Creation vs. Evolution

[alwight]

Hi Alwight,
I apologize for the rather extensive delay in answering your post. for some reason I can't get into the thread sometimes, and it always seems to be when I'm ready to work on my reply to you.

I'm trying something new. I'm inserting comments in your quotes in a different color.

Just remember that this way of doing things can make it more complicated to respond to.:AMR:

In my more lucid moments perhaps.


Well, my mission here as I see it is to steer you away from a fundamentalist doctrinal adherence and to embrace science. Not as a religion but as something that best explains the facts and evidence, which it may not always get right of course, but is arguably getting there and generally doing a good job.

So you want me to embrace something that may be wrong, but is generally ok and may get stuff right eventually--perhaps not until after I am dead? What do you you want me to do with this thing you call science? Embrace it for what purpose?

Let's be more optimistic and hope that science sometimes can get it right quite quickly given it's based in evidence and can be falsified it is wrong.

So I can use a cell phone or fly in an airplane? Ok, considered it embraced! But if you want me to use science as you described it to discern morals and how I should act and how to prepare for eternity--I'm pretty confident it will come up short based on your description. For those things I (and everybody else that cares about eternal life) need something else to cling to for that time period beyond our earthly existence. Something that we can hold to with a "fundamental and doctrinal adherence" perhaps.

I can understand that you may want an eternal life of bliss and everything but you understand presumably that what we may want and that which is actually true are not always the same thing?
The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
I certainly don't expect science to guide me morally while it often throws up dire moral issues that we as humans have to deal with as best we can.

Creationists however have a fixed predetermined doctrinal time limit in which everything has to be made to fit into, whereas science takes whatever time the evidence seems to require which strangely enough always seems to dovetail well with other scientific disciplines without too much fettling. Hence the generally accepted scientific epochs and the clarity of how long ago something probably happened in actual Earth years.

But what does it do for you? And why would you be a missionary for a doctrine you consider to be fickle, or perhaps "evolutionary" in the sense that it gets better with age?

What it does for me is to offer rational explanations and testable conclusions based on the available evidence.

You seem to me to have your own background agenda to maybe find some doubt for doctrine to occupy, rather than to honestly seek to correct your own understanding or science if it is wrong. Science is about being wrong sometimes and being corrected by the evidence. There's nothing wrong with questioning science, but simply doing so because it doesn't fit with a pre-concluded religious agenda isn't exactly going to help put science on a better track imo, unless what you say is based in fact and evidence, rather than perhaps an adherence to a literal Genesis.

Here's the crux of the matter. Only a literal Genesis is of any use. If it's allegorical, there's no point in it at all. But if it's literal, then we have to decide whether it's fact or fable--like all literature. And if it's fact, then we have to decide what to do with it in light of "scientific" declarations of fact that contradict it. As you said, science is a multi-discipline field, and though you've said that most branches seem to agree, that's not really the case. The "laws" of physics and general observation don't fit with the story of evolution.

I'm not too clear how exactly you separate allegory from fable here?
I think you'll need to explain specifically how laws of physics and observations are somehow at odds with Darwinian evolution, since that might be interesting.

If our understanding of the past needs to be guided by what we observe today, then we should recognize that pouring a bunch of sunlight (energy) onto a creature does not cause that creature to have more capable offspring. Pouring a bunch of sunlight onto anything tends to degrade that thing. Radiation causes mutations and mutations are overwhelmingly harmful. That's what science says. Creatures we dig up were not in some intermediate state of operability--they all seemed to have advanced complexity that works for what it was <designed> for.

You make scientists seem pretty stupid if they are somehow able to simultaneously believe in two contradictory things.
However it's the sun's energy that makes life on Earth possible through photosynthesis.
Every fossil discovered was once a fully operational creature not some kind of half way point. Any mutations that do happen are just that, mutations, they can be neutral, harmful but sometimes beneficial. Beneficial mutations in individuals are more naturally selectable and therefore more likely to pass on their genes to the next generation.

Someone told me today that some American YECs think that Joan of Arc was Noah's wife.

Even with fettling, we can't get animals to evolve into other types of animals or even into much better of an animal. Dogs bred with special features are often deficient in other areas. Mutated flies don't have useful mutations or survive better. They're just grotesque. Bacteria that seem to achieve some kind of mutational benefit by surviving against antibiotics are not more fit for normal bacterial existence, they are less so. That's what science tells us.

We can leave aside dogs here since that involves artificial selection, while Darwinian theory relates to natural selection.
Bacteria evolving immunity to antibiotics is simply evolution in action.

