ramsay, it is inerrant.

But Davis.... that is only a very small example of how accurate the Bible is. Let's look at what some other archaeologists have said.

"I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen." Dr Clifford Wilson, formerly director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology*

Dr. Jack Cottrell,"Through the wealth of data uncovered by historical and archaeological research, we are able to measure the Bible's historical accuracy. In every case where its claims can thus be tested, the Bible proves to be accurate and reliable." *

Dr. Nelson Glueck"It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical description has often led to amazing discoveries."
 
MichaelCadry

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hedshaker said:
No matter you spin it Michael, what you espouse is a logical fallacy. Please don't take my word for it, see for yourself. Just type "Argument Ad Populum" into your search engine and learn:
Click to expand...

No matter you spin it Michael? Make a complete sentence that makes sense. I espouse God and Jesus, and the Holy Ghost. I am extremely happy with that. I can't help it if the Bible is the Best selling book in our days. People read the Bible because they are looking for some truth, and they are finding it. You don't know what is even IN THE BIBLE!! So you are busy beating on a book you know nothing of what is in it. And don't give me any more of your Ad Populum. I'm not impressed. I see tons of Christians and I see few atheists. By the way, the serpent and the donkey spoke telepathically, not orally. Don't you know? Adam and Eve didn't even have a language to speak except they knew by instinct speaking. Just when you go to Heaven, you will not speak with your lips, because you won't have them anymore. You will be a spirit residing on a star instead. There is also no marriage in Heaven. From what I understand, there is not even male or female in Heaven, but instead every one is the same being worshiping our Creator.

Hedshaker said:
What are you taking about? I've never claimed to be a Bible scholar. Enough with the straw man arguments,
Click to expand...

Hedshaker, I'm far from being a straw man and I've never been called one until you did just now. I'm NOT a straw man. The point I was making was the fact that you don't know the Bible very well, but you act like you know what our Holy Book says and you don't. You have little idea what or who you are even fighting!

Hedshaker said:
That may be your opinion Michael but certainly isn't mine. Even if I was in need of moral guidance the last place I would look for it would be the Bible, nor would I trust in it for accurate history and certainly not science. There is no scientific theory for a talking snake{they don't have the larynges), a virgin birth, and man walking on water, feeding 5000 people on a fish sandwich, un-fermented water turning into wine ........... or a clinically dead man reanimating back to life after being clinically dead for three days. So no, least of all science Nor do I see any reason to believe there is any such thing as a "Divine creator."
Click to expand...

Well, you haven't got the morals that the Bible teaches, like Love your enemies as well as your neighbors. What reward have you who loves only those who are close to him. You seem to know all of the miracles that were done as recorded in the Bible, but without the proper explanations. Know that Lazarus was dead for FOUR days when Jesus rose him from the dead. And it is my belief that God rose Christ back from death after 3 days. And they weren't 3 full days, but instead Fri evening until Sun morning. Some of the disbelievers even were stumped when Jesus did certain miracles, like healing the blind and the lame. He came for such a purpose. No big secret.

Hedshaker said:
Thanks for your concern Michael but I am quite sure truth is on my side, not yours. And to stay on topic, Like it or not, all the evidence points to the Theory of evolution

All the best
Click to expand...

Hedshaker, you will discover that the truth is not on your side.

Much Love & Cheerio!!

Michael
 
MichaelCadry

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
gcthomas said:
How would anyone at the time be able to recognise a flood as a worldwide one? There was no long distance transport or communication - all they would have had was the evidence of their own eyes when their locale was flooded (their whole world, not the whole world).
Click to expand...

