|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
Source: ABC News
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
Why is he doing this?
That's what I was wondering. These sorts of debates never go well for evolution. Maybe this time will be different...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
And you continue to fail because you really don't know what you're talking about.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
Saying it over and over again won't make it true, Faith. We test the veracity of Geology every time we apply it to the exploration and DISCOVERY of natural resources.
We find the gold, copper, and oil. What do Creationists find?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
The real zinger was:
"Because science by definition is a "theory" -- not testable, observable, nor repeatable, why do you object to creationism or intelligent design being taught in school?" Oh my...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
The billions of fossils are too, because the Flood would have killed billions upon billions of living things, and provided the ideal conditions for their burial and fossilization. ABE: These simple observable facts are excellent evidence for the Flood for anyone who can see things clearly, without the brain cramp caused by theory bias.
Oh yes! All those "billions" of fossils in the rocks today would make for an excellent argument in favor of a global flood 4300 years ago... if those fossils actually represented organisms alive 4300 years ago. A very simple observation that can be made by anyone on the planet and requires zero interpretation is that there are no modern horses, camels, oxen, kangaroos, bears, cats, dogs, cattle, sheep, goats, chickens, humans, trees, grass, wheat, corn, tools, houses, carts, settlements, or ANYTHING from an iron age world present in the rocks. There are fossils that resemble today's animal and plant life, but these examples occur at the top of the rock record. In fact, they occur withing tens of feet of the surface of the earth, when, if there truly was a global flood, they would occur at the bottom. Settlements don't run up hill. On top of that, the deeper you go into the fossil record (i.e., move stratigraphically lower), the more bizarre the life forms. With the exception of a few organisms, they only resemble today's life forms in the most superficial ways.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
"Essentially" modern is not what I was going for. I expect exact replicas of life from 4300 years ago in the rock record. But I am interested in knowing which *modern* life forms from 4300 years ago exist in the rock record.
You are correct. I used the age of the Bible as the age of the Flood. The flood is alleged to have occurred in the Bronze Age.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
That was my point. Of all the "billions" of fossils in the fossil record, not one person has found anything, either a life form or man-made structure, from Noah's time buried by what appear to be catastrophic flood debris and sediments. Not one.
We know there are similarities in the fossil record, sharks, coelacanths, camels, mammoths, bears, and so on that lived prior to and coincident with modern humans, but they are always just a little bit different. It does not matter if it's hard for the lay person to see, the differences are there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
well, sure. if you have a pet dog, and it has a little of puppies, the puppies are going to be just a little different than their mother, and from each other. that's sort of how evolution works: heritable features vary from one generation to the next. as long as there is mutation and genetic drift, you will not get precise replicas even in asexual species, over durations this long. but then there are things like this species of triops well represented in jurassic (and even upper triassic). the same species. that's a pretty insignificant change even if you're not a lay person.
I understand that. But the experts can still tell the difference between species from 10,000 years ago and today. Besides, I'm specifically referring to animals and humans that lived 4300 years ago. Those will certainly stick out like a sore thumb at the base of all these thousands of feet of stratigraphic section since most Creos place the flood at the top of the Precambrian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
How about the angle that the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, which are mentioned in Genesis with respect to the location of the Garden of Eden, have apparently been spared being buried under tens of thousands of feet of flood stratigraphy?
How many other antediluvian locations, such as possibly Jerusalem, Jericho, the Nile, the Dead Sea, the Red Sea, and so on, are present today where they were prior to the flood? Why were they not buried?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
ABE: Weathering would leave chemical traces too, according to some creationists who have studied that contact, and they say it isn't present.
Only if the rocks exposed to weathering contain minerals that react with oxygen or water.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
I think that highlights the points you and others have made, which is certainly a valid point, that we can only speculate according to our historical model.
Correct. All we can do is speculate about the past. However, there is blind speculation and informed speculation. Faith and other Creationists practice blind speculation whereas geologists practice informed speculation. Creationists like to pretend they are one in the same, but they are not. Faith knows absolutely NOTHING about the rocks she is discussing. All she looks at are cartoon diagrams on the internet of one location on the planet, and takes it at face value, applying it to the entire planet. Why? Because she is smart enough to realize that by ignoring the details in the rocks, she can make whatever unsupported assertion she needs to make to defend her position. What Faith's geology looks like:
What real geology looks like:
You take any of the geologic formations in the Grand Canyon and construct detailed stratigraphic sections of them, and you will see the same types of details in the images above. There is NO way a flood of epic proportions could have created all these little textural and compositional differences that Creationists insist. None. It is impossible. But as long as Faith can present the rocks as massive, homogenous, gray or brown or pink horizons on a cartoon, she can say whatever fool thing she wants and the ignorant masses -- like you -- will think she is making good points. Use you god-given brain, man, and question everything.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
It's also amazing how entire reef system became detached and hydraulically sorted completely intact!
Permian Reefs and Carbonate Complexes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
So true!!! I work with a multitude of Creationists and they make excellent geologists.
"Hey, boss, I think we should drill here to look for more copper because... I don't really know why and I have no model to show you why I think we should drill there, but just put your faith in me! Your $10 million exploration budget is safe with me!!" Yeah... I don't think so. LOL Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given. Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1018 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
Souble dost! Doo manty Margaristas.
Edited by roxrkool, : Too many Margaritas!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024