The evolution story needs just as much as the biblical story to be judged for its literalness and factuality. And it's failing, despite the grand hoopla of the fawning press, academia, and governmental sanction.

For a start Darwinian evolution is a scientific theory not a story. It stands or falls on real evidence, not by a belief in ancient mythology.

Then perhaps for you there is hope, but I think you are perhaps trying to fudge your own beliefs albeit with at least some desire to value the core conclusions of science generally.
Cognitive dissonance?
Do you really think that the Earth is young because real facts and evidence indicate that is so, or are you more compelled to presuppose that the Earth is young because that's what Genesis would have us believe, if presumed to be an inerrant historical narrative? You can't really have it both ways.

I can if it's true

So what evidence do you think says that the Earth is young?

Differing opinions are one thing but evidential support is what tends to settle scientific arguments. I don't know what you mean by "squelched" science. Science isn't about someone's opinions it's about being demonstrably falsifiable should it be false. Science is being constantly challenged by science itself but creationism doesn't contribute anything of value to that process.

Squelched science is where the courts have to intervene to say a particular viewpoint is not allowed to be taught, like the Scopes trial (yes I include that one) or the Dover decision. Squelched science is trying to punish climate change deniers.

Creationism at least can't be taught as science because it isn't science. But maybe you'd like astrology or phrenology to be taught as science too?

Yes but your holy scripture was actually written by people with sophisticated language skills who were just as able as we are to "spin a yarn", to use allegory, to embellish, to use folklore myth and legend. They wanted to be heard and to be entertaining,

[those genealogies are sure entertaining--they ought to make a movie out of those things!]

they weren't simply putting down what they saw outside, they had an agenda as we all do.

[That's a conclusion based on the evidence, but it's not the only conclusion. See how easy this is?]

lain:

There are always a few with strong personal opinions outside the herd perhaps, which is a good thing too, but as I say it's evidence and facts that usually forces science together in the end, not doctrinal beliefs.

Science provides conclusions that we can compare with the evidence to judge for ourselves how believable or not it is. Nothing is deemed to be proven truth.

[Ok, if I judge for myself and come to the YEC conclusion, why do you think you need to be a missionary for something else????? On the other hand, if your mission leads toward strengthening false conclusions that can drive people away from a saving faith in Jesus Christ, toward eternal damnation, you can see why we would push back a little, right?]

I don't think accusing me of trying to drive people away from Jesus Christ is at all fair, many Christians can accept both science, an old Earth and have faith in Jesus, and I haven't suggested otherwise here. My mission is for reason and rationality based in science, facts and evidence, not an evidence free literal adherence to a specific ancient scripture.

An honest creationist.

Science at least isn't written in tablets of stone.


There was, a couple of years ago, but now seems to have largely gone away. The scientist in charge who found the supposed "soft tissue" that excited YECs is very much a Christian but nevertheless dates the demise of her dinosaur to well over 60 million years ago iirc, despite her findings.

Firstly I will concede my bias that imo if anything of scientific value is to be found on creationist websites then it is purely coincidental, or perhaps taken from a more scientific source if they think something helpful to YECism exists. Say if it can be pointed to as a possible contradiction or can be quote mined. I accept my bias here and will try to keep an open mind, but for them a literal Genesis will always trump any science that seems to contradict it, there are no open minds to be found there.

[Sometimes we can be a little too fervent in our denials before the facts are completely known, admittedly. Sometimes we don't understand the scriptures well enough to figure out how they apply to a certain scientific discovery or conclusion. Sometimes the scientific conclusions are wrong. All 3 conditions need to considered regularly.]

Except YECs typically don't care what science concludes, if it seems to contradict Genesis then it must automatically be considered wrong.

Science otoh isn't a religion and it expects to be wrong sometimes.

[Science isn't a religion, but men that do science are very religious, just sometimes the religion is Christianity, sometimes it's atheism, sometimes it's something else. Richard Dawkins is one of the most religious men I know. Very fervent! He's definitely a missionary!]

I can tell that you don't find Dawkins at least to be particularly inspiring, I wonder why.

Not too sure what you mean by "better than art". A painting is what it is, but clever words can be used to paint a mental picture that needn't always relate to facts. Many legends and myths are part of many cultures, it's just human nature to tell stories and to embellish.

So you agree that scientists can and will do this too?

Sure, scientists are humans too, but science is accountable to evidence and peer review. Bad science can be falsified, as it sometimes is, but Genesis is assumed to be inerrant by YECs come hell or high water.

 

[Greg Jennings]

No...not really.
We don't know how much animals have mutated and adapted in the past several thousand years. And, we don't know what pre-flood conditions were. (IE. How much salinity would be added to oceans after a global flood?)

