Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (9011 total)
61 online now:
PaulK, Tangle, vimesey (3 members, 58 visitors)
Newest Member: Burrawang
Upcoming Birthdays: Coragyps
Post Volume: Total: 881,652 Year: 13,400/23,288 Month: 330/795 Week: 31/95 Day: 0/12 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Have any Biblical literalists been to the American Southwest?
nator
Member (Idle past 831 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 1 of 183 (240593)
09-05-2005 1:27 PM


Zhimbo and I have just returned from a fabulous 10 days in the American Southwest.

After 5 nights at a remote B&B at almost 6,000 feet in New Mexico (Zhimbo got in a lot of great astronomical observation) we spent 5 more nights driving to see some of the most incredible geological formations on the planet, including Canyon de Chelly, the Painted Desert and Petrified Forest, Monument Valley, and Grand Canyon.

For fun, I tried to figure out a way to reconcile what most Creationists tell me about what happened to form them and what I saw, but I just couldn't.

My question to the Biblical literalists is have any of you ever seen these places for yourselves and have you really tried to figure out how all of these features could have been produced in a few thousand years, and how the Flood figures in to what is seen?


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminJar, posted 09-05-2005 2:04 PM nator has responded
 Message 7 by jar, posted 09-05-2005 10:39 PM nator has not yet responded
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 09-07-2005 11:35 AM nator has responded
 Message 19 by cmanteuf, posted 09-07-2005 5:38 PM nator has not yet responded
 Message 29 by DorfMan, posted 09-08-2005 12:49 PM nator has not yet responded

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 183 (240603)
09-05-2005 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
09-05-2005 1:27 PM


Where oh where is this little thread gone?
I'd love to promote this thread but I'd like it to be where the literalists can reply. The problem is there's no good fit in any of the Faith forums. Would you agree to it being in Education and Creation/Evolution?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 09-05-2005 1:27 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by nator, posted 09-05-2005 7:23 PM AdminJar has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 831 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 3 of 183 (240683)
09-05-2005 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminJar
09-05-2005 2:04 PM


Re: Where oh where is this little thread gone?
Sure, that sounds fine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminJar, posted 09-05-2005 2:04 PM AdminJar has not yet responded

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 183 (240684)
09-05-2005 7:25 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1154 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 5 of 183 (240692)
09-05-2005 7:58 PM


American Southwest
I believe the American Southwest is a direct result of the worldwide flood.

Water covered the entire world, so everyplace in the world was subjected to the same treatment.

That's why all those "old" features you talk about are spread so widely across the world rather than being clustered in one small corner of one country.

I mean, come on, maybe... MAYBE... if the Monument Valley, the Grand Canyon and Arches National Monument were close together you'd have an argument that they represented some sort of regional erosion pattern.


Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by nator, posted 09-05-2005 8:09 PM Nuggin has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 831 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 6 of 183 (240696)
09-05-2005 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Nuggin
09-05-2005 7:58 PM


Re: American Southwest
LOL!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Nuggin, posted 09-05-2005 7:58 PM Nuggin has not yet responded

jar
Member
Posts: 32965
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 7 of 183 (240731)
09-05-2005 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
09-05-2005 1:27 PM


Love the Southwest.
It was like all my life I'd been wearing dirty glasses.

The beat goes on.

There are the Superstitions...

and Casa Grande...

and one of my favorites, the Mogollon Rim with over 35,000 years of pollen history alone.

Then there is El Capitan and Devil's Sinkhole and Enchanted Rock and Government Canyon and Grand Canyon Caverns and ...


Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 09-05-2005 1:27 PM nator has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 831 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 8 of 183 (241001)
09-07-2005 10:06 AM


Hello? Any Biblical Literalists out there?
bump

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by cavediver, posted 09-07-2005 11:24 AM nator has not yet responded

cavediver
Member (Idle past 2305 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 9 of 183 (241017)
09-07-2005 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by nator
09-07-2005 10:06 AM


Re: Hello? Any Biblical Literalists out there?
You should know that whenever you ask "difficult" questions, creationists melt away. How many YECs responded to my cave post? It's been there a few months now...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by nator, posted 09-07-2005 10:06 AM nator has not yet responded

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 106 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 10 of 183 (241021)
09-07-2005 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
09-05-2005 1:27 PM


I'm staying away from EvC as much as possible so I don't want to get into a lengthy discussion about this. No, I haven't been to the Southwest though I really want to see it, so you can disqualify my answer on that basis. It is, however, pictures of the formations of the Southwest that convince me the most of the Flood apart from the Bible. The stacked strata, so obviously rapidly formed by water, the fact that all the formations are shapes of stacked strata exposed by what looks like massive water erosion, and of course the incredibly copious fossil contents.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 09-05-2005 1:27 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Nuggin, posted 09-07-2005 11:43 AM Faith has responded
 Message 25 by nator, posted 09-08-2005 10:24 AM Faith has responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1154 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 11 of 183 (241025)
09-07-2005 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Faith
09-07-2005 11:35 AM


