Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 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:   Fossil sorting for simple
Steve
Inactive Member


Message 226 of 308 (117311)
06-21-2004 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by NosyNed
06-21-2004 8:56 PM


Re: Details
no, what I need is a bibliography showing me these supposed evidences against the flood. Than I can break them down for you.
You talk about diggin deeper, but you don't want to give me the information.
by the way, don't worry if you've been going at this for months, people have been rebelling against God since the very first man...Adam!!!
This message has been edited by steve, 06-21-2004 08:05 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by NosyNed, posted 06-21-2004 8:56 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by NosyNed, posted 06-21-2004 9:13 PM Steve has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 227 of 308 (117314)
06-21-2004 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by Steve
06-21-2004 9:04 PM


bibliography
So what particular facts do you need the details on?
Is it the ordering of the various fossil forms? Which ones don't you like?
For example, do you think flowering plants go all the way back to the Cambrian?
Do you think that there have always been mammals around? Just which bits are a problem for you?
It isn't a matter of one or ten papers. It is 10,000's of them.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 06-21-2004 08:14 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Steve, posted 06-21-2004 9:04 PM Steve has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by simple, posted 06-24-2004 5:01 AM NosyNed has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 228 of 308 (117413)
06-22-2004 3:52 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by Steve
06-21-2004 8:43 PM


Re: Actual Examples of Sorting?
The dates already given were the dates of publication (for instance de Maillet's _Telliamed_ was published in 1748). Every one of the people mentioned was a significant figure.
Let's start with Cuvier since he was one of the first to recognise the order of the fossil record.
His record includes:
Major contributions to systematics (the "vertebrate" classification is his work).
Major contributions to geology (his study of the Paris basin)
Major contributions to paleontology. Not only the work from the Paris basin study but also his work in reconstructing fossil animals from skeletal remains ("His collected papers (1812) became the foundation of modern vertebrate paleontology" _Evolution: The History of an Idea_ Revised Edition, Bowler 1989).
His most relevant publication is _Discours sur les revolutions de ls surface du globe_ first edition 1812, second edition 1825. Lyell published the first volume of his _Principles of Geology_ in 1830 and Darwin published _On the Origin of Species_ in 1859.
For Cuvier's evidence I suggest that you consult his own published works.
Since Cuvier was among the first to recognise the order of the fossil record it cannot be said that earlier works attempted to explain it. Since Cuvier did not believe in evolution and Lyell and Darwin had yet to publish it cannot be said that a devotion to any of the above caused Cuvier to misrepresent the data. And Cuvier recognised that a single global castrophe could not account for the fossil record.
Let me also add that I am not required to write lengthy essays to refute your claims. What I have already written goes well beyond the requirements of this forum. You are required to back up your assertions. All I needed to do was ask you to quote the relevant sections and - if and when you did - request you to support the assertions. So perhaps you can give full details for the author of the material you linked to. What is HIS evidence ? What are HIS qualifications ? If your demands for evidence are honest requests then you should be prepared to provide equivalent evidence for your side - the more so since the onus is on you to support your claims - not for me to refute them.
And no I dont think that 500 flood stories are due to pure chance - that is nearly as absurd than the idea of a global flood having occurred in the last few thousand years. We have lots of flood stories because large floods are relatively common disasters. Stories grow in the telling and myths tend to exaggerate even more. So there is an underlying regularity that makes flood stories common, even though there was no global flood in all of human history or prehistory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by Steve, posted 06-21-2004 8:43 PM Steve has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by Steve, posted 06-22-2004 11:01 AM PaulK has replied

Steve
Inactive Member


Message 229 of 308 (117479)
06-22-2004 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by PaulK
06-22-2004 3:52 AM


Re: Actual Examples of Sorting?
Ah, yes, that's what I'm talking about. Thank you.
You all are schooling me now. By the way, did you really read all these publications or do you just know about them?
And saying that the ordering of the fossil record cannot be attributed to a world wide flood, does not mean that the world wide flood did not occur.
So now I know what you're looking for. Good.
Now, first things first, it is not possible from this moment on to say that the flood did or did not occur based on all available physical evidence. The purpose now is to look at what is there not from one perspective or he other, but to look at what is there and decide what it is telling us.
You got your rules, I got mine. Now that's what a true scientist does!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by PaulK, posted 06-22-2004 3:52 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by Steve, posted 06-22-2004 11:03 AM Steve has not replied
 Message 232 by PaulK, posted 06-22-2004 11:09 AM Steve has not replied
 Message 234 by NosyNed, posted 06-22-2004 11:34 AM Steve has not replied