Salinity would be reduced, not added. And a very large amount. Think of how much water is in the Great Lakes alone! Then factor in all of the glaciers, lakes in other countries, rivers, and so on, and you have more fresh than saltwater.

 

[Jonahdog]

They were fruit flies. Perhaps they have a stage where they are a worm.

C. elegans is a nematode worm. There is no stage in a fruit fly's life when it is a worm, nematode or otherwise.

But maybe I am just not as up to date on the science as you and the Christian tv broadcast you cited. Give me the full name of F. elagantis and a citation to the scientific literature that dealt with the study you saw discussed on tv.

Thanks

 

[Interplanner]

The worst of modern science was the day Darwin sat in the harbor of Rio Santa Cruz Argentina in the Beagle and read PRINCIPLES, but failed to look at the window at the glacial valley of the Rio and realize that it had to happen very fast.
For the same reason, the Yellow Band at the top of Everest had to happen fast, the Grand Canyon and the Monterey (submarine) and Monument Valley. Things look totally different when they happen over millions of years. None of those do.
Mt St Helens is full of examples of extremely rapid phenomenon in geology; there are many mutations which happen in a few years.
There were mountain men who found 'overdried jerky' on the huge bones of dinosaurs which were simply not as old as Lyell wished. A recent Northridge CA college professor ran some of the same kind of samples with the latest in microbiology testing and found material that still responded as living tissue would. He was fired because it violated the uniformitarian (authoritarian!) orthodoxy.
Part of the reason Pluto was 'removed' from planet status was because the mountains are now known to have formed in a few thousand years. One peer scientist on this wrote that they were 'extremely younger than the Rockies.' Well, I think he should study the Rockies a little closer, but meanwhile it is 'safe' to change dates out there at Pluto.
There are mantle-slips that can happen in a moment that are in the category of super-faults and that means the distance moved ranges from 100M to 10,000M as in one S. African instance.
Once again, in the category of 'what does 1 million years of motion look like?' many galaxies would not look like the S shapes we see if they had been there even 1 million years. Instead they would look like concentric rings like Saturns, but for different reasons. The intact S shape means they are not as old as stated.

In short, who needs time?

 

[Greg Jennings]

It would depend on which species and a number of other factors.

Evidence in the case of evolution model versus creation modelgenerally better supports the creation account. However most people do not realize that. Most people have never been taught anything about the creation model. So evidence is always interpreted in light of the only model that they have been taught, the evolution model.*

Really? Then perhaps you can name just one species of shark, whale, dolphin, or fish larger than your finger that has adapted drastically in just one generation? Just one?

Funny how a model that repeatedly requires supernatural intervention in order to work is, in your misguided opinion, a better fit for real world evidence than a model that actually makes sense

One example of the misunderstanding that most evolutionists have is regarding the ability of animals to quickly adapt to changing environments. Especially in the past, evolutionists thought change and speciation was a slow gradual process taking millions of years. The creationist model calls for the ability to rapidly change and even rapid speciation. Adaptation~ speciation usually happens when natural selection, 'selects' information that already exists in the genome. It is a process identified by a creationist (Edward Blyth) before Charles Darwin popularized the notion. It is a process similar to that of breeding animals... artificial selection. Selection is a process that usually eliminates unwanted information... It does not create new information.*

As an example Darwin noted different species of finches in the Galapagos Islands. Evolutionists thought that these species have developed over the course of up to 5,000,000 years. That time frame was not based on science, but on the belief that everything evolved from a common ancestor over the course of millions and millions of years. Real science involving observation has now shown that these different species likely developed over the course of a few hundred years.*

But even a few hundred years is a very long time. Speciation can happen over the course of just a few generations.... a matter of several years. Sticklefish have speciated / rapidly adapted in a very short time period.

Another example of rapid speciation (creationist model) comes from a study of guppies in Trinidad. One of the researchers speaking from the evolutionary perspective says " ‘The guppies adapted to their new environment in a mere four years—a rate of change some 10,000 to 10 million times faster than the average rates determined from the fossil record" IE. He says that the actual observed rate does not match the evolutionary assumptions of million of years in the fossil record.*
science; Predator-free guppies take an evolutionary leap forward (Morell)*

Rapid changes are bewildering to evolutionists..... but make perfect sense in the creationist model. God created most things with a very polytypic genome ( programmed variation) . They can change and adapt to various situations because of the wide array of info in their DNA.*

