Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The TRVE history of the Flood...
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


(1)
Message 570 of 1352 (806654)
04-27-2017 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 569 by edge
04-27-2017 12:22 AM


Learning
People learn easier if they are taught rather than abused for being ignorant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 569 by edge, posted 04-27-2017 12:22 AM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 578 by Taq, posted 04-27-2017 10:42 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 580 by ringo, posted 04-27-2017 12:42 PM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 571 of 1352 (806655)
04-27-2017 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 561 by Admin
04-26-2017 8:35 AM


Re: Let's not keep arguing the same old basics
In this thread you can't argue that something is true because the Bible is true. You have to supply corroborating real world evidence.
Archeological and historical evidence has consistently confirmed the Bible is true. That is corroborating real world evidence

This message is a reply to:
 Message 561 by Admin, posted 04-26-2017 8:35 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 573 by PaulK, posted 04-27-2017 8:31 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 574 by Theodoric, posted 04-27-2017 8:51 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 576 by Coyote, posted 04-27-2017 9:30 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 579 by Taq, posted 04-27-2017 10:44 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 581 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-27-2017 1:13 PM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 572 of 1352 (806656)
04-27-2017 7:59 AM
Reply to: Message 556 by Pressie
04-26-2017 6:30 AM


Re: More nonsense
Coyote, they will never discuss your research, because they can't find anything about it on some creationist website.
So where is it published?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 556 by Pressie, posted 04-26-2017 6:30 AM Pressie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 577 by Coyote, posted 04-27-2017 9:39 AM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 724 of 1352 (807920)
05-06-2017 10:32 PM


Speedy Species Surprise
Posted here because it was getting too far off topic in "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution."
Percy:
Does this mean that you believe there was one original giraffe kind on the ark, and that the four species we see today are descended from that one original kind? If so, doesn't this mean you're advocating some kind of accelerated evolution?
RAZD:
In other words, they are members of a clade that descended from a common ancestor population,
Yes. If you visit Creation | Creation Ministries International you will find that is what YEC's say. If you are surprised at that then you don't really understand our position.
We accept speciation within the kind. That we can get hybrids between species and even between genera supports this view.
The initial radiation from the Ark into different environments would have encouraged rapid speciation within the kinds. Each new species would have reduced genetic diversity compared to the original population so speciation would slow down. Also today most ecological niches are filled, reducing opportunity for speciation.
However even today speciation can be quite rapid in the right circumstances. "The rapid appearance today, of new varieties of fish, lizards, and more defies evolutionary expectations but fits perfectly with the Bible." Speedy species surprise - creation.com

Replies to this message:
 Message 725 by Coyote, posted 05-06-2017 11:27 PM CRR has not replied
 Message 726 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-07-2017 12:36 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 727 by bluegenes, posted 05-07-2017 3:12 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 756 by CRR, posted 05-07-2017 7:14 PM CRR has replied
 Message 763 by Faith, posted 05-08-2017 3:17 AM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 756 of 1352 (807989)
05-07-2017 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 724 by CRR
05-06-2017 10:32 PM


Re: Speedy Species Surprise
RAZD asks:
Is the Okapi also a member of the Giraffidae clade, and is it descended from the same common ancestor population?
What about the Samotherium?
Okapi. Yes. However like all scientific questions this may have to be revised if contradictory information comes to light.
Samotherium? I don't know.
Edited by CRR, : added reply about Samotherium?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 724 by CRR, posted 05-06-2017 10:32 PM CRR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 760 by RAZD, posted 05-08-2017 12:30 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 764 by CRR, posted 05-08-2017 3:28 AM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 757 of 1352 (807995)
05-07-2017 10:09 PM
Reply to: Message 753 by Faith
05-07-2017 5:37 PM