Steve
Inactive Member


Message 230 of 308 (117480)
06-22-2004 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 229 by Steve
06-22-2004 11:01 AM


Re: Actual Examples of Sorting?
Where does it say that Cuvier did not believe in evolution?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by Steve, posted 06-22-2004 11:01 AM Steve has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by PaulK, posted 06-22-2004 11:10 AM Steve has not replied

contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 231 of 308 (117483)
06-22-2004 11:07 AM


quote:
And saying that the ordering of the fossil record cannot be attributed to a world wide flood, does not mean that the world wide flood did not occur.
Correct. This does not mean a global flood did not occurr; it merely STRONGLY IMPLIES a global flood did not occur. To claim a global flood, you would have to demonstrate both the flood mechanism, and the bone deposition mechanism; the problem is harder.
quote:
The purpose now is to look at what is there not from one perspective or he other, but to look at what is there and decide what it is telling us.
Correct. And there is nothing reliable tellling us there was a global flood.

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 232 of 308 (117484)
06-22-2004 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 229 by Steve
06-22-2004 11:01 AM


Re: Actual Examples of Sorting?
Actually I did find and read Cuvier's work (in translation) while composing my reply. I also have a copy of Bowler which was my main source (a secondary source, to be true, but a respected one).
So we have established :
1) There is an order in the fossil record, and contrary to your source's claim it is not based on the assumption of evolution. As a consequence of that we have demonstrated that the ICR FAQ is an unreliable source (since any serious investigation would have noticed the error).
2) The alleged flood cannot account for the order in the fossil record.
So now we need to know what explanation you can offer for the order. That is the subject of this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by Steve, posted 06-22-2004 11:01 AM Steve has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 233 of 308 (117485)
06-22-2004 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by Steve
06-22-2004 11:03 AM


Re: Actual Examples of Sorting?
See Bowler's discussion of Cuvier referneced in post 288 above.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Steve, posted 06-22-2004 11:03 AM Steve has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 234 of 308 (117494)
06-22-2004 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 229 by Steve
06-22-2004 11:01 AM


Who's Idea was it anyway
And saying that the ordering of the fossil record cannot be attributed to a world wide flood, does not mean that the world wide flood did not occur.
But the major (and a lot of minor) young earth creationists organizations and publications claim that the global flood did produce the fossil record. They go so far as to claim that it is evidence of the flood. That it could not be is one of the nails in the flood coffin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by Steve, posted 06-22-2004 11:01 AM Steve has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by PaulK, posted 06-22-2004 6:58 PM NosyNed has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 235 of 308 (117629)
06-22-2004 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by NosyNed
06-22-2004 11:34 AM


Re: Who's Idea was it anyway
Yes, there are serious problems trying to explain the fossil record from a YEC perspective.
They can't appeal to ordinary geological processes depositing much in a mere 10,000 years, and even if they could the order in the fossil record is still a problem. The Flood is "less bad" but still has such serious problems that it was rejected in favour of an older Earth and multiple catastrophes even before Lyell.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by NosyNed, posted 06-22-2004 11:34 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by NosyNed, posted 06-23-2004 9:56 PM PaulK has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 236 of 308 (118062)
06-23-2004 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by PaulK
06-22-2004 6:58 PM


bump for steve
I take it, steve, that you too have given up on this?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by PaulK, posted 06-22-2004 6:58 PM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by Steve, posted 06-24-2004 12:59 AM NosyNed has replied

Steve
Inactive Member


Message 237 of 308 (118118)
06-24-2004 12:59 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by NosyNed
06-23-2004 9:56 PM