Other examples of the ability of animals to adapt quickly:*
Fruit flies grow longer wings...*
... evolutionists are 'alarmed'*
New Scientist 165 wrote:*
"Flying out of control—alien species can evolve at an alarming rate"
*

Frogs seemingly 'evolve' in 1 generation...*
... Evolutionists are surprised.*
Science Daily wrote:*
"However, the results show that in many cases, species with eggs and tadpoles placed in water seem to give rise directly to species with direct development, without going through the many seemingly intermediate steps that were previously thought to be necessary "
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0910142632.htm*

And the best one showing.....
... Evolutionists are unscientific.
Bird species changes fast but without genetic differences (species-specific DNA markers)...*
"Rapid phenotypic evolution during incipient speciation in a continental avian radiation" Proceedings of the Royal Society B.*
The researchers suggest that the lack of genetic markers may mean the changes in these birds happened so fast that the genes haven't had a chance to catch up yet!!!!*

That's a few of the many examples of adaptation and speciation that support the Biblical model, contradicting the evolutionist model of slow gradual change over millions of years.

So you found a guppy and fly that change rapidly. Shocking. Their genomes are so simple compared to larger fish, for example a grouper, that that's hardly news. Fruit flies and guppies have been used in Mendelian genetics experiments since the 1800s because we know that they have simple, easily manipulated genomes and short reproductive cycles.

Now if you found a species of whale or shark or Marlin or the like that can evolve the ability to withstand all levels of salinity in one generation, then you have a point. As it stands you're holding on to a guppy, trying to use it to prove that every ocean creature has the ability to evolve osmoregulatory capabilities in regards to salinity in one generation

Now I'll move on to your source here, which is a link to a help page. No article at all. And you obviously fudged the words of the article (wherever it is) a bit, since proponents of evolution don't ever refer to themselves as "evolutionists" as you did above. You made up "evolutionists are surprised" and the other boldened titles above. In the future you should avoid doing this, as it makes you appear dishonest and/or deceitful

 

[Interplanner]

C. elegans is a nematode worm. There is no stage in a fruit fly's life when it is a worm, nematode or otherwise.

You are clueless.

I don't recall the exact details, but I'm not clueless. It was in the fruit fly category and it was a 30 minute presentation on research done at a US university, basically about how dead-ended mutation change actually is.

I just read the post above and saw the phrase 'short reproductive cycles.' The point being made by the professor was that the fly's reproduction happens late in life, not (relatively) early like humans. That was the 'bridge' analogy. The mutations fail before that point and were not passed on. I can't remember how many examples of this he gave from other species, but it went on for about 5 minutes.

 

[Jonahdog]

The worst of modern science was the day Darwin sat in the harbor of Rio Santa Cruz Argentina in the Beagle and read PRINCIPLES, but failed to look at the window at the glacial valley of the Rio and realize that it had to happen very fast.
For the same reason, the Yellow Band at the top of Everest had to happen fast, the Grand Canyon and the Monterey (submarine) and Monument Valley. Things look totally different when they happen over millions of years. None of those do.
Mt St Helens is full of examples of extremely rapid phenomenon in geology; there are many mutations which happen in a few years.
There were mountain men who found 'overdried jerky' on the huge bones of dinosaurs which were simply not as old as Lyell wished. A recent Northridge CA college professor ran some of the same kind of samples with the latest in microbiology testing and found material that still responded as living tissue would. He was fired because it violated the uniformitarian (authoritarian!) orthodoxy.
Part of the reason Pluto was 'removed' from planet status was because the mountains are now known to have formed in a few thousand years. One peer scientist on this wrote that they were 'extremely younger than the Rockies.' Well, I think he should study the Rockies a little closer, but meanwhile it is 'safe' to change dates out there at Pluto.
There are mantle-slips that can happen in a moment that are in the category of super-faults and that means the distance moved ranges from 100M to 10,000M as in one S. African instance.
Once again, in the category of 'what does 1 million years of motion look like?' many galaxies would not look like the S shapes we see if they had been there even 1 million years. Instead they would look like concentric rings like Saturns, but for different reasons. The intact S shape means they are not as old as stated.

In short, who needs time?

Wowser. Are you sharing the Nobel with anyone or is all this that overturns science as most people know it a result of your work?

 

[Interplanner]

Wowser. Are you sharing the Nobel with anyone or is all this that overturns science as most people know it a result of your work?

I've just been collecting material to complete a novel for a couple months. You are welcome to the bibliography and you can ask them.

 

[Greg Jennings]

C. elegans is a nematode worm. There is no stage in a fruit fly's life when it is a worm, nematode or otherwise.

But maybe I am just not as up to date on the science as you and the Christian tv broadcast you cited. Give me the full name of F. elagantis and a citation to the scientific literature that dealt with the study you saw discussed on tv.

