Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

You're relying on nonsense furthered by creationist.

CH210: Age of the Earth

Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition

Relying on creationist quacks such as Henry Morris for earth science will only result in your further embarrassment.

Why do you continue to quote me ?

Some of my views are based in faith but I can admit to it. Some is based on actual evidence. Your problem is you are unwilling to admit the faith needed to believe many of the things you believe. Believe as you wish but until you can provide actual evidence supporting all your views you are no different from the believer in the creator.

I think it’s important to counter creationist lies with fact. For example, you state “…you are unwilling to admit the faith needed to believe many of the things you believe”. That is an obvious falsehood as there is no “faith” required to understand natural forces. In order to believe biblical tales and fables, you are forced to accept outrageously silly tales of supernatural events that are utterly contrary to our understanding of the natural world. Without such “belief” in supermagical events, biblical tales and fables devolve into tales designed to promote fear and superstition.

The acceptance of various tales and fables is merely a matter of choosing to accept the stories (tales and fables) without regard to authenticity or accuracy. It's remarkable that you and others will bicker about - and even defend - the relative strength of such hearsay claims yet you will dismiss facts describing the natural world accepted without such critique.

As for evidences, evidence for gawd(s) is non-existent. It has been part of human culture to invent supernatural agents to explain that which could not already be explained. Whenever there is a gap in our knowledge, it was tempting for cultures and societies to simply throw up their hands in defeat and say 'Gawdidit' (or more frequently 'Thegawdsdidit'). Kings, rulers, pharaohs and "scholars" etc made use of this idea, by claiming for themselves a special ability to receive messages or to translate the true meaning from a divine supernatural ruler, even though the best evidence for their existence was simply the fact that there were some things we didn't understand. Societies grew, codified rituals, passed on these ideas from parent to child with severe warnings for not believing - such as eternal burning and torment and unrealistic 'carrots' for believing e.g an eternity of sensual gratification and so giant structures and substructures grew which evolved (yes, evolved) into the religions we see today.

Monotheism is currently in vogue for many religions. Multi-gawd religions have been replaced by a one-stop-shopping god of convenience.

Such deistic minimalism is wrong, of course, and it will eventually go out of fashion. Whatever replaces it will be wrong as well.

You can always depend on religion that way. Rocks of Ages are subject to plate tectonics.

Fact ? you use this term loosely.

 

[ima]

No, I believe that there were at least baby dinosaurs on the Ark and they made it through the Flood. They just didn't do so well around St. George.

And if a Meteor hit the ocean, well, let's say "Sandy" would have seemed like a sun shower... Injured is not dead. And God didn't design the flimsey glass windows. You're nuts because everything happens for a reason.

Dinosaurs are found in layers of sediment that are far older than 4 or 5000 years. How long ago was the Noah thing supposed to have happened? Anyways, some baby dinosaurs were massive and couldn't fit on his boat. Plus they'd eat all the other animals in 40 days.
I have another question: if the world was covered in water, where did all the water go after 40 days?

They (dinosaurs) are found in sediment that is dated older using uniformitarian logic. God created a fully complete universe and earth with a finished ecological system. The Flood buried these large creatures under mud etc. If I bury a body in what appears to be very ancient sediment, the body doesn't become millions of years old simply because its been there only 5000. God chose the animals to be on the ark. I'm sure He picked tame ones and dinosaur eggs are not that large. We have no idea how fast or even how big dinosaurs could grow. It is very possible that some dinosaurs scientists say were different kinds, actually were one in the same only very old. I have no idea what a 1000 year old dinosaur might look like. And you cannot say that dinosaurs couldn't have lived to be very old...

Geez, it's like I'm arguing with a guy who's on magic mushrooms or something.

So you're saying that there exists ancient sediment that is millions of years old? So the earth is older than 6 or 7000 years?
There is no mention of Noah bringing huge eggs or dinosaurs on the ark, you just made that up. And anyways, if Noah did get 2 of EVERY dinosaur, where are they all now? Not ONE survived? So why would god save them from the flood and then let them all die? What's the point?
You can't say that dinosaurs couldn't have flown down from Jupiter in big pink limos either. Doesn't mean it happened like that.
So I still never got an answer to: where did all the water go after the flood? It had to recede to somewhere, no?

 

[Youwerecreated]

By what mechanism(s) can uniformitarian logic be used to date sedimentary layers?