Re: Fossilised forests
The famous petrified forest in Yellowstone Park has up to 27 layers and a total vertical height of ~1000m.
The Mt St Helen's catastrophe gives some insight into how petrified forests could have formed during Noah's Flood.
See this article which the following extract is from. The Yellowstone petrified forests - creation.com
"An earthquake, Richter magnitude 5.1, caused a landslide that dumped half a cubic kilometer (one-eighth of a cubic mile) of debris into the nearby Spirit Lake. This caused waves up to 260 meters (860 feet) high, which gathered a million logs into the lake, forming a floating log mat (see photo on p. 21 of the magazine). Most of them lacked branches, bark and an extensive root system.
Since roots are designed to absorb water, the remains of the roots on the floating logs soaked up water from the lake. This caused the root end to sink, and the log tipped up to float in an upright position (see photo on p. 21 of the magazine). When a log soaked up even more water, it sank and landed on the lake bottom. Debris from the floating log mat and a continuing influx of sediment from the land (in the aftermath of the catastrophe) buried the logs, still in an upright position. Trees that sank later would be buried higher up, that is on a higher level, although they grew at the same time. This was confirmed by sonar and scuba research by a team led by Drs Steve Austin and Harold Coffin.8,9 By 1985, there were about 15,000 upright logs on the bottom."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 753 by Faith, posted 05-07-2017 5:37 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 758 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-07-2017 10:25 PM CRR has not replied
 Message 759 by edge, posted 05-07-2017 10:40 PM CRR has not replied
 Message 761 by Faith, posted 05-08-2017 2:20 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 762 by CRR, posted 05-08-2017 3:00 AM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 762 of 1352 (808014)
05-08-2017 3:00 AM
Reply to: Message 757 by CRR
05-07-2017 10:09 PM


Re: Fossilised forests
Edge, Doc,
The linked article discusses whether the petrified forest at Yellowstone was repeatedly buried by volcanic ash. I'll leave it at that.
Edited by CRR, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 757 by CRR, posted 05-07-2017 10:09 PM CRR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 800 by edge, posted 05-08-2017 6:02 PM CRR has not replied
 Message 807 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-08-2017 9:51 PM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 764 of 1352 (808021)
05-08-2017 3:28 AM
Reply to: Message 756 by CRR
05-07-2017 7:14 PM


Re: Giraffes
The Samotherium is an extinct short necked giraffe. Honanotherium, Helladotherium, and Sivatherium are extinct long necked giraffes. There's an article here about them.
There could have been up to seven pairs of giraffes on the ark because they are clean animals. However the variation in the giraffe family is no greater than in the cat family which I have previously mentioned. The dogs also have greater variability than the giraffes and they are supposed to have all derived from wolves.
It's reasonable to conclude that after the flood there was a period of rapid speciation but that not all of those species have survived to the present day. It's also likely that some kinds have completely perished. Wasteful? No, it's just allowing adaptation to the changing post flood conditions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 756 by CRR, posted 05-07-2017 7:14 PM CRR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 765 by vimesey, posted 05-08-2017 4:13 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 779 by RAZD, posted 05-08-2017 12:59 PM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 799 of 1352 (808164)
05-08-2017 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 766 by Tangle
05-08-2017 6:53 AM


And you have to explain why everything that left the ark didn't just die with a couple of weeks. The land was dead having been under water for a year.
Noah was on the Ark for a year but that wasn't the time that all the earth was covered. It took 40 days for the water to rise high enough to float the ark and it grounded some time before they exited. Noah sent out a dove which returned with a twig with leaves showing that vegetation was growing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 766 by Tangle, posted 05-08-2017 6:53 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 801 by Tangle, posted 05-08-2017 6:09 PM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 802 of 1352 (808169)
05-08-2017 6:41 PM


The TRUE history of the flood
We will never know the true history of the flood!
As is common with historical sciences the evidence is fragmentary and can be interpreted in different ways leading to different conclusions. This becomes more so as we look at finer details. So two Young Earth Creationists can agree that there was a global flood without agreeing on all the details.
This also applies to the period after the flood. How rapidly did the continents separate? What land bridges existed? What was the history of the post flood ice age? How did the animals disperse? Why are there no penguins in the Arctic? The written history in Genesis is only a few chapters and focuses on the people within small geographic areas. Any technical or scientific details are only incidental to the main story.