Dear gcthomas,

Why would Noah be told to include certain birds on his Ark? God said He would destroy ALL FLESH upon the Earth. Well now, we know some of those birds had to have died because they would have found no place to land. Just paddling for 150 days wouldn't do the trick. Noah sent out a bird to see if the waters had gone down enough for the bird to stay gone and not come back to the boat. When he sent the next bird out of the ark days later, and the bird brought back a twig/sprig, Noah knew that some of the waters had abated to tree height on the Earth. We know that some birds can fly great distances until they land {like when they migrate}, but evidently these birds could not make it because there was no place to land upon. So they perished also. Also, by the way, this is another answer, the 'fruit' that Adam and Eve ate did not have to be an 'apple.' The word is fruit, not apple.

I wish we could talk about more pleasant things besides being at odds all of the time. How is your life going? Why do you go against the odds and believe in atheism instead? You're going with the severe minority, you know. I'm glad it's not me.

Many Blessings Upon You,

Michael
 
gcthomas

gcthomas

New member
Interplanner said:
Sorry I don't have the item handy. But that was the summary observation about it. I don't know how deep the mantle was but the readings showed the entire east of China to be a mantle above an ocean, and that above either another layer or magma.

How exactly does magma interface with subterranean water? I don't know. Is it a repeat of what is seen at the lowest depths where there is ongoing seismic rift and activity?
Click to expand...

There is no pool of water below China - that is likely to be a misrepresentation by someone who trusts Walt Brown, the proponent of the Hydroplate "Theory". The original research represented the amount of water as being equivalent to an ocean full. It was never true that the water was pooled or even necessarily in liquid form.
 
D

DavisBJ

New member
6days said:
Old Faithful was used as an example, but this is more of his answer...
"According to what is written in the Scriptures, the fountains of Noah’s flood may have been a similar form of geyser activity on a massive, world-wide scale, concentrated along the mid-oceanic ridge system.
Click to expand...

The mid-oceanic ridge system is an elevated fissure between tectonic plates that runs essentially up the center of the Atlantic Ocean. It is formed primarily by the juncture of three tectonic plates - the North American Plate, the African Plate, and the South American Plate. Since it is the juncture of oceanic plates, it has a thickness of probably less than 100 km. I know of no studies or measurements that indicate the fissure extends to any appreciable depth below the joining of the plates. The ridge is a place where the involved plates are known to be spreading apart, so subduction is not a factor there.
6days said:
A careful reading of Genesis 7:6-10 seems to indicate that the flood waters were already rising for about seven days before the fountains “were broken up” (verse: 11)….
Careful parsing of the above passage indicates that great amounts of water were already being added to the Earth’s seas at least seven days before the rains even began. This means that sea level was already rapidly rising, flooding low lying coastal areas and sending panicked low-land inhabitants inland from the rising seas. Meanwhile, presumably up on much higher ground, Noah and his family took shelter on the Ark and waited, while the massive gopher wood vessel remained firmly nested in its construction frame, unmovable and secure until the rising waters lifted it from its resting place.
The great volume of water this early in the flood event could only come from massive undersea “fountains” beginning to breech the crust all along the mid-oceanic ridge system. But this preliminary out-flow was still insufficient to breech the ocean’s surface. The volume of underwater displacement would, however, be sufficient enough to generate global tsunami (tidal waves) activity, quickly drowning inhabitants who lived near the seas.
Click to expand...
(A side note – peripheral to the question of the fountains of the deep). On each side of the mid-oceanic ridge in the solidified magma is a clear pattern of magnetic stripes showing reversals in the earth's magnetic field. This pattern is mirrored on both sides of the ridge, and extends to the continental masses, as would be expected if the currently observed spreading was typical of long-term plate motion, and if the earth’s magnetic field undergoes periodic reversals on time scales of tens of thousands of years. The observed pattern of magnetism fits great with geological understandings about that area over hundreds of thousands of years.