Uniformitarianism: Charles Lyell


Discrete rock layers containing different fossils reinforced the idea that the Earth's history could be divided into ages marked by catastrophic change. However, gradual change, like that caused by erosion, has also played an important role in the Earth's history.
Thanks to the pioneering work of researchers such as William Smith, geologists in the early 1800s were able to swiftly organize rock formations into a single colossal record of Earth's history. Many geologists saw in this record a stormy epic, one in which our planet had been convulsed repeatedly by abrupt changes. Mountains were built in catastrophic instants, and in the process whole groups of animals became extinct and were replaced by new species. Giant tropical plants, for example, left their fossils in northern Europe during the Carboniferous Period, never to be seen there again. Earth's history might not fit a strict Biblical narrative any longer, but these revolutions seemed to be a sign that it did have a direction. From its formation, catastrophes altered the planet’s surface step by step leading towards the present Earth. Life, likewise, had its own arrow through time.

Uniformitarianism: Charles Lyell

This is evidence that could support the creationist view no ? sounds like global flood if you ask me.

The biblical tale of a global flood has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, your "quotes", being from creationist sites are typically unreliable.

Uniformitarianism (World of Earth Science) Study Guide & Homework Help - eNotes.com

Ok You have my curiosity,please explain how the global flood has been debunked ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

again you're wrong totally wrong .
the yarn about the ark and dinosaurs is pure fantasy.
as to things happening for a reason... shit happens and we make up reason for why...and most of those are wrong .
yours is specious at best.

What do you think science is ? You make crap up and hope it's not proven wrong,then when it is proven wrong you move the goalposts and present another explanation until it's proven wrong. This way they can use the claim it's both fact and theory.

Yeah, that Renaissance thing was such a shame.


"There will never be world peace until Gods house and Gods people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world."

-Pat Robertson


Uh, sorry Pat. Your christian pals already tried that.

The Christian church managed to keep Europe in the Dark Ages and literally set back humanity by 800 years.

You quote self professed Christians that do not represent all Christians got it ? hmm funny Christians broke free of oppressive leaders to only build a country set up on Christian principles but you deny this fact. It was not the Christian principles that was the problem it was the oppressive leaders of england that were the problem. God has not endorsed any religion they are creations of man but God did endorse Christian priciples and the Christian philosophy.

 

[LittleNipper]

Dinosaurs are found in layers of sediment that are far older than 4 or 5000 years. How long ago was the Noah thing supposed to have happened? Anyways, some baby dinosaurs were massive and couldn't fit on his boat. Plus they'd eat all the other animals in 40 days.
I have another question: if the world was covered in water, where did all the water go after 40 days?

They (dinosaurs) are found in sediment that is dated older using uniformitarian logic. God created a fully complete universe and earth with a finished ecological system. The Flood buried these large creatures under mud etc. If I bury a body in what appears to be very ancient sediment, the body doesn't become millions of years old simply because its been there only 5000. God chose the animals to be on the ark. I'm sure He picked tame ones and dinosaur eggs are not that large. We have no idea how fast or even how big dinosaurs could grow. It is very possible that some dinosaurs scientists say were different kinds, actually were one in the same only very old. I have no idea what a 1000 year old dinosaur might look like. And you cannot say that dinosaurs couldn't have lived to be very old...

Geez, it's like I'm arguing with a guy who's on magic mushrooms or something.

So you're saying that there exists ancient sediment that is millions of years old? So the earth is older than 6 or 7000 years?
There is no mention of Noah bringing huge eggs or dinosaurs on the ark, you just made that up. And anyways, if Noah did get 2 of EVERY dinosaur, where are they all now? Not ONE survived? So why would god save them from the flood and then let them all die? What's the point?
You can't say that dinosaurs couldn't have flown down from Jupiter in big pink limos either. Doesn't mean it happened like that.
So I still never got an answer to: where did all the water go after the flood? It had to recede to somewhere, no?

What I am saying is that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards, they have come to conclusions void of a Creator's handle. Creation scientific logic is that baby dinosaurs were not that large. And scientists presently have no way of knowing how fast dinosaurs even grew. I accept the Biblical revelation from God and have no reason to accept otherwise. Scientists really do not know and I for one am not going to accept their conclusions hook-line-and-sinker.

