Isn't it reasonable to doubt Young Earth Creationism?

[iouae]

Also, sedimentary rocks are the result of a global flood, which you ascribe to. It's bizarre that you believe all life was drowned in fountain-derived waters 4,500 years ago, but think sedimentary rocks have no record of such an event.

The fact that different sedimentary rocks all have uniquely different fossils shows there was not one flood laying down sedimentary rock. There have been dozens or hundreds of mass extinctions in earth's history, each one burying its living organisms in sedimentary rock. Noah's flood was just the latest, so if we find shallow sedimentary rock with modern animals then we know we have found Noah's flood fossils. Such as dire wolves, mammoths, giant sloths, sabre toothed tigers etc.

 

[Jose Fly]

But you're just going to say so; you won't debate the evidence.

Let's keep in mind that THIS is what Stripe thinks constitutes "debating the evidence".

1: :yawn:
2: DNA.
3: Mountain ranges.
4: Same number of chromosomes.

 

[6days]

Let's keep in mind that THIS is what Stripe thinks constitutes "debating the evidence".

1:
2: DNA.
3: Mountain ranges.
4: Same number of chromosomes.

Other than #1... that's a good start of evidences that help support Scripture. But, even point 1 isn't bad. ( emotions / consciousness/ intelligence)

 

[Jose Fly]

Other than #1... that's a good start of evidences that help support Scripture. But, even point 1 isn't bad. ( emotions / consciousness/ intelligence)

Well there ya go....to creationists, smilies and single words are how one "discusses evidence".

Not much I need to add to that.

 

[Stripe]

Let's keep in mind that this is what Stripe thinks constitutes "debating the evidence".

Let's keep in mind that you asked me to list evidence:

Let's see your evidence.

In that, specifically regarding:

1. The geologic column being an invention of "Darwinists."

Which is obviously a boring and pointless thing to argue about. No wonder you included it.

2. Science confirming that Neandertals are human.

I said DNA, which has been discussed at length already. Were you just asking for evidence again in an attempt to deny the existence of what you'd been shown, or are you going senile?

More on the evidence side:

The orthodontist who X-rayed Neanderthal skulls and showed that they were late-developing, long-lived people.

3. The amount of energy required to move continental plates at 55mph.

This is a strange thing to request evidence for, but if we assume you meant to ask for evidence that plates moved at such speeds, mountain ranges is an obvious answer.

4. How it's possible to tell from DNA that two organisms are of the same type.

I said "chromosomes." Then the Darwinists thought it would be a good idea to pretend they'd asked for proof and to respond in kind. Do you really think I would fall for such a transparent ploy?

So, no. Those four concise responses are not an example of me discussing evidence. This is just you making sure a sensible discussion never gets off the ground.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Jonahdog]

3. The amount of energy required to move continental plates at 55mph.

This is obviously a strange thing to request evidence for, but if we assume you meant to ask for evidence that plates moved at such speeds, mountain ranges is an obvious answer.

Please explain, or at least a citation to the scientific literature.

 

[Jonahdog]

All ya gotta do is look at a map of the continents. Specifically the mountain ranges along the west coast of the Americas and the East of Asia, Africa, and Australia, and even all the (non-volcanic, if any) mountains that make up the islands to the east and north of Australia.

That the mountain ranges follow the coastlines are an indication that the plates came to an abrupt stop, and the rock at the edge of the crumbled and buckled, pushing rock upwards and creating the mountain ranges we see today. It's why the rockies are so much higher than the appalachians.

Why are the Rockies so much higher? Were the Appalacians higher at some time in the past? What specific plates created the Rockies?

 

[Jonahdog]

All ya gotta do is look at a map of the continents. Specifically the mountain ranges along the west coast of the Americas and the East of Asia, Africa, and Australia, and even all the (non-volcanic, if any) mountains that make up the islands to the east and north of Australia.

That the mountain ranges follow the coastlines are an indication that the plates came to an abrupt stop, and the rock at the edge of the crumbled and buckled, pushing rock upwards and creating the mountain ranges we see today. It's why the rockies are so much higher than the appalachians.

Why are the Rockies so much higher? Were the Appalacians higher at some time in the past? What specific plates created the Rockies?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Please explain, or at least a citation to the scientific literature.

All ya gotta do is look at a map of the continents. Specifically the mountain ranges along the west coast of the Americas and the East of Asia, Africa, and Australia, and even all the (non-volcanic, if any) mountains that make up the islands to the east and north of Australia.

That the mountain ranges follow the coastlines are an indication that the plates came to an abrupt stop, and the rock at the edge of the crumbled and buckled, pushing rock upwards and creating the mountain ranges we see today. It's why the rockies are so much higher than the appalachians.

