Glenn Morton's Evidence Examined

As has been posted here over and over, science in general and scientific theories in particular explain things. That is what science does!In this case, science explains the fossil order by means of a theory that has withstood many challenges, accounts for all of the relevant data, and is not contradicted by any relevant data.YEC "science" and flood geology have not withstood challenges (except in the minds of true believers), cannot account for all of the relevant data, and have to simply ignore contrary data.

Having an explanation is of no value whatever if it's the wrong explanation.

Which you have not shown to be the case.Besides, this explanation works.If you come up with something better we will go to the business who use the geological explanation and make a fortune.

Exactly; that is why Young Earth is worthless and useless and has been thrown away by all scientists for hundreds of years. It's a wrong explanation, false, irrelevant.So as asked back in Message 384:"So you accept relative dating, is that correct?"

So you and others keep saying, but so far not a shred of evidence that it works to find oil.

I think he changed his mind after posting, so edited it to a meaningless string.

You should talk to the oil companies then. I'm sure they'd agree with you.

kbertsche said otherwise. You didn't answer him either. Just passing the question off to the oil companies is avoiding the question. Why can't you answer it?

Evidence and argument, please, not name-calling and trying to pick fights.

Where did you say anything about the use of relative ages here? Faith's claim is that you can use relative ages in place of absolute ages and get the same results that other geologist use.

Of course that is true.Science relies on data, evidence, logic, and the scientific method as well as constant attempts to disprove hypotheses and theories. For example, every new fossil that is found is a test of a number of theories.Creation "science" relies on scripture and dogma, rather than data, evidence, and logic, and abhors the scientific method--thus it is the exact opposite of real science.Those who rely on creation "science" often see real science as having the wrong explanation, but that is because they rely on belief instead of evidence. That has been explained to us here on several occasions.Perhaps the solution is for each side to be more explicit what underlies their claims. Science can say "our evidence and theories show this...," while creationists can say, "scripture leads me to believe this... ."As a friend noted,

Preachers are always complaining that "scientists are playing God," but all too often, their confusion is the result of preachers playing scientist.

​

--The Sensuous Curmudgeon

He said it HERE

Coyote, I know you believe this, in fact you believe it so relentlessly one can't insert a contrary thought between your statements of it. But you are not right. Yes the FOUNDATION of YEC attempts to explain the physical world IS the scripture, but you miss the main arguments YECs make, that make NO use whatever of scripture but argue completely from the physical facts as they present themselves. I argue for the Flood because scripture tells me there was a Flood and when it was and all that, but HOW I argue for the Flood is based completely on the physical facts I find presented by geology and presented at EvC. I make my case entirely from those facts, I do not use scripture as part of my argument AT ALL.ABE: Of course if I didn't find physical evidence that validates the Flood I couldn't and wouldn't argue it. What you don't get is that I am sincerely convinced of the Flood BY THE PHYSICAL FACTS. (Not that every hypothesis I come up with about how it all played out is set in concrete, but the overall arguments I'm making are solidly based on my reading of the physical facts and not on scripture.) /abeMOST of my arguments haven't even touched on scripture at all, and yet you continue to claim that all I ever do is argue from scripture.No, I am not arguing that the OE explanation is wrong based on my belief in scripture. Not on this thread anyway. I really am not.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Unfortunately that's not the case.YECs attempt to explain the physical world in terms of scripture, but the facts don't support that explanation. That leads to enormous stretches of interpretation, misinterpretation of facts, ignoring facts that run contrary to belief, in some cases making up facts, quote mining, and other problems.

No it IS the case. While you were writing your post I added this to mine so I'll copy it here: You made a lot of accusations in that post. Please support even one of them from anything I've argued. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.