Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
9 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,469 Year: 3,726/9,624 Month: 597/974 Week: 210/276 Day: 50/34 Hour: 1/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The cream of flood geology research
CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 1 of 49 (355123)
10-08-2006 5:31 AM


Over in the faith thread, Buzzsaw said:
quote:
Contrary to your claim that there is no creation science, regardless of what you personally think of flood geology, bonafide practicing geologists who research flood geology arriving at alternative interpretations of what is observed are doing science.
This is a very simple and straight forward forum, I'd like Buzzsaw to put forward the strongest research project of this nature he is aware of and then the rest of us can use it for discussion.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by CK, posted 10-08-2006 9:19 AM CK has replied
 Message 14 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 10-09-2006 4:45 PM CK has not replied
 Message 22 by Buzsaw, posted 10-09-2006 10:25 PM CK has not replied

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 49 (355152)
10-08-2006 8:22 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 3 of 49 (355169)
10-08-2006 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by CK
10-08-2006 5:31 AM


Note for people wishing to get involved.
The next post should be from a creationist (does not have to be Buzzsaw but let's give him an opportunity to provide an example) who wishes to put forward a SPECIFIC piece of research that they wish to have examined.
That's a SPECIFIC piece of research not a general statement about apologotics or flood geology - a SPECIFIC piece of research.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CK, posted 10-08-2006 5:31 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by CK, posted 10-09-2006 8:02 AM CK has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4149 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 4 of 49 (355345)
10-09-2006 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by CK
10-08-2006 9:19 AM


Re: Note for people wishing to get involved.
Hello? Hello? is this thing on?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by CK, posted 10-08-2006 9:19 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Nighttrain, posted 10-09-2006 8:35 AM CK has not replied
 Message 6 by RickJB, posted 10-09-2006 9:16 AM CK has not replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4015 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 5 of 49 (355353)
10-09-2006 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by CK
10-09-2006 8:02 AM


Re: Note for people wishing to get involved.
Zipping my mouth till the other side turns up, Chas.:-p

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by CK, posted 10-09-2006 8:02 AM CK has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5012 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 6 of 49 (355358)
10-09-2006 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by CK
10-09-2006 8:02 AM


Re: Note for people wishing to get involved.
The deafening sound of silence......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by CK, posted 10-09-2006 8:02 AM CK has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 7 of 49 (355362)
10-09-2006 10:16 AM


forgive the sarcasm, please. I couldn't resist.
Hey, look at that tumbleweed going by...
*long pause*
Isn't the sound of chirping crickets so very peaceful?

  
AdminModulous
Administrator
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 8 of 49 (355364)
10-09-2006 10:32 AM


enough
It is tempting to post as others have done, rule number 10 does ask that we 'Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.' It is easy to see how some of the comments above could come under this.
Also - most of the posts so far have been on the topic of there not being any creationist posters in the thread. This is not a ratio of off-topicness that we'd like to encourage.
Thanks all, as usual any discussion of this posting can be taken over to the appropriate thread listed in my sig.
Edited by AdminModulous, : No reason given.

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Observations about Evolution and This could be interesting....

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by RickJB, posted 10-09-2006 10:41 AM AdminModulous has not replied
 Message 10 by nator, posted 10-09-2006 1:09 PM AdminModulous has not replied
 Message 11 by Archer Opteryx, posted 10-09-2006 1:38 PM AdminModulous has replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5012 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 9 of 49 (355365)
10-09-2006 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by AdminModulous
10-09-2006 10:32 AM


Re: enough
Fair enough.
Guilty as charged, m'lud.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by AdminModulous, posted 10-09-2006 10:32 AM AdminModulous has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 10 of 49 (355391)
10-09-2006 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by AdminModulous
10-09-2006 10:32 AM


Re: enough
me too.
I have a bad character today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by AdminModulous, posted 10-09-2006 10:32 AM AdminModulous has not replied

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3619 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 11 of 49 (355396)
10-09-2006 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by AdminModulous
10-09-2006 10:32 AM


waiting room
Dang. This is quiet thread.
How about a little music while we're waiting? This one's for Schraf.
_
Edited by Archer Opterix, : HTML.

Archer
All species are transitional.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by AdminModulous, posted 10-09-2006 10:32 AM AdminModulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by AdminModulous, posted 10-09-2006 8:45 PM Archer Opteryx has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 12 of 49 (355414)
10-09-2006 2:57 PM