 

[LittleNipper]

Uniformitarianism: Charles Lyell


Discrete rock layers containing different fossils reinforced the idea that the Earth's history could be divided into ages marked by catastrophic change. However, gradual change, like that caused by erosion, has also played an important role in the Earth's history.
Thanks to the pioneering work of researchers such as William Smith, geologists in the early 1800s were able to swiftly organize rock formations into a single colossal record of Earth's history. Many geologists saw in this record a stormy epic, one in which our planet had been convulsed repeatedly by abrupt changes. Mountains were built in catastrophic instants, and in the process whole groups of animals became extinct and were replaced by new species. Giant tropical plants, for example, left their fossils in northern Europe during the Carboniferous Period, never to be seen there again. Earth's history might not fit a strict Biblical narrative any longer, but these revolutions seemed to be a sign that it did have a direction. From its formation, catastrophes altered the planet’s surface step by step leading towards the present Earth. Life, likewise, had its own arrow through time.

Uniformitarianism: Charles Lyell

This is evidence that could support the creationist view no ? sounds like global flood if you ask me.

The biblical tale of a global flood has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, your "quotes", being from creationist sites are typically unreliable.

Uniformitarianism (World of Earth Science) Study Guide & Homework Help - eNotes.com

Ok You have my curiosity,please explain how the global flood has been debunked ?

I imagine it is assumed it has been dedunked because a slight majority of the Supreme Court once said there is a separation between STATE and God? And they are perfect and all knowingly without error.

 

[ima]

They (dinosaurs) are found in sediment that is dated older using uniformitarian logic. God created a fully complete universe and earth with a finished ecological system. The Flood buried these large creatures under mud etc. If I bury a body in what appears to be very ancient sediment, the body doesn't become millions of years old simply because its been there only 5000. God chose the animals to be on the ark. I'm sure He picked tame ones and dinosaur eggs are not that large. We have no idea how fast or even how big dinosaurs could grow. It is very possible that some dinosaurs scientists say were different kinds, actually were one in the same only very old. I have no idea what a 1000 year old dinosaur might look like. And you cannot say that dinosaurs couldn't have lived to be very old...

Geez, it's like I'm arguing with a guy who's on magic mushrooms or something.

So you're saying that there exists ancient sediment that is millions of years old? So the earth is older than 6 or 7000 years?
There is no mention of Noah bringing huge eggs or dinosaurs on the ark, you just made that up. And anyways, if Noah did get 2 of EVERY dinosaur, where are they all now? Not ONE survived? So why would god save them from the flood and then let them all die? What's the point?
You can't say that dinosaurs couldn't have flown down from Jupiter in big pink limos either. Doesn't mean it happened like that.
So I still never got an answer to: where did all the water go after the flood? It had to recede to somewhere, no?

What I am saying is that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards, they have come to conclusions void of a Creator's handle. Creation scientific logic is that baby dinosaurs were not that large. And scientists presently have no way of knowing how fast dinosaurs even grew. I accept the Biblical revelation from God and have no reason to accept otherwise. Scientists really do not know and I for one am not going to accept their conclusions hook-line-and-sinker.

Scientists are merely discovering what a creator created. That that disproves the biblical stories just shows that back then, they didn't know very much scientifically and got some things wrong. So what? Isn't your creator's creation more important as it actually is, rather then how people thought it was 1500 years ago?

SO WHERE DID ALL THE FUCKING WATER GO AFTER THE FLOOD? Does no one here even know?

 

[Hollie]

Why do you continue to quote me ?

Some of my views are based in faith but I can admit to it. Some is based on actual evidence. Your problem is you are unwilling to admit the faith needed to believe many of the things you believe. Believe as you wish but until you can provide actual evidence supporting all your views you are no different from the believer in the creator.

I think it’s important to counter creationist lies with fact. For example, you state “…you are unwilling to admit the faith needed to believe many of the things you believe”. That is an obvious falsehood as there is no “faith” required to understand natural forces. In order to believe biblical tales and fables, you are forced to accept outrageously silly tales of supernatural events that are utterly contrary to our understanding of the natural world. Without such “belief” in supermagical events, biblical tales and fables devolve into tales designed to promote fear and superstition.

