|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,817 Year: 4,074/9,624 Month: 945/974 Week: 272/286 Day: 33/46 Hour: 5/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Great Creationist Fossil Failure | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 761 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined:
|
Read it again, Faith. For comprehenion this time.
"The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1471 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Sorry, if you read it differently it's up to you to make your case. All I see is that it affirms extensive strata in a regular order with fossil contents also in order. If you see it otherwise, have at it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
That is an unfair requirement when the point is a very limited point that does not require extensive knowledge of a whole field. You are wrong. The requirement is totally fair regardless of how difficult that makes things for you. What we are discussing here is central to your claims that you and scientists simply have different interpretations of the same evidence. Not all interpretations are created equal. To some extent, it is irrelevant how you come up with an hypothesis. The second step after making an interpretation or hypothesis based on evidence is to vet that interpretation. Interpretations that do not survive vetting by you or anyone else must be dropped regardless of the field of expertise required to do the vetting. For that reason, you don't have the luxury of cherry picking what fields of study you need to learn. You have to address issue based on any legitimate objection from any field. The alternative is to simply persuade yourself of something that has an enormous chance of being wrong. I don't think that fact bothers you. The fact that you are enabled to avoid acknowledging that yo are wrong by limiting your field of view appears to me to be the actual result you desire. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Geologist and all other scientists were committed to the established idea that the earth was young, that there had been a Biblical Flood, that Special Creation actually happened and went out looking for evidence that supported and would confirm the established idea. Nicely said. And of course Faith's answer is to question the commitment of folks who let science convince them to drop the truth. What those folks should have done is to put down their picks and shovels and then pick up their Bible Genesis and reconnect with the God of the OT. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
NoNukes about Faith writes: The fact that you are enabled to avoid acknowledging that yo are wrong by limiting your field of view appears to me to be the actual result you desire. And thus the Avoidance Movement; Avoidance Christian Schools using Avoidance Textbooks and Avoidance Teachers accredited by Avoidance Accreditation Boards; Avoidance Networks and Forums; Avoidance Colleges and Universities. If you can limit exposure to the facts that you do not like you can create your own little fantasy world. Unfortunately for them it is getting harder and harder to persuade the kiddies. Edited by jar, : fix attribution Edited by jar, : not Faith FaithAnyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1471 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Strange how I just never get used to the misrepresentations and distortions of everything I say, am always surprised by it, never anticipate it, can't really believe it, just walk right into it every time and don't have the smarts to leave a place that does this sort of thing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
Faith writes: Strange how I just never get used to the misrepresentations and distortions of everything I say, am always surprised by it, never anticipate it, can't really believe it, just walk right into it every time and don't have the smarts to leave a place that does this sort of thing. If you are going to continue make such claims don't you think it worthwhile to at least point out the misrepresentation and then provide the accurate presentation including the model, method, process, procedure or thingamabob that supports what you say?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1733 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
Sorry, if you read it differently it's up to you to make your case. All I see is that it affirms extensive strata in a regular order with fossil contents also in order. If you see it otherwise, have at it.
Sorry, but the strata vary laterally and vertically with varying depositional environments through time and space, and the same with fossils. Just because you choose to look at one area at a time, it does not create th record that you think. While you have coal swamps in one place you will have coral reefs elsewhere, along with continental shelves, deep seas and mountain building. The geologic record is clear on this, just as we see it today.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1471 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I don't know why you feel the need to lecture me on the familiar. I was responding to that one quotation, period. If you have a different reading of it, as Coragyps also claims to have, why not just say it.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined:
|
Most YEC, in fact most people, would not realise that each of the major periods - Jurassic, Triassic etc - is further broken up into stages numbering about 100 from the Cambrian to the present. The limits of these stages are defined by the first or last appearance of various fossils, often microscopic organisms. Then these stages are typically divided into 5 or 6 further stages, some more and some less, similarly defined.
