Creationist FAIL - Young Earth Creationists, do explain this for me

"Creationists fail again: taken for granite"


"Geologists scoping out a glacier in Antarctica found a piece of granite there. Finding rocks on the ice isn’t that unusual; there are flows and currents in the ice that bring up rocks from below, and in fact that’s how meteorites are found so commonly on the frozen continent.

But this granite was unusual. Basically, its structure matched that of granite found in only one other place: North America. Not only that, radioactive dating tests using several methods all match the age of the same granites in North America. So how did that rock get to Antarctica?"

blogs.discovermagazine.com...

Also, one of the comments below this post explained that one of the problems with the Creationist "curveball" that is applied to such evidence - the "catastrophic plate tectonics" - is that such an event would release so much that most rock layers melt, and oceans up to 25km deep would vaporize. Supposedly Noah and his boat lived through 10^28 joules of global heat release. Durp da Durp?
www.asa3.org...

For fun: the link below is to a nifty animation that explores continental drift. Cheers to Alfred Weneger - German heretic who first "blasphemed" about possible continental drift.
www.ig.utexas.edu...

This video is a Neal Adams animation about his theory that the Earth is growing. This collides with the Pangea theory.

Google Video Link

you never know

Hmm. Well the Old Testament does state that in the days of Peleg the land was divided. Maybe something to check into. It's in Genesis. Not sure of chapter and paragraph. Hope that helps.

Not to be one of these people that judges someone solely on credentials and education, but I had to look into this guy you mentioned - Neal Adams. *ahem*
"Adams attended the High School of Industrial Art in Manhattan, and shortly after graduation began working in the advertising industry. Interested in comic books, he unsuccessfully submitted art samples to DC Comics, but did find uncredited freelance work drawing Bat Masterson and Archie Comics.[1] In 1962, Adams began his comics career in earnest at the NEA newspaper syndicated, working as an anonymous assistant on such comic strips as Peter Scratch, Rip Kirby, and The Heart of Juliet Jones before being given his own strip, Ben Casey, based on the medical drama TV series. This comic strip ran from 1962 through 1965."
Not exactly the background I expected from a person advocating some alternative groundbreaking theory of earth tectonics, or lack thereof.

"Neal Adams (born June 12, 1941, Governors Island, Manhattan, New York City) is an American comic book and commercial artist best known helping to create some of the definitive modern imagery of the DC Comics characters Superman, Batman and Green Arrow among others."
he's a comic book artist - not a geologist, or a geological engineer or geochemist, etc etc. Not that he doesn't have any knowledge of these areas. One can easily read literature and studies and grasp a pretty decent idea about a specific discipline. However, I think this sort of answers the question why no other actual scientists advocate such mumbo-jumbo, or why we don't hear about it - not that it is being hidden from us. Ofcourse, I wouldn't dare say that plate tectonics has everything right, and that there is no room for doubt/differing opinions. Ofcourse there is - that is the whole point of science. It is not "all-knowing", and doesn't claim to be.

"Adams has put forth ideas on a new model of the universe in his Growing Earth Theory, a derivative of a widely discredited theory (credited to Samuel Warren Carey) that the Earth and every other celestial body are growing."

with no evidence/testing or experimental observation to back it up. He simply made an animation and put it on youtube.

en.wikipedia.org...-Earth_theory

Guess you missed his website?
www.nealadams.com...

Neal Adams's Interview on Coast to Coast
www.coasttocoastam.com...

Is Pangea Possible? No it is not, and this is why.
www.continuitystudios.net...


Civilization is built on theories so I'm not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that because he has no piece of paper giving him a title like Dr, that he cannot investigate an idea and develop it into a theory that can actually backed up with possible facts?

Oddly enough, his theory also explains many of the unexplainable phenomena found on other planets such as planetary scaring.

I'm not for or against, I just find it very cool that it is a possibility among many.



[edit on 7-7-2009 by warrenb]

Young Earth Creationism has been so thoroughly debunked, and is so nonsensical I find it hard to believe that anybody actually accepts that rubbish. Are there actually any young earth creationists here who believe that scientific evidence shows the myths of the bible to be true?