The acceptance of various tales and fables is merely a matter of choosing to accept the stories (tales and fables) without regard to authenticity or accuracy. It's remarkable that you and others will bicker about - and even defend - the relative strength of such hearsay claims yet you will dismiss facts describing the natural world accepted without such critique.

As for evidences, evidence for gawd(s) is non-existent. It has been part of human culture to invent supernatural agents to explain that which could not already be explained. Whenever there is a gap in our knowledge, it was tempting for cultures and societies to simply throw up their hands in defeat and say 'Gawdidit' (or more frequently 'Thegawdsdidit'). Kings, rulers, pharaohs and "scholars" etc made use of this idea, by claiming for themselves a special ability to receive messages or to translate the true meaning from a divine supernatural ruler, even though the best evidence for their existence was simply the fact that there were some things we didn't understand. Societies grew, codified rituals, passed on these ideas from parent to child with severe warnings for not believing - such as eternal burning and torment and unrealistic 'carrots' for believing e.g an eternity of sensual gratification and so giant structures and substructures grew which evolved (yes, evolved) into the religions we see today.

Monotheism is currently in vogue for many religions. Multi-gawd religions have been replaced by a one-stop-shopping god of convenience.

Such deistic minimalism is wrong, of course, and it will eventually go out of fashion. Whatever replaces it will be wrong as well.

You can always depend on religion that way. Rocks of Ages are subject to plate tectonics.

Fact ? you use this term loosely.

I use the term when it's appropriate.

It's just a fact that science has been proven to be reliable for the attainment of knowledge where religious dogma has been a yolk around the neck of humanity. It's not religious dogma promoting fear and superstition that has cured disease, advanced technology and allowed us to explore the solar system, it has been science.

We can use the process of science to perceive existence, and our reason to interpret or categorize it. If you disagree that reason is the keystone of our perception of existence, then please announce what it is you think is the keystone, and cite support for that claim. I would point out to you that to engage in such an exercise immediately requires you to use your powers of reason, and as such would negate your assertion by the very attempt.

While there certainly are things unknown about the Universe, this does not mean they are intrinsically unknowable. In fact, it is irrational beliefs in things such as the supernatural that would make the Universe incomprehensible, which is why I feel that intransigent religious belief systems do Man a great disservice as the promotion of religious fear and superstition negatively affects humanity.

It has been science that has peeled back the layers of superstition that previously assigned to the gods such tasks as making thunder and lighting, floods and earthquakes. Speaking of shaky foundations, assigning such actions to the will of the gawds has been the definition of shaky foundations.

 

[Hollie]

The biblical tale of a global flood has been thoroughly debunked.

Secondly, your "quotes", being from creationist sites are typically unreliable.

Uniformitarianism (World of Earth Science) Study Guide & Homework Help - eNotes.com

Ok You have my curiosity,please explain how the global flood has been debunked ?

I imagine it is assumed it has been dedunked because a slight majority of the Supreme Court once said there is a separation between STATE and God? And they are perfect and all knowingly without error.

That makes no sense. I can understand your frustration in that your religious dogma is not taken seriously, but your comment is just silly.

The biblical flood tale has been debunked because the religious claims to miracles; psychopathic gawds wiping out humanity, is simply not supported by the rational science.

The biblical flood story is nothing more than a re-telling of earlier flood myths. Like much of the various bibles, the tales and fables are often the re-telling of stories, tales and fables passed down from generation to generation while the origins of the tales and fables have long ago been forgotten and the later re-telling has resulted in embellished and manufactured legend building.

 

[jack113]

What do you think science is ? You make crap up and hope it's not proven wrong,then when it is proven wrong you move the goalposts and present another explanation until it's proven wrong. This way they can use the claim it's both fact and theory.

Oh please, uniformitarians have been making things up for years. They need to prove life is the end result of a natural process --- no matter want. When I was in the fifth grade, we were taught that the moon pulled out of what is now the Pacific Ocean. I told the teacher that the theory was bunk and that God made the moon. The teacher said that this was a scientific theory with lots of scientific research behind it. The scientists then knew that the moon is moving away from the earth at a measurable rate and if the earth is a old as they believe, that is proof that the moon pulled out of the earth. Today, scientists no longer believe this ---- they were proven wrong when they got to the moon. Yet my belief is firm.
And I do believe that the movement of the moon is valid proof of a young earth, but of course this involves a Creator. So we are at a stale mate. However, science has nothing to do with it. The fact of a CREATOR does not eliminate science. And the fact that we have science does not disprove the existance God. But one needs to accept that if GOD created the universe, there is no rational logic to insisting that it took billions of years. If God made Adam, there is no reason to presuppose that Adam was nursed from an infant and not created a fully grown and mature man. So, I am of the firm belief (since I know God exists) that God created everything in 6 days (as He revealed in His Word) more like an artist than a demolition expert. And I accept His word because Jesus is the Word made flesh --- the only son emanating directly from the Father.