Replies to this message:
 Message 803 by herebedragons, posted 05-08-2017 6:59 PM CRR has not replied
 Message 804 by Coyote, posted 05-08-2017 7:08 PM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 863 of 1352 (808482)
05-11-2017 7:06 AM
Reply to: Message 473 by Dr Adequate
04-24-2017 2:29 AM


Re: Six "Flood" Arguments Creationists Can't Answer
Six "Flood" Arguments Creationists Can't Answer | NCSE:
quote:
5. Fossil Sequence
At all costs, creationists avoid discussing how fossils came to be stratified as they are. Out of the thousands of pages that Henry Morris has written on creationism, only a dozen or so are devoted to this critical subject, and he achieves that page count only by recycling three simple apologetics in several books. The mechanisms he offers might be called victim habitat, victim mobility, and hydraulic sorting. In practice, the victim habitat and mobility apologetics are generally combined. Creationists argue that the Flood would first engulf marine animals, then slow lowland creatures such as reptiles, while wily and speedy humans escaped to the hilltops. To a creationist, this adequately explains the order in which fossils occur in the geologic column. A scientist might test the mobility hypothesis by examining how well it explains the fact that flowering plants don't occur in the fossil record until early in the Cretaceous era.
A scenario with magnolias (a primitive plant) heading for the hills, only to be overwhelmed along with early mammals, is unconvincing. And when marine fossils are found in many places above those of land animals and plants, the victim habitat apologetic loses all credibility, too.
If explanations based on victim habitat and mobility are absurd, the hydraulic sorting apologetic is flatly contradicted by the fossil record. An object's hydrodynamic drag is directly proportional to its cross-sectional area and its drag coefficient. Therefore, when objects with the same density and the same drag coefficient move through a fluid, they are sorted according to size. (Mining engineers utilize this phenomena in some ore separation processes.) This means that all small trilobites should be found higher in the fossil record than large ones. Since this is not what we find, the hydraulic sorting argument is immediately falsified. Indeed, one wonders how Henry Morris could ever have offered it, given his background as a hydraulic engineer.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
The fossil sequence is indeed an interesting question. Have out of sequence fossils ever been found? Or, has evolution made predictions about the fossil record that have been confirmed or otherwise by subsequent discoveries?
Fossils have turned up in the wrong place many times and this continues today. This leads to the range of fossils often being extended. Vertebrates have been confirmed in the early Cambrian. Pollen fossils have been found in Precambrian strata although it was claimed that flowering plants don't occur in the fossil record until early in the Cretaceous era. Grass was not supposed to have evolved until millions of years after the end of the dinosaurs but traces of grass have been found in fossilized dinosaur coprolites (dung). Ducks, squirrels, platypus, beaver-like and badger-like creatures have all been found in ‘dinosaur-era’ rock layers along with bees, cockroaches, frogs and pine trees. Picture T. Rex stomping along with a duck flying overhead. Perhaps that Precambrian rabbit will soon appear.
Similarly there are many living fossils, animals and plants that were thought to have gone extinct millions of years ago. Coelacanth, Wollemi Pine, a rodent called Laonastes aenigmamus , and a sponge called Nucha vancouverensis are examples.
There are several mechanisms that separately and together could provide a Creationist explanation for the sequence in the fossil record.
● Ecological zonation
● Differential escape
● Hydrodynamic sorting
● Biogeographic provincialism
The Flood was a big event covering different phases and and effecting different habitats and landforms at different times. It is unlikely that one mechanism would explain all the fossilisation that has occurred. Tas Walker has proposed that the flood could be 5 phases. Most fossils would have been produced during the inundatory phases.
● Inundatory, Eruptive
● Inundatory, Ascending
● Inundatory,Zenethic
● Recessive, Abative
● Recessive Dispersive
Why don't we find mammals underneath Trilobite bearing layers? Because Trilobites lived on the bottom of the ocean and very few mammals lived underneath them. The Trilobites were probably buried early in the flood where they lived so mammal fossils had no opportunity to form underneath them. I saw a show on TV some time ago which said many Trilobite fossils were in contorted positions consistent with being buried alive.
We can also ask how well the fossil record supports the [neo-]Darwinian evolutionary model. Darwin said that according to his theory there should be many finely graded intermediate types but admitted that these did not appear in the fossil record. Darwin hoped that future discoveries would fill in the gaps. Over 100 years later Gould admitted the lack of transitional forms was the trade secret of paleontology, and he and Eldridge came up with Punctuated Equilibrium to explain this. This theory has not been a success. Transitional fossils are still missing.
Edited by Admin, : Put excerpt from NCSE inside a quote box, make into a link.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 473 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-24-2017 2:29 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 864 by Coyote, posted 05-11-2017 9:45 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 867 by Taq, posted 05-11-2017 10:40 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 868 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-11-2017 11:15 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 869 by edge, posted 05-11-2017 11:33 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 870 by PaulK, posted 05-11-2017 11:37 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 900 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-16-2017 3:35 PM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 887 of 1352 (809065)
05-16-2017 6:14 AM
Reply to: Message 876 by JonF
05-11-2017 12:51 PM