Not quite what the OP is looking for, but this seems closely enough related: a report on what a creationist has to say regarding the state of creationist sciences. From Robert Schadewald's report of the 1998 International Conference on Creationism and Dr. Kurt Wise's closing presentation (1998 International Conference):
Saturday evening, Wise gave the closing presentation for the conference, and among other things, he reviewed the state of the creation model in various fields. Astronomy? No creation model exists. Biology? Same. Paleontology (his own field)? Same. He thinks a couple of other fields, such as the development of a Flood model, are making slow progress.
Despite this seemingly gloomy summary, Wise sent people away fired up. His message was that creationists have an enormous amount of work to do, and it is time for them to get cracking. He appealed to everyone present to pitch in and do whatever they could. One prominent creationist told me later that he thought the Wise windup was the best presentation of the conference.
It is hard to overstate the influence of Kurt Wise in shaping modern creationism as it is practiced at its higher levels. I first met Kurt at NCC85 in Cleveland ... . He immediately impressed me with his candor in dealing with the evidence, but it didn't really sink home until the following year, when I heard him give a presentation at ICC86 entitled "How Geologists Date Things." The talk was absolutely straight Geology 101, except for a few debunking asides. ("You know how creationists often claim that geologists use circular reasoning, that the rocks date the fossils, and fossils date the rocks? Well, that's wrong." And he explained why.) That was 12 years ago. Since then, Kurt has labored tirelessly, in public and private, by example and persuasion, to convince his creationist colleagues to face the facts and find new ways to interpret them.
...
One result of the higher level of ICC presentations seems to be a higher-level audience. The deep-denial school of creation science the "absolutely no evidence for evolution," dust-on-the-moon, salt-in-the-sea, evolution-is-Nazism, geomagnetico-thermoapologetic ICR parrots were mostly silent, though not entirely absent.
...
On one point [Schadewald and creationists at the ICC] found complete agreement: precious little of the ICC-style creationism has filtered down to the grassroots level. Duane Gish, Gary Parker, Kent Hovind, Walter Brown, Donald Chittick, and others still spout the same old stuff in seminars and debates, and it is endlessly regurgitated at Sunday schools, Bible clubs, and on the Internet. The new-generation creationists are painfully aware that most of the popular creationist literature is dreck. Although they cannot (and should not) prevent anyone from publishing anything, a move is afoot to establish some sort of clearinghouse that will award a seal of Clean Creation Science (or whatever) to books that meet the new standards.
This at least shows that there are honest creationists out there who do realize that if they are going to try to make a scientific case, then they do have to do the science and to do it honestly.
Though I don't know where that effort has gotten yet. Last I heard a about five years back, Dr. Wise was getting rather cozy with the ICR, so I'm just not sure whether he has compromised his honesty in the meantime. Working to his advantage (in maintaining his honesty) is that he based his dedication to YEC firmly and explicitly on his belief in the Bible and acknowledged that the evidence certainly does overwhelmingly indicates evolution and an old earth; IOW, he does not seek to support his faith by living in denial of the evidence.
Edited by dwise1, : cleaned up conclusion
Edited by Admin, : Shorten URL.

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by RickJB, posted 10-09-2006 4:19 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5012 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 13 of 49 (355425)
10-09-2006 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by dwise1
10-09-2006 2:57 PM


I really don't know how Wise squares everything up in his head, but he is indeed very honest about his faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by dwise1, posted 10-09-2006 2:57 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
AnswersInGenitals
Member (Idle past 173 days)
Posts: 673
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 14 of 49 (355429)
10-09-2006 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by CK
10-08-2006 5:31 AM


This thread turned me into a YEC!
To help out our creationist friends, I went to the library and checked through several geology textbooks to see if they referenced any of the types of papers you are seeking in their discussions of alternative theories. I didn't find any such references, but I got interested in the early introductory chapters of these texts where they lay the physics foundations for the later development. To my surprise and horror, I found that every one of these texts based all their subsequent development on Newtonian mechanics and Newtonian gravitation theory. Can you believe it? NEWTONIAN mechanics and NEWTONIAN gravitational theory! These theories, and yes they were never more than just theories, have been proven to be WRONG, WRONG, WRONG for almost 100 years!!! They make predictions that are CONTRARY to the OBSERVED FACTS. The are NOT EVIDENCE based! And certainly no one would try to argue that a valid understanding of mechanics and gravitation are not at the very heart of geology. I sought in vain for a single book or paper on so called scientific geology that started from the valid and fully evidence supported Einsteinian mechanics and general relativity. So I would like CK 'to put forward the strongest research project of this nature he is aware of and then the rest of us can use it for discussion' (i. e., an earth geology paper reporting original work that starts from a general relativistic foundation and makes no reference to the discredited Newtonian basis). IMHO, old earth geologist (old here referring to the age of the earth, not the geologists) have a lot to answer for in their attempts to foist this antiquated and disproved so called science on America's impressionable youth. This sure raises the Haeckels hackles on the back of my neck! I don't know what a valid science of geology based on a correct physical foundation would look like, but I suspect you can make the earth look as young or as old as you like by merely changing your velocity with respect it.
Edited by AnswersInGenitals, : Edited because the vooices told me to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CK, posted 10-08-2006 5:31 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Straggler, posted 10-09-2006 7:10 PM AnswersInGenitals has not replied
 Message 19 by Taz, posted 10-09-2006 8:03 PM AnswersInGenitals has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 15 of 49 (355445)
10-09-2006 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by AnswersInGenitals
10-09-2006 4:45 PM


Re: This thread turned me into a YEC!
Absolutely! In fact as I understand it the faster the Earth moves through space the slower time progresses so the billions of years that scientists claim the Earths age to be are absolutely compatible (but still wrong obviously) with the biblical fact that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old!! It all depends on how fast you think you are going. Space time curvature explains why the Earth used to be flat but is now round and the cosmic microwave background is just Hawking radiation from the Gods first utterance!
Eureka.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 10-09-2006 4:45 PM AnswersInGenitals has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024