It's not a question of logic Astronaut, its a question of faith

Creationists are moronic

reply to post by warrenb

---

That was a disgustingly wrong video and I, for one, am upset that people peddle this crap.
As a geologist I can say that he is categorically wrong and that it wouldn't/doesn't stand up to rigid scrutiny...whereas...oh what's the point, I'm probably working for TPTB anyway.

[edit on 7-7-2009 by aorAki]

[edit on 7-7-2009 by aorAki]

reply to post by aorAki

---

I am not saying your wrong at all, but i would like to see some information as to why the video was wrong

reply to post by warrenb

---

I'm pretty sure I stated that not having an education in a certain field does not mean you can't read and learn about said field and become familiar with it.
"Not that he doesn't have any knowledge of these areas. One can easily read literature and studies and grasp a pretty decent idea about a specific discipline."
However - you are wrong. I did read his bogus page and it made me gag. He writes with such ferocious smugness, that he thinks by insulting you and your ideas, he can present his garbage as a scientific alternative -
"one of the best ways to quickly identify a "crackpot" is by noting the emotional nature of the text." I keep this adage close at heart.
I found a board where Mr. Adams made an appearance and attempted to bolster his outrageous claims by again, simply trying to sound over-educated and superior to the other posters. You'll find his posts (under NealAdams) start about a third of the way down.

The Earth contains a finite amount of material. If it were growing, then material would have to move to the surface to build up the ever expanding crust. Over time, this would create massive voids in and under the crust which a lot of ground and surface water would probably drain into, leaving little on the surface. I am not a geologist, so aorAki, if this makes no sense then please correct me.

The Earth is getting larger. If I remember right, it's around 200,000 tons per year of space dust. It's why there are geological layers. This however, does not support the felgercarb (for original BSG fans) that Neil Whatshisface is touting as a scientific theory. Why does the name Kent Hovind keep popping into my head?!?!

As far as subduction goes, it has been measured and observed by seismologists with great accuracy. And if plate tetonics and subduction are not fact, then what causes earthquakes?

reply to post by scghst1

---

What rate is the earth expanding at? If the diameter and mass of the earth is ever-increasing we should be quite able to measure such nonsense.

Please just take the time to read this forum and read Mr. Adams posts. He tries to confront actual scientists with his bogus ideas - in terrible, almost unreadable english and grammar - and avoids all the questions thrown at him. He actual makes no sense whatsoever. One word for this "expanding earth" crap - unintelligible.
www.bautforum.com...

reply to post by makinho21

---

the only thing i'm going to explain to you.the undeniable fact that
by posting this, your still trying to convince yourself. so good luck w/ that.



[edit on 7-7-2009 by randyvs]

reply to post by makinho21

---

After reading more into this i think i have to agree with your reasoning.. he seems to sell his stuff pretty good but is an idiot at doing it

reply to post by randyvs

---

Ahh the local bible-historian has arrived. Good to see you too. I mean aside from the fact that, well, I present fact and there is sufficient backup for the story I posted, I would just like to say your post had nothing really beneficial to add except a pitiful attempt at trying to be presumptuous and dogmatic. I look forward to your next delightful post of non-evidence and personal slander.

reply to post by warrenb

---

this is the link I was referring to. Forgot to paste it. See for yourself what idiotic nonsense he spouts. He doesn't even form proper sentences
www.bautforum.com...

[edit on 8-7-2009 by makinho21]

reply to post by Astronaut Down

---

How old was Adam when he was made? 1 day old.
How old did he look? Well, we know that it was a man. So, say 18 years or older.

But how old was he? 1 day old.

If God can make a man that looks 18 years old and yet is only one day old. He could take an earth and finish it up in 7 days. And make it look billions of years old.

You can't take a miracle and put it under a microscope.
"Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God."

reply to post by Beneia

---

And there are magical unicorns in my room, however, when I search for them they can disappear and conceal themselves...but they're there!
You believe what you want, because, really, no one is going to refute what you said. The reason is, however, because what you wrote is pointless escapism and can not be tested, nor observed. Provide backup for such a ridiculous claim and I will worship your dumb god for eternity.

And blind faith prevents you from ever seeing all the possibilities.