Maybe you misunderstood my point and maybe I chose a poor way to make my point. Now that I read what I posted I am kinda slapping the science community and it was the wrong road to take. Many good things have come from real science and their research. The problem I have is the numbers that are being fed a line of bull with some of the theories that are being taught to our children and because these teachers are in a position to be respected and trusted they are indoctrinating our children with theories they call science and by looking at the evidence it can easily be seen that it is not real science. The scientific method takes a back seat when it comes to the theory of naturalism.

I love science and that is why it was my major and I worked in the field for several years. It just became to difficult trying to work along side of the agenda driven. I can verify that a majority of the scientific labs have been highjacked by Idelogical,agenda driven, atheistic evolutionists. They are not a pleasant crowd they seem down right angry and a very bitter crowd. you can see what I am saying on display in this thread.

Dinosaurs are fantasy? lol of course some kook went around the world planting the bones just to throw you off lol.

 

[Hollie]

What do you think science is ? You make crap up and hope it's not proven wrong,then when it is proven wrong you move the goalposts and present another explanation until it's proven wrong. This way they can use the claim it's both fact and theory.

Yeah, that Renaissance thing was such a shame.


"There will never be world peace until Gods house and Gods people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world."

-Pat Robertson


Uh, sorry Pat. Your christian pals already tried that.

The Christian church managed to keep Europe in the Dark Ages and literally set back humanity by 800 years.

You quote self professed Christians that do not represent all Christians got it ? hmm funny Christians broke free of oppressive leaders to only build a country set up on Christian principles but you deny this fact. It was not the Christian principles that was the problem it was the oppressive leaders of england that were the problem. God has not endorsed any religion they are creations of man but God did endorse Christian priciples and the Christian philosophy.

Your self-professed claim to speak on behalf of the gawds and what your gawds what / don't want for christianity is laughable.

It is only the credulous tendency of self-professed “interpreters of the will of the gawds” to claim that they, and they alone, speak to what the gawds “really” want and “really” mean.

As we have seen, that is fundamentally a futile effort given the ambiguous and non-scientific nature of the actual texts. But more to the point, why would anyone feel the need to "scientifically prove" the foundational documents of any religion in the first place? Is the truth or falsehood of the various bibles resting upon what they say about the science?

Further, the truth or falsity of christianity does not depend on what any of the bibles say about a flat earth or a geocentricity. It depends on whether the bibles and the ideology that was manufactured from earlier supernatural / creation myths can pass the much tougher tests of reason and evidence.

 

[Hollie]

They (dinosaurs) are found in sediment that is dated older using uniformitarian logic. God created a fully complete universe and earth with a finished ecological system. The Flood buried these large creatures under mud etc. If I bury a body in what appears to be very ancient sediment, the body doesn't become millions of years old simply because its been there only 5000. God chose the animals to be on the ark. I'm sure He picked tame ones and dinosaur eggs are not that large. We have no idea how fast or even how big dinosaurs could grow. It is very possible that some dinosaurs scientists say were different kinds, actually were one in the same only very old. I have no idea what a 1000 year old dinosaur might look like. And you cannot say that dinosaurs couldn't have lived to be very old...

Geez, it's like I'm arguing with a guy who's on magic mushrooms or something.

So you're saying that there exists ancient sediment that is millions of years old? So the earth is older than 6 or 7000 years?
There is no mention of Noah bringing huge eggs or dinosaurs on the ark, you just made that up. And anyways, if Noah did get 2 of EVERY dinosaur, where are they all now? Not ONE survived? So why would god save them from the flood and then let them all die? What's the point?
You can't say that dinosaurs couldn't have flown down from Jupiter in big pink limos either. Doesn't mean it happened like that.
So I still never got an answer to: where did all the water go after the flood? It had to recede to somewhere, no?