Then there are pollen stages which may overlap these stages. The ability of the Flood to sort the fossils in this way would be mind-boggling.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined:
|
The Seventh-day Adventist Church set up the Geoscience Research Institute in 1959 to find evidence for YEC and the Flood. GRI reported to the church's 5 yearly General Conference in 2010 that after 50 years they still could not produce a model of YEC and Flood that explained the evidence.
Their website FAQ section lists unsolved questions after discussing various topics. I think they make interesting reading. A selection follows. "Fossils : How did the fossils become arranged in the particular sequence in which we find them? Why do some organisms .... appear throughout the fossil record while others disappear?" "Age of Earth : The most difficult question is probably the apparent sequence of radiometric dates, giving older dates for lower layers ..... and younger dates for the upper layers. ....why different dating methods often give similar ages; an explanation for the cooling of the magma composing the ocean floor" "Plate tectonics : When and how rapidly have the plates moved? What happened to the pre-Flood continents? " "Ice ages : What processes account for the appearance of large numbers of layers in ice cores and cyclical oscillation in climate proxies from marine and terrestrial records?" "Noah's Ark : How did the terrestrial animals get from the Ark to their present distribution?" One would wonder how someone could read - or write - these questions without having a light-bulb moment. "Hey, there's a good answer to all these questions - the Earth is old!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Exactly. It's so easy.
All the major and minor exploration and mining companies from all over the world have come to that conclusion. Old earth models work in finding and exploiting those resources and reserves. The earth is old. Very old.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1733 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
Most YEC, in fact most people, would not realise that each of the major periods - Jurassic, Triassic etc - is further broken up into stages numbering about 100 from the Cambrian to the present. The limits of these stages are defined by the first or last appearance of various fossils, often microscopic organisms. Then these stages are typically divided into 5 or 6 further stages, some more and some less, similarly defined.
Very good points. I don't see how such resolution of time periods would be possible if it was all just all coincidence or imaginary as YECs seem to think.Then there are pollen stages which may overlap these stages. The ability of the Flood to sort the fossils in this way would be mind-boggling. It may be a little beyond the scope of a discussion board, but here is an example of such time divisions as taken from Wiki.
"The Norian is a division of the Triassic geological period. It has the rank of an age (geochronology) or stage (chronostratigraphy). The Norian lasted from ~228 to ~208.5 million years ago.[1] It was preceded by the Carnian and succeeded by the Rhaetian.[2] ... The Norian was named after the Noric Alps in Austria. The stage was introduced into scientific literature by Austrian geologist Edmund Mojsisovics von Mojsvar in 1869. The Norian stage begins at the base of the ammonite biozones of Klamathites macrolobatus and Stikinoceras kerri, and at the base of the conodont biozones of Metapolygnathus communisti and Metapolygnathus primitius. A global reference profile for the base (a GSSP) had in 2009 not yet been appointed. The top of the Norian (the base of the Rhaetian) is at the first appearance of ammonite species Cochloceras amoenum. The base of the Rheatian is also close to the first appearance of conodont species Misikella spp. and Epigondolella mosheri and the radiolarid species Proparvicingula moniliformis. In the Tethys domain, the Norian stage contains six ammonite biozones: zone of Halorites macerzone of Himavatites hogarti zone of Cyrtopleurites bicrenatus zone of Juvavites magnus zone of Malayites paulckei zone of Guembelites jandianus Norian - Wikipedia
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 195 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
In Jesus' Name Productions wanted to make a movie about the fludde. They wanted it to reflect the most up-to-date views of creation "scientists". So in 2011 they assembled a bunch of them (including Walt "Hydropants" Brown, who walked out early after nobody would buy his BS) and conducted a Flood Science Review. I have the PDF of their book if anyone wants something specific from it, but obviously I can't hand it out.
From the introduction:
quote: (There was some discussion of the vapor canopy "model".) At the end the moderator's conclusion is:
quote: Let me repeat:
The critical question at this point is: Did any of our Flood models meet the objective of this Review as stated in our Introduction? The answer, according to our Panel’s Conclusions is: No, not at this time. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2400 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
Soon. Very soon.
JB
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024