Thanks

Goodness. It's like these guys don't even know what a nematode is......oh wait...

 

[Jonahdog]

I don't recall the exact details, but I'm not clueless. It was in the fruit fly category and it was a 30 minute presentation on research done at a US university, basically about how dead-ended mutation change actually is.

Man up and get the back ground. Citing some vague Christian tv show gets 0 points. If it is so important and world changing you should be able to give us more specifics.
But if your understanding of biology suggests a fruit fly is a worm for part of its life cycle you are correct, you are not clueless you are simply uneducated and ignorant.

 

[Jonahdog]

I've just been collecting material to complete a novel for a couple months. You are welcome to the bibliography and you can ask them.

A fantasy novel, now I understand.

 

[Greg Jennings]

I don't recall the exact details, but I'm not clueless. It was in the fruit fly category and it was a 30 minute presentation on research done at a US university, basically about how dead-ended mutation change actually is.

I just read the post above and saw the phrase 'short reproductive cycles.' The point being made by the professor was that the fly's reproduction happens late in life, not (relatively) early like humans. That was the 'bridge' analogy. The mutations fail before that point and were not passed on. I can't remember how many examples of this he gave from other species, but it went on for about 5 minutes.

Inter, fruit flies and nematodes are completely different animals. Nematodes are tiny worms also known as roundworms. Many, such as hookworms, are parasitic and require a human host to live. They aren't in any way related to insects, which obviously fruit flies are.

Fruit flies have a larval stage, where they are maggots. But maggots and nematodes couldn't be more different

 

[Interplanner]

Man up and get the back ground. Citing some vague Christian tv show gets 0 points. If it is so important and world changing you should be able to give us more specifics.
But if your understanding of biology suggests a fruit fly is a worm for part of its life cycle you are correct, you are not clueless you are simply uneducated and ignorant.

LOL I'm simply not a uniformitarian, which is a racist plot hatched by upper class English thinkers to counter act the US Constitution and liberty because without race superiority through evolution (which they held on to long enough to join the Third Reich), the Christian doctrines in the US founding documents prevail. This racism is in Darwin, thanks to Huxley, and is on the title page of ORIGINS.



Combined Background Resources and Glossary
Marcus Sanford, ask@interplans.net



Ager, D. THE NATURE OF THE STRATIGRAPHICAL PROCESS. A peer scientist disputes Lyell's basis for uniformitarianism by evidence about rapid deposition and the Epeiric sea over north America.

Ager, D. NEW CATASTROPHISM.

Armour, R. North American Indian Fairy Tales, Folklore and Legends, (1905). Ojibwe legend of Nanabohzo.

Appearance of Design. The recognition even by Dawkins that the earth and its occupants seem to be here and formed to be here by design.

Baugh, C. PRE-FLOOD ARTIFACT DEVASTATES UNIFORMITARIANISM. Youtube. A hammer made of sophisticated metal from England in a 'strata' where it does not 'belong.'

Baugh, C. THE WORLD AND MANKIND BEFORE THE FLOOD. Youtube. “Bizz-artifacts” of the ancient world re longevity, giantism.

Baumgardner, J. CATASTROPHIC PLATE TECTONICS; the key to understanding the Genesis Flood. Youtube.

"Biblical-Type Floods Are Real, and They're Absolutely Enormous" DiscoverMagazine.com. 2012-08-29.

Boudreaux. NEW THEORY FOR THE PRE-FLOOD CANOPY re sugilite, a trace found all over the earth's surface. Youtube.

Bretz, J H. 1920s. Geologic catastrophism in connection with Lake Missoula.

Brown, W. (various titles on the deluge and anomalies left around the world by it, but usually written apart from tectonic theory). Former DOD logistician.

Carbera, Dr. A Peruvian surgeon who located a human skull in tertiary material with dinosaurs.

CENTRALIA THEORY. A newer catastrophic view that the entire central 80% of Australia is a rapid deposit sedimentary zone as part of a global event.

Chima Channels, Peru. Advanced water supply systems that moved water 150 miles in 'primitive' times.

Clark, E. INDIAN LEGENDS OF THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST. One of the best collections. The great flood is a frequent subject.

Clemens, J. Research on granitic magmatism. Geologist Association of London.
Coconino. The layer of sandstone at Grand Canyon that is from northeast north America.

Cooper, B. AFTER THE FLOOD.

CREATION. A recent production of the domestic and social factors that mattered while Darwin wrote ORIGINS.

Creationwiki.com. 8700 articles.