Re: bump for steve
The Flood
The worldwide flood presents a problem for those viewing a world spanning billions of years. A worldwide cataclysmic deluge as described in Gen 6-9 would have destroyed all the evidence of the geologic ages and so it as well as the Creation account must be explained away or altered so that the theory of long age for the earth and evolution can remain intact. Of course, on the other hand, the Biblical Flood of Noah can also explain all the sedimentary layers, canyons, gullies, fossils, continent movement, climatic changes, etc.
Nearly every anti-Christian system or movement (communism, racism, humanism, etc.) would be deprived of their pseudo-intellectual foundation if they accepted a worldwide flood as described in scripture.
Many scholars explain away a global flood by claiming it was local. The only other type of flood would have been something that gently rose and then fell — not much chance of that happening.
What does Scripture teach about the flood?
1. Height & Duration of Flood — Gen 7:19-20 The flood covered the tops of the highest mountains. Gen 8:5 This lasted 10 months. (If the mountains were the same height as now (uniformitarianism), the local flood at Mt Ararat would have been 17,000 feet high — this would be a flood 3 miles high that didn’t spread out too far.
2. The Need for an Ark — Gen 7:3 If the flood was local an ark would not have been necessary to preserve living things. The ark carried the equivalent of 522 railroad stock cars based on the dimensions in Gen 6:15 (that was twice the size needed to accommodate 2 of every species of known land animal). What sense was there for Noah to build an ark for many years if there was only going to be a local flood.
3. Destruction of the Earth — Gen 6:13 God said He was going to destroy the earth — local flood wouldn’t accomplish that. Gen 7:11 describes the fountains of the deep burst forth, floodgates of heaven were opened (may have been no rain before the flood — Gen 2:15); Job 12:15 if He lets the waters loose they devastate the land; after the flood God provided a rainbow Gen 9:13
4. God’s unbroken promise — In Gen 9:11, God promises not to send a flood like this again — if it were only local, then He would have broken His promise many times (those who teach a local flood, have God breaking His promise many times)
5. Testimony of Christ and the Apostles — 2 Peter 2:5, 3:6, Heb 11:7 and Luke 17:27 show that the apostles and Christ taught that the flood had to have killed all of mankind except Noah’s family. People would certainly have been distributed around the earth by the time of the flood (modern geology and archaeology believe they would have been distributed by that time) so if one were to accept a local flood then they would need to reject Jesus’, Peter’s, and the author of Hebrews testimonies about the flood.
6. Characteristic of the Flood — In the New Testament, the term for the flood is kataklusmos or a cataclysm. The Bible describes it as torrents of water from the sky, reservoirs from the deep erupting, universal destruction of land animals, mankind, etc. This would include violent tidal action, great winds, rising mountains, sinking basins, and many other geological disruptions, etc.
7. Timing of the events detailed — 600th year of Noah’s life, 2nd month, 17th day. Around 2000 BC, almost 4000 years ago. Rain lasted 40 days. After 150 days water had receded, 7th month, 17th day the ark rested somewhere on the mountains of Ararat. On the 10th month, 1st day the tops of the mountains were visible. 40 more days raven and dove then 7 more days and the dove and another 7 and the dove brings back olive leaf. 601st year, 1st month, 1st day, water had dried up, earth completely dry by 2nd month, 27th day, then he disembarks. (How much more factual an eyewitness account can be recorded in terms of event and timeframe?)
8. Preparation for the Flood — God gave Noah specific size, wood type, etc. and time to make the ark.
9. Message of the Flood — God is patient and loves mankind and gave them a long time to see, hear and repent while Noah built the ark -- but will punish sin. Sin not only offends but grieves or pains God’s heart. The righteous will be blessed and preserved while the wicked will receive punishment. Now is the time to get right with God because when the rain began to fall, it was too late. God made a promise after the flood — He has kept His promise and sends a reminder every so often — a rainbow. He has given mankind a spiritual ark of safety — the opportunity thru Jesus Christ to experience the greatest gift of all — eternal life.
Interesting points, questions, issues
1. Ark — means box, similar term used for small box put in Nile with Moses.
2. Gopher Wood — scholars not certain but could refer to lamination since he was instructed to use pitch within and without.
3. Pitch — modern pitch is from coal tar, however before the discovery of that source of pitch, pine tree resin and charcoal were used to make pitch for 1000 yrs in Europe. Coal tar probably only became available after the flood.
4. Cubit — elbow to tip of middle finger ~ 18. Ark ~ 437’6:L x 72’11W x 43’9H
5. Building Tools — People of Noah’s day had at least the same intellect (perhaps greater) and could have made needed tools such as the use of running waterwheel and sawmill. Elephants, oxen and block and tackle could move heavy objects (maybe even a dinosaur).
6. Fitting the animals — There are far fewer kinds than species and variations and young or baby animals of those that get very large were probably put on the ark. There was plenty of room. (200 species of dogs today could have come from 2 dogs).
7. Types of animals — Clean: 7 of each kind taken, unclean: 2 of each kind taken, 7 of each bird kind.
8. Source of water — fountains of the deep and floodgates of heaven. It is interesting to note that 75% of what spews out of volcanoes is water (steam).
9. Evidence for the Flood — millions of fossils around the world, layers of silt/rock can be seen, fossil fuels (oil, gas, coal, tar sands, etc.)
10. Where are the remains of the ark? — Two locations in the Mtns of Ararat are believed by scholars — one high up on Ararat where snow, ice and weather make it extremely difficult to study — it had a few eye witnesses and a piece of wood taken from it. Another where the outline of the ship is seen and much is petrified — in this location, studies have found laminated wood, metal fasteners, and what possibly could be titanium slag used as ballast. Both locations are in Turkey and the govt. is not too cooperative and the area is dangerous for foreigners to do research so exploration is limited.
As you watch current media you will see a strong bias for local flooding. You will also see a bias that states that all fossils and fossil fuels were laid down over millions of years. Like the big bang theory having no explanation for going from black hole to expanding homogenous universe, there is no plausible explanation for finding fossils and fossil fuels around the globe, the same or similar to modern organisms, so deep in the earth, on the tops of mountains, etc. Since fossils don’t form if animals decay on the surface of the earth, almost all had to be formed by catastrophic burial. We don’t see many being formed today. If they had been forming over millions of years the chance that living things would have survived is rare since each time fossils were formed it required a major catastrophic action (remember that some fossil fuels are 5000’ deep).
It is far easier to believe Noah’s eye witness account, quoted and believed by Jesus Christ and many of the writers of other books of the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by NosyNed, posted 06-23-2004 9:56 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by NosyNed, posted 06-24-2004 1:44 AM Steve has not replied
 Message 239 by PaulK, posted 06-24-2004 3:51 AM Steve has replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 238 of 308 (118139)
06-24-2004 1:44 AM
Reply to: Message 237 by Steve
06-24-2004 12:59 AM