What I am saying is that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards, they have come to conclusions void of a Creator's handle. Creation scientific logic is that baby dinosaurs were not that large. And scientists presently have no way of knowing how fast dinosaurs even grew. I accept the Biblical revelation from God and have no reason to accept otherwise. Scientists really do not know and I for one am not going to accept their conclusions hook-line-and-sinker.

You can certainly say "...that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards...", but of course you would be incorrect to say that.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Oh please, uniformitarians have been making things up for years. They need to prove life is the end result of a natural process --- no matter want. When I was in the fifth grade, we were taught that the moon pulled out of what is now the Pacific Ocean. I told the teacher that the theory was bunk and that God made the moon. The teacher said that this was a scientific theory with lots of scientific research behind it. The scientists then knew that the moon is moving away from the earth at a measurable rate and if the earth is a old as they believe, that is proof that the moon pulled out of the earth. Today, scientists no longer believe this ---- they were proven wrong when they got to the moon. Yet my belief is firm.
And I do believe that the movement of the moon is valid proof of a young earth, but of course this involves a Creator. So we are at a stale mate. However, science has nothing to do with it. The fact of a CREATOR does not eliminate science. And the fact that we have science does not disprove the existance God. But one needs to accept that if GOD created the universe, there is no rational logic to insisting that it took billions of years. If God made Adam, there is no reason to presuppose that Adam was nursed from an infant and not created a fully grown and mature man. So, I am of the firm belief (since I know God exists) that God created everything in 6 days (as He revealed in His Word) more like an artist than a demolition expert. And I accept His word because Jesus is the Word made flesh --- the only son emanating directly from the Father.

Maybe you misunderstood my point and maybe I chose a poor way to make my point. Now that I read what I posted I am kinda slapping the science community and it was the wrong road to take. Many good things have come from real science and their research. The problem I have is the numbers that are being fed a line of bull with some of the theories that are being taught to our children and because these teachers are in a position to be respected and trusted they are indoctrinating our children with theories they call science and by looking at the evidence it can easily be seen that it is not real science. The scientific method takes a back seat when it comes to the theory of naturalism.

I love science and that is why it was my major and I worked in the field for several years. It just became to difficult trying to work along side of the agenda driven. I can verify that a majority of the scientific labs have been highjacked by Idelogical,agenda driven, atheistic evolutionists. They are not a pleasant crowd they seem down right angry and a very bitter crowd. you can see what I am saying on display in this thread.

Dinosaurs are fantasy? lol of course some kook went around the world planting the bones just to throw you off lol.

You must have a point with this post but I don't see it.

 

[LittleNipper]

Geez, it's like I'm arguing with a guy who's on magic mushrooms or something.

So you're saying that there exists ancient sediment that is millions of years old? So the earth is older than 6 or 7000 years?
There is no mention of Noah bringing huge eggs or dinosaurs on the ark, you just made that up. And anyways, if Noah did get 2 of EVERY dinosaur, where are they all now? Not ONE survived? So why would god save them from the flood and then let them all die? What's the point?
You can't say that dinosaurs couldn't have flown down from Jupiter in big pink limos either. Doesn't mean it happened like that.
So I still never got an answer to: where did all the water go after the flood? It had to recede to somewhere, no?

What I am saying is that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards, they have come to conclusions void of a Creator's handle. Creation scientific logic is that baby dinosaurs were not that large. And scientists presently have no way of knowing how fast dinosaurs even grew. I accept the Biblical revelation from God and have no reason to accept otherwise. Scientists really do not know and I for one am not going to accept their conclusions hook-line-and-sinker.

Scientists are merely discovering what a creator created. That that disproves the biblical stories just shows that back then, they didn't know very much scientifically and got some things wrong. So what? Isn't your creator's creation more important as it actually is, rather then how people thought it was 1500 years ago?

SO WHERE DID ALL THE ... WATER GO AFTER THE FLOOD? Does no one here even know?

Over two thirds of the earth is under water. We now live on the tops of plateaus. Some scientists are making assumptions founded on "naturalism" and devoid of the supernatural. What God revealed concerning the creation of space and material goes much further back than 1500 years. What is more important is the spiritual over the material.

 

[LittleNipper]

Geez, it's like I'm arguing with a guy who's on magic mushrooms or something.