Crone, B. IN THE DAYS OF NOAH. Giants, Ancient Technology and Noah's Ark. Part 2: A Glorious Civilization. A very complete collection of archeological and geological anomalies, however, some examples did not have to do with the Genesi flood as such.

Dona, K. ARTIFACTS FROM PRE-FLOOD WORLD & FALLEN ANGELS. Pres. By Habsburg Haus curator. Youtube. “Bizz-artefacts” of the ancient world.

Epeiric Sea. The worldwide ancient sea as referred to in scientific literature, to which Pangaea (one single continent) was the counterpart.

Farellian Law of Chance. 1:1 (50th) is the point of impossibility. Most of the critical doctrines of evolution and uniformitarianism are dependent on much less favorable odds.

FINDING NOAH. Oct.8.2015 limited screening.

Geo-mythology. The science of connecting ancient myth to its location's fossils or artefacts.

Giem, P. IS PLUTO YOUNG? Youtube.

GILGAMESH EPIC. Babylonian flood account as part of a search for eternal life after offending a female deity. Only Utnapushtim has eternal life; he responded to deity instructions to build a huge ship, titled The Preserver of Life, and survive a flood that would otherwise destroy all life. He took his family, village craftsmen, and baby animals.

Guthrie. FROZEN FAUNA... Research on the plant life around the time and place of the huge numbers of frozen mammoths.

Hancock, G. FINGERPRINTS OF THE GODS. Former ECONOMIST correspondent compiles all the archeological and geological anomalies which orthodox science simply won't mention.


Haynes. MAMMOTHS... Research on the thousands of mammoths in permafrost.

Hovind, K. FLOOD OF NOAH. Youtube. Hundreds of flood legends around the world. Hovind tends to wander off topic.

Hovind, K. THOUSANDS OF DRAGON LEGENDS AROUND THE WORLD. Youtube. Hovind tends to wander off topic.

Howorth, 1887. Early research on mammoths unable to explain the huge numbers found in permafrost.

Hippolytus. Ancient Greek historian who described worldwide flood as consisting of water from below, and fire and earthquakes.

James-Griffiths, P. TRACING GENESIS THROUGH ANCIENT CULTURE. Youtube. Extensive and well-illustrated comparative legend and literature.

Jenkins Collection. A huge collection of Naszca materials that was extremely difficult to access for many years.


Job 9. 'God moves and overturns mountains.'

Johnson, C. THE PRE-FLOOD WORLD: CREATION AND CANOPY. Youtube.

Langdell. Doctor of Law appointed at Harvard in 1879 primarily because he used ORIGIN OF SPECIES concepts and language to reshape American law.

LIVING WATERS. See nrbtv (Direct 378). This is a rich photoessay against several aspects of Darwinism.

Lewis, C. S. GOD IN THE DOCK. Among these essays, besides the one featured here, “The Myth That Became Fact” is a complete statement as to why we should expect near-replica accounts from all the ancient cultures that are 'memories' of what actually happened. Simply for the reason that it actually happened!

Lyell. Mid-1800s scientist who developed the idea of uniformitarianism 'to free geology from Moses.'

THE MAN WHO FOUND TIME. Re Hutton (mid-1700s) and the first attempts to state the view that there are vast amounts of time manifesting on earth.

Mayr, E. THE NATURE OF THE DARWINIAN REVOLUTION.

Mayor, A. Folkorist and geomythologist. Her hypothesis was that seashells and marine fossils found inland and on mountains inspired worldwide flood legends.

Mial, A. (research on failures of uniformitariansm) Springer International Publishing.

Naval Observatory of Peru. One of the current locations of the former Jenkins collections of Nazsca stones and artefacts, along with the Aeronautical Museum of Peru.

National Geographic Society. (100 mammoths at Hot Springs, South Dakota).

Noa A Gomshi. Translation: Noah's Huge Boat. The local name for the Ararat area.

Noorberger, R. SECRETS OF THE LOST RACES. Peruvian and other evidence shows a very different world before a global deluge.

NOVA. Making North America. Nov. 2015. The usual uniformitarianism but just about north America and its dinosaurs. The metal particles sprayed around when an asteroid struck. “Every layer we see used to be the surface of the earth” in perfectly predictable order.

Nurre, P. EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY AND THE BIBLE. Nwcreation.net. Comparing new archeology with Biblical record.

Oard, M. THE LAKE MISSOULA FLOOD. Nwcreation.net Seattle creation conference 2015. This event echos the Genesis flood and demonstrates what happens when a half-continent floods.