 

[JudgeRightly]

How the heck did you quote me before I posted????

Somethin' weird's goin' on with TOL...

Why are the Rockies so much higher? Were the Appalacians higher at some time in the past? What specific plates created the Rockies?

Why are the Rockies so much higher?

I literally just told you why. Perhaps you weren't paying attention when you read my post, if you even read it all at all.

Were the Appalachians higher at some time in the past?

No. The Appalachian mountains were made by the fountains of the great deep breaking forth.

What specific plates created the Rockies?

I assume you mean which hydroplates?

The plate which makes up North America crashed into the plate which made up the floor of the Pacific Ocean.

Edit: In addition to the crushing force of the plates colliding, the North American plate also came to rest over a portion of the mid-oceanic ridge in the Pacific.

Edit 2: https://youtu.be/4hhE6tzJR_c

 

[JudgeRightly]

The fact that different sedimentary rocks all have uniquely different fossils shows there was not one flood laying down sedimentary rock. There have been dozens or hundreds of mass extinctions in earth's history, each one burying its living organisms in sedimentary rock. Noah's flood was just the latest, so if we find shallow sedimentary rock with modern animals then we know we have found Noah's flood fossils. Such as dire wolves, mammoths, giant sloths, sabre toothed tigers etc.

You've clearly never heard of the phenomenon called "liquifaction."

See the above YouTube video. It describes how the Flood would have "sorted" the layers of the sediments.

 

[iouae]

You've clearly never heard of the phenomenon called "liquifaction."

See the above YouTube video. It describes how the Flood would have "sorted" the layers of the sediments.

The video above is more hydroplate theory.

There is not a theory in the cosmos able to explain how fossils get sorted so that whole biomes get buried separately. The only possible explanation for fossils buried together is that they died together. And different epochs creatures all died in succession, showing beyond a doubt that there have been many different ecosystems and biomes with different communities of plants and animals in the past.

And I have heard of liquification, enough to know it does not sort fossils as they are found to make up the geologic column.

 

[Stripe]

There is not a theory in the cosmos able to explain how fossils get sorted so that whole biomes get buried separately.

Whole biomes were not buried separately. They were all buried by the same event.

The only possible explanation for fossils buried together is that they died together.

All fossils are buried "together."

Different epochs creatures all died in succession, showing beyond a doubt that there have been many different ecosystems and biomes with different communities of plants and animals in the past.

That which you assert without evidence, we are justified in ignoring without evidence.

What's worse is that the evidence shows none of what you say could have happened.

And I have heard of liquification, enough to know it does not sort fossils as they are found to make up the geologic column.

You're great at declaring things to be so. How about for once explaining the physics that means layers cannot be sorted by changes in water pressure.

It's pretty easy to show that they are.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[JudgeRightly]

The video above is more hydroplate theory.

How astute! :mock:

There is not a theory in the cosmos able to explain how fossils get sorted so that whole biomes get buried separately.

Um, Yes, there is, and I just pointed you to the video which explains EXACTLY HOW.

The only possible explanation

... is not the one you're about to provide.

for fossils buried together is that they died together.

Nope. Well, they did, but the groups didn't die individually... All the groups died together in the same event.

Go watch the video. I'll wait.

And different epochs creatures all died in succession, showing beyond a doubt that there have been many different ecosystems and biomes with different communities of plants and animals in the past.

More question begging.

You're assuming that the geologic column shows millions of years to say that each layer represents an epoch of time.

Yet millions of years of erosion does not produce an average of a mile deep of sediments around the globe. It's just not possible. In addition, there are epochs of time, if your position is correct, where ABSOLUTELY NO EROSION OCCURRED FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS!.

And I have heard of liquification, enough to know it does not sort fossils as they are found to make up the geologic column.

Sorry, I spelled it wrong initially. But liquification (what you typed) =/= liquefaction. Go watch the video. You might be surprised. And don't skim through it like you did the last video. Pay attention to the animations which show how everything happened with MINIMAL speculation.

 

[iouae]

Whole biomes were not buried separately. They were all buried by the same event.

All fossils are buried "together."

That which you assert without evidence, we are justified in ignoring without evidence.

What's worse is that the evidence shows none of what you say could have happened.



You're great at declaring things to be so. How about for once explaining the physics that means layers cannot be sorted by changes in water pressure.

It's pretty easy to show that they are.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

If you take a small spade of soil and shake it up in water and let it settle, it settles in layers or strata.

The rocks settle first, followed by the gravel, small stones, sand, then clay.

Organic matter floats on the surface (grass, leaves, branches) or if denser than water (say earthworms), it settles last, on top of the clay. Over days, the cloudy water settles and clears as finest soil settles.