World wide
But, if the flood was worldwide, why are these formation ONLY in the southwest?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 09-07-2005 11:35 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 09-07-2005 12:07 PM Nuggin has responded

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 106 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 12 of 183 (241032)
09-07-2005 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Nuggin
09-07-2005 11:43 AM


Re: World wide
There's no reason the Flood would have left ONLY this kind of effect, it's just one large area where it looks obvious because the strata have been exposed in so many dramatic ways. But there *are* places in the rest of the world that show similar deep stratifications and the sculpting or exposure of them after they were formed, places in Africa for instance, IIRC. These are just places were the strata were exposed so they're visible to the naked eye, but deep drilling just about anywhere on earth encounters the same stratifications. You see stratifications in high mountains too. Seems obvious to me, though I know people here hate that expression, that deep stacks of strata were laid down BEFORE they were exposed --by erosion in the Southwest, or by the tectonic forces that pushed up the mountains, or by road cuts wherever, etc. Despite all the emphasis on how individual strata show erosion and other disruptive effects, nothing like the water erosion and tectonic upheavals that exposed the entire stack after its complete formation has been shown, which in itself is evidence for a rapid laying down of the strata.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Nuggin, posted 09-07-2005 11:43 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Nuggin, posted 09-07-2005 1:24 PM Faith has responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1154 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 13 of 183 (241055)
09-07-2005 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Faith
09-07-2005 12:07 PM


Re: World wide
So, if I'm reading you right, every example of stratified sedament is defacto proof that there was a world wide flood.

It doesn't matter what the layers consist of, where they are located, their depth, their fossils (or lack of fossils). Every layer, everywhere in the world, examples of the great flood.

Therefore no layer is older than 6000 years old. "Young" mountains like the Rockies or the Himalayas are just as old as "old" mountains like the Appelacians, despite the obvious differences in erosion.

I accept that your religion requires you to believe what you believe, but let's not use words like "evidence". After all, we don't use the existance of bread as "evidence" of Hansel and Grettle


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 09-07-2005 12:07 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 09-07-2005 1:30 PM Nuggin has responded

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 106 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 14 of 183 (241058)
09-07-2005 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Nuggin
09-07-2005 1:24 PM


Re: World wide
So, if I'm reading you right, every example of stratified sedament is defacto proof that there was a world wide flood.

I wouldn't put it that way, but yes I think the worldwide strata themselves are evidence for the Flood.

It doesn't matter what the layers consist of, where they are located, their depth, their fossils (or lack of fossils). Every layer, everywhere in the world, examples of the great flood.

Yes. I believe the actual facts are consistent with what water that saturated the earth would have done, and not consistent with the OE explanation.

Therefore no layer is older than 6000 years old. "Young" mountains like the Rockies or the Himalayas are just as old as "old" mountains like the Appelacians, despite the obvious differences in erosion.

The erosion has to do with their composition and the way they were formed, not their age.

I accept that your religion requires you to believe what you believe, but let's not use words like "evidence". After all, we don't use the existance of bread as "evidence" of Hansel and Grettle

I haven't mentioned my religion in these observations.

Thank you for the conversation. That's all for today.

This message has been edited by Faith, 09-07-2005 01:31 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Nuggin, posted 09-07-2005 1:24 PM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Nuggin, posted 09-07-2005 1:38 PM Faith has responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1154 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 15 of 183 (241060)
09-07-2005 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Faith
09-07-2005 1:30 PM


Re: World wide
I understand Faith is taking a break, so if some other Creationist would like to pick up the banner and run with it...

I believe the actual facts are consistent with what water that saturated the earth would have done, and not consistent with the OE explanation.

Is this "magic" water? Why does it behave differently than ordinary water?

The erosion has to do with their composition and the way they were formed, not their age.

So, erosion is not a process which takes place over time. Since age has nothing to do with it. Therefore, if one mountain range contained granite and the other mountain range also contained granite, and they were both laid down at the same time and exposed to the same forces (World wide flood), then we'd expect all mountain ranges which consist of the same materials to have the same amount of erosion.

If I'm drawing the wrong conclusion from your data, please let me know how.

I haven't mentioned my religion in these observations.

You're right. Unfair of me to assume that your religion had anything to do with your literal intreptation of the Bible's old testament.

You could just as easily be Hindu and cling to the YEC model. Though, I don't know why anyone would.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 09-07-2005 1:30 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 09-07-2005 1:48 PM Nuggin has responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020