Oard, M. WHAT HAPPENED TO WOOLLY MAMMOTHS? Nwcreation.net Seattle creation conference 2015. Newest research on the thousands of mammoths frozen upright in permafrost, 'drowning' in loess.

Ocucaje village. Peruvian village where many of the sketched burial stones were found. Samples of methods of preserving human flesh. Excavated in 1950 by Solde. Patination confirmed by the University of Bonn.

Opisthotonic.

Physico-theologians. Those pastors and professors in the 1800s who believed God originated and sustained each organism on a micro level, but not in a pantheistic sense. 'In all life Thou livest / the true life of all.' Sometimes the view sounded quaint, but it was sheer skepticism and a desire for another outcome, not facts, that ridiculed it.

Pluto's mountains. A critical dating item which has lead in part to removing Pluto from the planet list because they are 'too young.'

Prescott, W. THE CONQUEST OF PERU. Early data on advanced civilization and young creation.

Psalm 104. The creation psalm with a few verses on the deluge, if not on Gen 1:2.

Psalm 136. The earth is set on top of water.

SATAPATHA BRAHMANA. The Hindu version of the great flood. The 1st man Manu is warned of impending flood and advised to build a giant boat.

Schaeffer, F. GENESIS IN SPACE AND TIME. A bit dated on some information, but mentioned the extensive accounts of massive flooding among South American peoples.

Siccar Point, Scotland. This site is contested as a clinching site by both uniformitarians and Biblical creation/deluge believers.

Silvestru, E. GEOLOGY AND DEEP TIME. Youtube. Vertical tectonics, rapid sedimentary deposits by a highly-trained ex-uniformitarian.

SHA NAQBA IMURU. Ancient Bablylonian text containing GILGAMESH EPIC. The title means “He who saw the deep.” (Deep = the unfathomable waters, oceans).

Snelling, A. WORLDWIDE FLOOD; GEOLOGIC EVIDENCE. Youtube. Demonstrates some calculations of how hundreds of feet of sediment could have been transferred 2000 miles.

Steno, N. Mid-1600s 'father of geology' and his Biblical basis.

Stratigraphy. The 'account' of earth history in the layers or strata of geology.

Superfault. A location where the mantle is known to have buckled between 100-10,000 meters in one moment.

Tihuanaca, Peru. Gateway to the Sun construction; metal staples to connect massive stones; temples similar to those in Cambodia; earthquake protection that has worked; widespread ethnicity in the facial carvings; jade used in carvings is from China.

Timeaus. Plato's account of a flood over the whole earth. A Titan named Prometheus tells Deucalion it is coming, who prepares and survives it.

Titikaka., Peru. Native boats memorialize sea-monster accounts.

Tolmachoff. 1929. Studies on woolly mammoths as anomalies.

Vereshagin. MAMMOTH CEMETERIES. Research on cause of death of thousands of mammoths in permafrost.

Uniformitarianism.

Walker, T. (THE GENESIS DELUGE). Nwcreation.net Seattle creation conference 2015. Worldwide samples of tectonic upheaval and sedimentary transfer.

Walker, T. MEGA-CATASTROPHE. Nwcreation.net Seattle creation conference 2015.

Wallace, A. NEW THOUGHTS ON EVOLUTION. 1910 critique of where it was headed. Material on Haeckl.

Waltke, B. CREATION AND CHAOS. Study of ancient near east legend to show how Gen 1's mission is to declare that the LORD is the redemptive-creator.

Ward. CALL OF THE DISTANT MOUNTAINS. Research on the anomalies of woolly mammoths.

Wikipedia. Final introductory quote about Genesis flood: “A world-wide deluge, such as described in Genesis, is incompatible with modern understanding of the natural history and especially geology and paleontology.”[24][25]

Wilberforce, W. English politician and evangelical Christian who helped end slavery and wrote a criticism of upper class life for its attempt to preserve slavery. To preserve it, evolutionary doctrines were accepted on both sides of the Channel.

Woodman. NASZCA; JOURNEY TO THE SEA. Their balloon technology scope similar to Kon Tiki and the sea.



Ziusudra Epic. Sumerian. The preflood kings lived enormous life spans. After the flood their lifespan is normal.

 

[Jonahdog]

Interplanner: I've seen your "bibliography" before. Wouldn't get a good grade in high school because it is not very complete. Retake an English class somewhere and learn how to cite your research.

In the meantime, I'll wait for you to get specific background information on the science behind the Christian TV show that explained a problem with evolution using fruit flyies, or nematodes, or...

 

[Interplanner]

Interplanner: I've seen your "bibliography" before. Wouldn't get a good grade in high school because it is not very complete. Retake an English class somewhere and learn how to cite your research.