Anyway, whether you are speaking of the relatively slow 7-days rise in ocean level prior to the fountains bursting forth, or the fountains themselves, there is still the issue of 400 km additional of super-hot, almost soft, felsic rock that must be parted to permit the entrapped deep subterranean water to escape to the surface. The lithospheric geotherm (plain English – the temperature at various levels as you go deeper into the outermost levels of the earth) shows that any water being brought up from below will still be surrounded by rock whose temperature is far above the normal boiling point of water, until the water gets within just a few km of the surface. That means it is going to be very hot when it comes out, and since water has a high specific heat, it will be carrying a lot of heat energy with it as it emerges.

If we assume the oceanic rise during the first 7 days is limited to just 100 meters (floods lowlands, leaves most small hills and all mountains essentially dry), then we are going to need to add about 30,000,000 cubic km of water to the oceans. That’s 30 quintillion kg of water (if my back-of the-envelope calculations are correct). That’s really, really hot water. And remember, when hot water turns to steam, a lot of the available energy is used up in the conversion to steam. But that isn’t happening here in the first 7 days, since no fountain yet, so the whole energy in the water is going to go directly into cooking whatever sea life is anywhere close.

Once the fountains start erupting above the surface, then we are back to a Walt Brown type situation, except the overburden pressure on the water in Walt’s case came from just 60 miles of overlying rock, but here we have 6 times as much overburden. Ouch.

Let’s face, it – this “fountains of the deep” explanation is turning into nothing more than a glorified just-so story, almost totally devoid of anything but “what if”, and without evidentiary support.
6days said:
Are Johnsons 'theories' correct? Possibly. He is saying that the God's Word is consistent with fountains of the deep and mechanisms we are familiar with.
Click to expand...
I see that you at least put quotes around the word “theories” above, since Johnson’s speculations are a far cry from theories as science uses the term. Why not just call Johnson’s ideas what they are, speculations on ways to hopefully salvage some shreds of a literal reading of the Bible creation account?
6days said:
Some scientists are creationists....some are evolutionists. What term do you wish to use to differentiate them?
Click to expand...
Some creationists love to use the fallacy of equivocation. You very specifically said:
6days said:
… Also keep in mind that Bible deniers / evolutionists in the past made statements like this ""Additionally, because only 1.7% of the earth's water is stored underground, there is not nearly enough water in groundwater storage beneath the earth's surface to account for the amount of water necessary to flood the entire earth to the extent described in the Bible."
Click to expand...
I am pretty sure few evolutionists probably even knew (or know, or care) the percent of the water budget that was believed to be below ground, nor is there any connection between people’s attitudes on the Bible and groundwater studies. Really 6days, why can’t you act like a minimally mature adult and use the term for the branch of science that actually came up with those figures? You remind me of a pimp trying to justify his work by saying he is just teaching his girls about how to run a business and provide them a secure and safe environment.

Let me dwell for a moment on the 1.7% groundwater issue. Part of physical geology is the study of the hydrosphere – the water that we have to be concerned with daily – whether in clouds, oceans, rivers, aquifers, glaciers, rain, lakes, bathtubs, etc. All of that water (with rare exceptions) is very close to the surface of the earth. The realization that there may be a massive amount of deep subterranean water does not alter the water budget in the hydrosphere that is relevant on a daily basis. In fact, as mentioned in the original article about the deep water, the major relevance of that deep water is how it impacts our understanding of deep-earth processes – volcanic magma, P and S wave propagation, etc. For everyone not directly involved with deep-earth physics, the knowledge of that deep water is essentially purely academic. If you find fault in not including that deep water in the hydrosphere, then in turn I expect you to faithfully make sure that every mention of Christian history includes details about those of God’s children that lived in far-away lands and had effectively no part in that history.