What a lot ...
Lots of words, steve. Just where did you touch on the topic of this thread?
You seem to be having the same problem as others of your views here. You have no answer for this question.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by Steve, posted 06-24-2004 12:59 AM Steve has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by coffee_addict, posted 06-24-2004 4:45 AM NosyNed has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 239 of 308 (118161)
06-24-2004 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 237 by Steve
06-24-2004 12:59 AM


Re: bump for steve
The worldwide flood presents a problem for those viewing a world spanning billions of years. A worldwide cataclysmic deluge as described in Gen 6-9 would have destroyed all the evidence of the geologic ages and so it as well as the Creation account must be explained away or altered so that the theory of long age for the earth and evolution can remain intact. Of course, on the other hand, the Biblical Flood of Noah can also explain all the sedimentary layers, canyons, gullies, fossils, continent movement, climatic changes, etc
This paragraph is false in almost every respect. The alleged flood only poses problems to those who believe in it. Even if it would have destroyed the geological evidence of the billions of years prior to it (something Genesis neither says nor implies) the fact is that that geological evidence exists today - it was NOT destroyed by a flood. The Flood was rejected by geologists because it failed to explain the evidence which clearly pointed to long periods of time - indeed this thread is dedicated to one of those pieces of evidecne where the "flood explanation" is clearly lacking. You would do better to address this point rather than ignoring it in favour of making baseless assertions.
The ark has not been found. Your references are to Ron Wyatt's claims - claims which even creationists reject. Are you going to tell me that John Baumgardner or John Morris are lying because they refuse to accept the truth of the Flood ?
Here's what the ICR - your favoured source - say
Acts and Facts Magazine | The Institute for Creation Research
FAQs | The Institute for Creation Research
John Morris of the ICR states
quote:
My conclusion, and the conclusion of almost every other team, was that it is an unusual geologic phenomenon, but not Noah's Ark.
As to the last paragraph
It is far easier to believe Noah’s eye witness account, quoted and believed by Jesus Christ and many of the writers of other books of the Bible.
There is no such account. Genesis nowhere claims to represent an eye-witness account. Even conservative Christians and Jews who oppose Biblical schlarship on the issue attribute the writing of Genesis to Moses. Biblical scholars generally attribute the Genesis account to the combination of two versions of a myth common in the area, another version of which may be found in the older Epic of Gilgamesh.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by Steve, posted 06-24-2004 12:59 AM Steve has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Steve, posted 06-24-2004 1:25 PM PaulK has replied

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 240 of 308 (118179)
06-24-2004 4:45 AM
Reply to: Message 238 by NosyNed
06-24-2004 1:44 AM


Re: What a lot ...
I am very very glad I decided to stay out of this thread from the beginning. My head would have exploded by page 9 just because of simple's systematic dodging of every technical question directed at him. The same pattern is emerging for steve.

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by NosyNed, posted 06-24-2004 1:44 AM NosyNed 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