Re: Six "Flood" Arguments Creationists Can't Answer
Here is a response to Chadwick's PRECAMBRIAN POLLEN IN THE GRAND CANYON A REEXAMINATION. Fossil pollen in Grand Canyon overturns plant evolution - creation.com.
Conclusion
The weight of evidence favours the conclusion that fossil pollen is contained in ‘Precambrian’ shale. This is contrary to expectations based on the accepted geological column.
More Precambrian Pollen
Fossils of spores and pollen have been found in the Precambrian Roraima formation, as reported in a 1966 article in the prestigious journal Nature. That means they are at least 1,300 million, or 1.3 billion years ‘out of date’. Pollen paradox - creation.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 876 by JonF, posted 05-11-2017 12:51 PM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 888 by Tangle, posted 05-16-2017 7:11 AM CRR has replied
 Message 891 by edge, posted 05-16-2017 9:59 AM CRR has replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 889 of 1352 (809075)
05-16-2017 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 888 by Tangle
05-16-2017 7:11 AM


Re: Six "Flood" Arguments Creationists Can't Answer
Tangle: Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien, Je suis l'esprit ferm.
Pardon if my french is not perfect but I'm sure you get my drift.
Edited by CRR, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 888 by Tangle, posted 05-16-2017 7:11 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 890 by Tangle, posted 05-16-2017 8:53 AM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 901 of 1352 (809206)
05-17-2017 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 891 by edge
05-16-2017 9:59 AM


Re: Six "Flood" Arguments Creationists Can't Answer
The first thing I noticed about this occurrence is that nothing has been published since the 1960's
Except for;
Bernard, S. et al., Exceptional preservation of fossil plant spores in high-pressure metamorphic rocks, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 262(1—2):257—272, 2007

This message is a reply to:
 Message 891 by edge, posted 05-16-2017 9:59 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 902 by vimesey, posted 05-17-2017 3:02 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 903 by JonF, posted 05-17-2017 2:03 PM CRR has not replied
 Message 904 by edge, posted 05-17-2017 4:14 PM CRR has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2243 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 942 of 1352 (810609)
05-31-2017 6:58 AM
Reply to: Message 936 by Tangle
05-30-2017 5:19 AM


Evaporites
However, interlayered with these fossil-bearing sedimentary rocks on all continents are layers of evaporite rock salt ...
In "A magmatic model for the origin of large salt formations, 2009, Stef Heerema discusses major problems with the evaporation theory for large salt deposits and suggests that a more feasible model regards salt deposits as the product of igneous halite magma.
He concludes
The huge salt deposits found around the globe are not the result of the evaporation of seawater over long periods of time. Rather, the deposits were emplaced as a molten magma at temperatures above 800C. The evaporite model requires much more time than is available for the biblical timescale. However, the idea that the deposits were formed by the evaporation of hundreds of kilometers of depth of seawater is totally inadequate to explain the thickness, volume, structure and purity of salt deposits. On the other hand, the model that has the deposits resulting from the generation of large volumes of molten salt ‘magma’ explains the evidence. Furthermore, with the magmatic model the large salt formations are emplaced rapidly by igneous processes, a mechanism that is consistent with the biblical timescale and a young earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 936 by Tangle, posted 05-30-2017 5:19 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 943 by RAZD, posted 05-31-2017 7:12 AM CRR has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024