6days said:
You are missing the point. It is true that 1.7% groundwater was the best estimate at the time. But, the problem for 'evolutionists' is that they used that figure to mock the Bible. …

Evolutionists have a history of making arguments against the Bible, which science later proves wrong.
Click to expand...
Since you clearly have no intention of using the word “evolutionist” in the way it is used in science, maybe I likewise should refer to creationists simply as “Christian Pimps”. Using correct terminology isn’t important to you, so why should I not do likewise? Your goal is to disparage evolutionists by associating them with whatever you think will demean them. But for me, no, I really want to look at myself in a mirror with a clear conscience, and I couldn’t do that if I resorted to your tactics.
6days said:
Yes as Christians we need to be able to admit that we are wrong sometimes.
Click to expand...
I doubt that this sentiment is one you are willing to apply to the question of whether or not the Genesis creation account is literal. If you found clear evidence it was not scientifically accurate, would you admit that?
6days said:
However, as Christians there are things in God's Word stated as absolute truth that we should adhere to and be unwilling to compromise on.
Click to expand...
And there is not even close to a consensus among Christians on many of the things in the Bible that are open to new understanding. The Genesis creation account is a big item that falls squarely in that category – some hold that it must be read as an accurate literal account, other equally faithful Christians happily pursue careers in fields (such as evolution) that are incompatible with a literal Genesis.
6days said:
The Bible … does tell us that the earth as it existed, was destroyed.
Click to expand...
Since that must have occurred in the geologically recent past, it would be expected that there would be substantial clear evidence of this world-wide destruction. What is that evidence? (And if it is no more than the flood of Noah, just say so, since that is already on the table.)
6days said:
The article does say that. But that isn't exactly what God's Word tells us. The article quotes Genesis 8 "And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and …
Click to expand...
The problem with offering Bible passages is that you are a long ways from showing the Bible is a credible document in much more than naming some neighboring countries. I am a scientist. Until you can show me that the Bible is credible as a scientific document, then it is no more meaningful scientifically to me than any competing religious history.
6days said:
Also a verse from Psalm 104 is relevant. "At your command, the water fled; at the sound of your thunder, it hurried away.*Mountains rose and valleys sank to the levels you decreed. Then you set a firm boundary for the seas, so they would never again cover the earth."
Click to expand...
Not unexpectedly, you go to the Bible again and again, when I am still awaiting credible evidence that I should give the Bible any special recognition. First things first, please.
 
Last edited:
Hedshaker

Hedshaker

New member
MichaelCadry said:
No matter you spin it Michael? Make a complete sentence that makes sense. I espouse God and Jesus, and the Holy Ghost. I am extremely happy with that. I can't help it if the Bible is the Best selling book in our days. People read the Bible because they are looking for some truth, and they are finding it. You don't know what is even IN THE BIBLE!! So you are busy beating on a book you know nothing of what is in it. And don't give me any more of your Ad Populum. I'm not impressed. I see tons of Christians and I see few atheists. By the way, the serpent and the donkey spoke telepathically, not orally. Don't you know? Adam and Eve didn't even have a language to speak except they knew by instinct speaking. Just when you go to Heaven, you will not speak with your lips, because you won't have them anymore. You will be a spirit residing on a star instead. There is also no marriage in Heaven. From what I understand, there is not even male or female in Heaven, but instead every one is the same being worshiping our Creator.
Click to expand...

Ad Poplulum is a logical fallacy whether you like it or not. Your blanket denial just makes you look even more ridiculous that usual. You have been proved wrong. Have the grace to admit it.



Hedshaker, I'm far from being a straw man and I've never been called one until you did just now. I'm NOT a straw man. The point I was making was the fact that you don't know the Bible very well, but you act like you know what our Holy Book says and you don't. You have little idea what or who you are even fighting!
Click to expand...

I never mentioned anything about being a Biblical scholar so your comment was you beating your own straw man. You may not like it but we all see it clearly.

Well, you haven't got the morals that the Bible teaches, like Love your enemies as well as your neighbors. What reward have you who loves only those who are close to him. You seem to know all of the miracles that were done as recorded in the Bible, but without the proper explanations. Know that Lazarus was dead for FOUR days when Jesus rose him from the dead. And it is my belief that God rose Christ back from death after 3 days. And they weren't 3 full days, but instead Fri evening until Sun morning. Some of the disbelievers even were stumped when Jesus did certain miracles, like healing the blind and the lame. He came for such a purpose. No big secret.
Click to expand...