So you're saying that there exists ancient sediment that is millions of years old? So the earth is older than 6 or 7000 years?
There is no mention of Noah bringing huge eggs or dinosaurs on the ark, you just made that up. And anyways, if Noah did get 2 of EVERY dinosaur, where are they all now? Not ONE survived? So why would god save them from the flood and then let them all die? What's the point?
You can't say that dinosaurs couldn't have flown down from Jupiter in big pink limos either. Doesn't mean it happened like that.
So I still never got an answer to: where did all the water go after the flood? It had to recede to somewhere, no?

What I am saying is that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards, they have come to conclusions void of a Creator's handle. Creation scientific logic is that baby dinosaurs were not that large. And scientists presently have no way of knowing how fast dinosaurs even grew. I accept the Biblical revelation from God and have no reason to accept otherwise. Scientists really do not know and I for one am not going to accept their conclusions hook-line-and-sinker.

You can certainly say "...that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards...", but of course you would be incorrect to say that.

The don't get it right when they examine the material either.

 

[LittleNipper]

Geez, it's like I'm arguing with a guy who's on magic mushrooms or something.

So you're saying that there exists ancient sediment that is millions of years old? So the earth is older than 6 or 7000 years?
There is no mention of Noah bringing huge eggs or dinosaurs on the ark, you just made that up. And anyways, if Noah did get 2 of EVERY dinosaur, where are they all now? Not ONE survived? So why would god save them from the flood and then let them all die? What's the point?
You can't say that dinosaurs couldn't have flown down from Jupiter in big pink limos either. Doesn't mean it happened like that.
So I still never got an answer to: where did all the water go after the flood? It had to recede to somewhere, no?

What I am saying is that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards, they have come to conclusions void of a Creator's handle. Creation scientific logic is that baby dinosaurs were not that large. And scientists presently have no way of knowing how fast dinosaurs even grew. I accept the Biblical revelation from God and have no reason to accept otherwise. Scientists really do not know and I for one am not going to accept their conclusions hook-line-and-sinker.

You can certainly say "...that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards...", but of course you would be incorrect to say that.

They don't get it right when they examine the material either. See the following: RADIOACTIVE AGE ESTIMATION METHODS - Do they prove the earth is billions of years old? ? ChristianAnswers.Net

 

[Hollie]

What I am saying is that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards, they have come to conclusions void of a Creator's handle. Creation scientific logic is that baby dinosaurs were not that large. And scientists presently have no way of knowing how fast dinosaurs even grew. I accept the Biblical revelation from God and have no reason to accept otherwise. Scientists really do not know and I for one am not going to accept their conclusions hook-line-and-sinker.

You can certainly say "...that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards...", but of course you would be incorrect to say that.

The don't get it right when they examine the material either.

What is it that they don't get right?

Additionally, aside from examining the material, how does anyone examine the immaterial or supernatural?

 

[ima]

What I am saying is that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards, they have come to conclusions void of a Creator's handle. Creation scientific logic is that baby dinosaurs were not that large. And scientists presently have no way of knowing how fast dinosaurs even grew. I accept the Biblical revelation from God and have no reason to accept otherwise. Scientists really do not know and I for one am not going to accept their conclusions hook-line-and-sinker.

You can certainly say "...that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards...", but of course you would be incorrect to say that.

The don't get it right when they examine the material either. See the following: RADIOACTIVE AGE ESTIMATION METHODS - Do they prove the earth is billions of years old? ? ChristianAnswers.Net

Try quoting real scientific studies, you'd look less foolish.

 

[LittleNipper]

You can certainly say "...that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards...", but of course you would be incorrect to say that.

The don't get it right when they examine the material either. See the following: RADIOACTIVE AGE ESTIMATION METHODS - Do they prove the earth is billions of years old? ? ChristianAnswers.Net

Try quoting real scientific studies, you'd look less foolish.

Try to comprehend that scientific investigation is not simply secular and you will look less of a bigot.

 

[LittleNipper]

You can certainly say "...that scientists estimated, that given what they see forming today and extrapolating such backwards...", but of course you would be incorrect to say that.

The don't get it right when they examine the material either.

What is it that they don't get right?

When specimens from a known dateable event are examined by labs that are not told this, the age of the specimens that are in fact only a hundred or so years old are dated to be millions. This should call into question the validity of all such "scientific" determinations.