Thus things settle largest and densest first, least dense last or it floats till it gets waterlogged and sinks.

But if I were to take a whole lot of freshly drowned animals in a pool, they do NOT settle according to the geologic column.

 

[iouae]

How astute! :mock:



Um, Yes, there is, and I just pointed you to the video which explains EXACTLY HOW.



... is not the one you're about to provide.



Nope. Well, they did, but the groups didn't die individually... All the groups died together in the same event.

Go watch the video. I'll wait.



More question begging.

You're assuming that the geologic column shows millions of years to say that each layer represents an epoch of time.

Yet millions of years of erosion does not produce an average of a mile deep of sediments around the globe. It's just not possible. In addition, there are epochs of time, if your position is correct, where ABSOLUTELY NO EROSION OCCURRED FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS!.



Sorry, I spelled it wrong initially. But liquification (what you typed) =/= liquefaction. Go watch the video. You might be surprised. And don't skim through it like you did the last video. Pay attention to the animations which show how everything happened with MINIMAL speculation.

I am not watching another video of yours. Its the lazy way of pointing folks to subjects you don't understand enough to explain. I can explain anything I believe in. I do not point you to videos all the time.

And the guys you point me to are all chimps, believing in things like mach 33 water droplets.

I believe in catastrophes like the Noah flood where mass extinctions occur with a hundred yard deep series of strata being laid down in days with no erosion of layers.

Over epochs of time too there can be layering but this is very secondary.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Let's keep in mind that you asked me to list evidence:


In that, specifically regarding:

1. The geologic column being an invention of "Darwinists."

Which is obviously a boring and pointless thing to argue about. No wonder you included it.

2. Science confirming that Neandertals are human.

I said DNA, which has been discussed at length already. Were you just asking for evidence again in an attempt to deny the existence of what you'd been shown, or are you going senile?

More on the evidence side:

The orthodontist who X-rayed Neanderthal skulls and showed that they were late-developing, long-lived people.

3. The amount of energy required to move continental plates at 55mph.

This is a strange thing to request evidence for, but if we assume you meant to ask for evidence that plates moved at such speeds, mountain ranges is an obvious answer.

4. How it's possible to tell from DNA that two organisms are of the same type.

I said "chromosomes." Then the Darwinists thought it would be a good idea to pretend they'd asked for proof and to respond in kind. Do you really think I would fall for such a transparent ploy?

So, no. Those four concise responses are not an example of me discussing evidence. This is just you making sure a sensible discussion never gets off the ground.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

That which you assert without evidence, we are justified in ignoring without evidence.

 

[Jonahdog]

How the heck did you quote me before I posted????

Somethin' weird's goin' on with TOL...





I literally just told you why. Perhaps you weren't paying attention when you read my post, if you even read it all at all.



No. The Appalachian mountains were made by the fountains of the great deep breaking forth.



I assume you mean which hydroplates?

The plate which makes up North America crashed into the plate which made up the floor of the Pacific Ocean.

Edit: In addition to the crushing force of the plates colliding, the North American plate also came to rest over a portion of the mid-oceanic ridge in the Pacific.

Edit 2: https://youtu.be/4hhE6tzJR_c

I note there is no reference to the scientific literature.

 

[Jose Fly]

Let's keep in mind that you asked me to list evidence:

In that, specifically regarding:

Indeed. Let's see how well you do at providing and discussing the evidence.

1. The geologic column being an invention of "Darwinists."

Which is obviously a boring and pointless thing to argue about. No wonder you included it.

No evidence provided let alone discussed.

2. Science confirming that Neandertals are human.

I said DNA, which has been discussed at length already. Were you just asking for evidence again in an attempt to deny the existence of what you'd been shown, or are you going senile?

The claim was that science has shown that Neanderthals are descendants of the First Adam.

More on the evidence side:

The orthodontist who X-rayed Neanderthal skulls and showed that they were late-developing, long-lived people.

Nothing about them being descendants of the First Adam.

3. The amount of energy required to move continental plates at 55mph.

This is a strange thing to request evidence for, but if we assume you meant to ask for evidence that plates moved at such speeds, mountain ranges is an obvious answer.

No evidence provided or discussed.

4. How it's possible to tell from DNA that two organisms are of the same type.

I said "chromosomes." Then the Darwinists thought it would be a good idea to pretend they'd asked for proof and to respond in kind. Do you really think I would fall for such a transparent ploy?

No evidence provided or discussed.

So, no. Those four concise responses are not an example of me discussing evidence.

Agreed.

 

[Jose Fly]

The Appalachian mountains were made by the fountains of the great deep breaking forth.

Really? Please explain how that is so, and address the specific geology of the Appalachians.