You're right I do not take my morals from the Bible. My morals are far superior. And no, people cannot come back to life after being stone dead for days. It didn't happen, it's a lie.


Hedshaker, you will discover that the truth is not on your side.
Click to expand...

On this issue I'm afraid it is. You've been wrong on so many things in the past. This is just one more. But you'll never now the difference since death is the end.
 
T

TheDuke

New member
Crucible said:
Evolutionists have made gargantuan exaggerations and assumptions, but don't expect them to admit it. In fact, expect them to do exactly the opposite and conjure up more nonsense.

Evolution has become something of a religion of faith in and of itself. It shouldn't be anything of much surprise- look at how they turn the Christian Fish into something with legs saying 'Darwin' in the middle, complete blasphemy, or the atheist 'atom'.

They hinge on the ideas of life coming from nothing, and reality coming from nothing- but the fact of the matter is that the fossil record could altogether fit inside of a standard size barn and there is no satisfactory theory of physics showing that it's possible for the universe to not have an intelligent agent.

So let them be pompous and drive the world into a further lie that the world already is anyway. An enormous, laughable stockpile of guilty white dudes, hypocritical 'minorites' (everyone not white), religious fanatics, and social media pushers as about as close to reality as an ethereal peanut.
Click to expand...


Can't tell if poe, or scriptural lobotomy? :confused:
 
D

DavisBJ

New member
6days said:
You are referring to this previous post...
Dr Luke (Gospel of Luke) was perhaps the world's greatest historian. The research Luke did is reflected in the accuracy of his account. The Gospel of Luke is just one of many historically accurate Books in God's Word.

The Gospel of Luke besides numerous mentions of things with historical and archaeological significance also mentions;
32 countries*
54 cities*
9 islands.*
Because of the numerous mention to countries and cities, Sir William Ramsay thought that this book would be the easiest one to disprove. He along with his archaeological team set out to Asia Minor to prove the Bible wrong. But... a funny thing happened. "Ramsay became so overwhelmed with the evidence he eventually converted to Christianity"*

Ramsey said*"I began with a mind unfavorable to it...but more recently I found myself brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth"

Dr. Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians."
http://www.bibleevidences.com/archeology.htm*

Interesting how so many people say the Bible is filled with errors. Yet for many who are willing to study it with an open mind, such as Sir William Ramsay, it is inerrant.

But Davis.... that is only a very small example of how accurate the Bible is. Let's look at what some other archaeologists have said.

"I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen." Dr Clifford Wilson, formerly director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology*

Dr. Jack Cottrell,"Through the wealth of data uncovered by historical and archaeological research, we are able to measure the Bible's historical accuracy. In every case where its claims can thus be tested, the Bible proves to be accurate and reliable." *

Dr. Nelson Glueck"It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical description has often led to amazing discoveries."
Click to expand...

6days, perhaps you think essentially repeating a post that you offered several days ago as a defense of the validity of the Bible will carry the day. If this is the best shot you’ve got, then fine, I will not contest the content of the Bible on archaeological grounds. Since all the posts you have offered have utterly failed as defenses of a literal Genesis and the hocus-pocus it contains, then I think we are well justified in dispensing with Genesis as being scientifically reliable. I rather expect you will continue to declare that “science confirms God’s Word”, just as a petulant child walks away sobbing and saying “Well, my dad can beat your dad.” Sorry 6days, but ... Checkmate.
 
patrick jane

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Question for anyone - Wouldn't the big bang theory necessitate the biggest, most massive black hole in creation ? Supernova explosions and the like are the only time new elements are created, and they all leave neutron star and black hole corpses. The big bang should be the same on an extremely massive scale.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top