In the meantime, I'll wait for you to get specific background information on the science behind the Christian TV show that explained a problem with evolution using fruit flyies, or nematodes, or...

Why should I care what your opinion is? You don't care whether a car has 350K miles and is going strong. You want one that has a good wax job.

Stop basing everything on me, and do your homework, such as reading Walker or Ager on catastrophism. Go through the Silvestru video on CPT. (Correction: Baumgardner's is better conceptually).

Anyone who knows the history of science knows how much hangs on Lyell. He simply spewed out his dates to get rid of Moses, science or not. He made way too many declarations before he knew what was going on. Biological evolution 'needed' his time frame because it was stuck. Presto. And British race superiority needed to keep the empire and slavery going. Presto. It's on the title page of ORIGINS. Damn those Americans and their Creator endowing rights in a Constitution!

 

[Jonahdog]

Damn those Americans and their Creator endowing rights in a Constitution!

Not only are you ignorant about biology, you are also ignorant concerning America's founding. Your lack of knowledge seems boundless.

 

[Interplanner]

Not only are you ignorant about biology, you are also ignorant concerning America's founding. Your lack of knowledge seems boundless.

Uhhh, that's a line quoted from the documents...about the endowed rights from the Creator.

I really don't care what you think, as long as I don't sound like Obama at Glacier Bay this summer!

I won't be doing your research for you. This is the age of the i.net and my 'background resources' list reflects the fact that a person can search for titles and authors based on keywords... Are you familiar with that?

 

[6days]

Salinity would be reduced, not added. And a very large amount. Think of how much water is in the Great Lakes alone! Then factor in all of the glaciers, lakes in other countries, rivers, and so on, and you have more fresh than saltwater.

Greg..... hello??


Your evolutionary assumptions about lakes, rivers and glaciers in the pre-flood world don't jive.*

And.... your 'facts' are your own... not matching reality. All the fresh water in the world is likely only about 3% of the total. It certainly is not greater than the amount of saltwater.*

Also....Salinity would not be decreased. Why do you think the oceans are salty? Where does the salt come from? Truth is we have no idea how a global flood would change things but almost certainly the oceans would be saltier afterwards.

"Today, however, most of the salt in the oceans comes from the continual rinsing of the earth. Rain falling on the land dissolves the salts in eroding rocks, and these salts are carried down the rivers and out to sea. The salts accumulate in the ocean as water evaporates to form clouds. The oceans are getting saltier every day, but the rate of increase is so slow that it is virtually immeasurable."
http://seawifs.gsfc.nasa.gov/OCEAN_PLANET/HTML/ps_questions.html

 

[Greg Jennings]

Greg..... hello??


Your evolutionary assumptions about lakes, rivers and glaciers in the pre-flood world don't jive.*

And.... your 'facts' are your own... not matching reality. All the fresh water in the world is likely only about 3% of the total. It certainly is not greater than the amount of saltwater.*

Hello!

You are correct about freshwater versus saltwater. I was wrong about that. I'm happy to admit when I err.

There is plenty of freshwater trapped in glaciers, icebergs, and snow to change the salinity of the oceans. In fact, enough of it spilling into the ocean would change the trans-Atlantic current that keeps Europe from freezing over. But anything like that is a problem for the far future.

Also....Salinity would not be decreased. Why do you think the oceans are salty? Where does the salt come from? Truth is we have no idea how a global flood would change things but almost certainly the oceans would be saltier afterwards.

"Today, however, most of the salt in the oceans comes from the continual rinsing of the earth. Rain falling on the land dissolves the salts in eroding rocks, and these salts are carried down the rivers and out to sea. The salts accumulate in the ocean as water evaporates to form clouds. The oceans are getting saltier every day, but the rate of increase is so slow that it is virtually immeasurable."
http://seawifs.gsfc.nasa.gov/OCEAN_PLANET/HTML/ps_questions.html

Again, you are correct. A flood would clearly not decrease salinity, but raise it dramatically. That's just as bad (if not worse) for animals with specific salinity needs as diluted oceans. Think of the Dead Sea.

The problem that you must explain remains the same. Did you find the ocean critters I asked for that can adapt to changing conditions in one generation?

 

[6days]

What it does for me is to offer rational explanations and testable conclusions based on the available evidence.

But..... it appears most atheists / agnostics most often accept irrational explanations. They often believe things that have nothing to do with evidence, or even contrary to evidence such*multiverse, or life from non life. They ofter seem eager to believe in far fetched tales such as happened with the fossil 'Ida' and hundreds of others.