It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Creationists, please explain: Noah and the Moa!

page: 10
4
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth

Could you quotea single geologist that supports your view that a) fossils were formed during some biblical flood and b) that the biblical flood and other assertions you made from the bible are supported by our current understanding of geology? It is my understanding that the field of geology does not in any way support your view, so the onus of proof is on you. If what you say is correct, there will be a wealth of academic papers and textbooks to choose from to back up your claim.

Emphasis on the word 'quote'.




posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 


Genetics perfectly back up the theory of evolution. In fact, we're using findings from the theory of evolution in modern genetics...

Also, watch this entire video for details:




posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Oh they do? Interesting...

Especially considering the evolutionary map of world migrations resembles the dispersion of Babel.
Evolutionists even have to incorporate a "bottleneck" event into their theories to make them work.

There is not a single piece of modern genetic evidence that will not already be accounted for in the Bible...

A2D



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Oh they do? Interesting...

Especially considering the evolutionary map of world migrations resembles the dispersion of Babel.
Evolutionists even have to incorporate a "bottleneck" event into their theories to make them work.

There is not a single piece of modern genetic evidence that will not already be accounted for in the Bible...

A2D

Can you show any scientific research that backs up your claims? Also, at the top of the page, you seem to have missed my original request for quotes from geologists that support your earlier claims.



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 


Write to them and get your own quotes. I have a feeling you're not handicapped and are capable of doing a simple internet search and/or email if that is what is required.

A2D



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 


Are you backing out of your claims? If I want to find scientific evidence to support a claim, I don't need to write to academics, I check the relevant resources (journals, academic textbooks, etc.). Are you having difficulty finding such information? Surprising, seeing as you insinuated it was in such abundance.



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 


Absolutely not. I'm not backing out of anything.

You're the one asking for resources, yet you have them right at your fingertips. Move your little fingers and press a few buttons and do a little searching.

There are all kinds of articles out there.

Analysis of the Main Principles of Stratigraphy on the Basis of Experimental Data by Guy Berthault
Assessing Creationist Stratigraphy with Evidence from the Gulf of Mexico by Carl R. Froede Jr., and John K. Reed, Creation Research Society Quarterly 36(2) September 1999.
Flood Geology Links Northwest Creation Network
Flood models: the need for an integrated approach by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor, Journal of Creation 14(1):52–59, April 2000.
Geology and the Flood by Henry Morris, Acts & Facts Aug 1, 1973
Geology and the Flood of Noah PowerPoint presentation by Chris Ashcraft
Geology Sinks in the Mud by Creation-Evolution Headlines
More Creationist Research Part I: Geological Research by Duane Gish, Creation Research Society Quarterly 25(4):161 March 1989
Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood by Stuart E. Nevins. A Symposium on Creation (Vol. III), pp. 32-65

It's not that hard.

A2D
edit on 28-3-2011 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
There is only one set of Scriptures that contain the truth that was not changed by the Yehudi Scribes and will soon be out for all to read this amazing story that will "ring" true to your ear and its "fruit" that it bears will prove to your heart (leb) that it is the inspired Word of YAHUWAH.

In this account of Noah (NUWach) you will notice that from the translation of the words it is NOT saying "the whole world" it is saying "IN THAT L A N D". That land was flooded and not the entire inhabited earth. It was that specific land of Noah that was so evil and so overrun with Giants and people who did not keep the 10 commandments and were wordless people as a result and were destroyed! Why would an innocent person be destroyed in another land who perhaps was word abiding? He or she would not be! The Pharises and the Scribes who were so rooted in there traditions that "controlled" their people are the ones who changed scripture to show our YAH as a vengeful God and this is why Je(Hovah) in Strongs Concordance (1943) HOVAH means mischief and destroyer because this is how the nations have twisted the word into becoming that of a hateful and evil Father when in fact he is NOT. But if you read the 66 books (bibles) of today, well that is ALL you will read about, why? Because it WAS CHANGED! People I tell you now that TRUTH is coming, The revealing of things hidden is coming, FULL DISCLOSURE of how A L L the religions of today have hidden the truth that has been revealed to each one of them and yet they have chosen to cover up and hide all this in their own petty prideful ways.

Here is a brief part of the story of the flood from the scrolls that were found dating from around 77 A.Y. (70 A.D.)

I MoshAH 7:


10 It developed that after seven days of closing up the Ark, the waters of the great flood suddenly came upon the entire region.
11 In the six hundredth season of NUWach's life, in his one hundred fiftieth year, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day, great mountains of water came rushing overthe land and the fountains of the great oceans were burst open! Then the windows of the sky were opened and heavy rains began to fall.
12 The rain fell continuously uponthat land for forty days and forty nights.
13 Throughout this YAom, NUWach, Shem, AHam and YAphath, the sons of NUWach and NUWach's wife and the three wives of his sons with them, floated safely in the Ark,
14 they and all the young animals after their kind, all the livestock after their kind, every creeping thing that creeps on that region after its kind and every reptile after its kind, every bird of every sort which YAHUWAH had caused to come to the Ark.
15 They went to NUWach into the Ark, by pairs of all young with the breath of life in them.
16 Those who went in, went in a male and a female of their flesh, as Almighty Eternal Loving YA of All Creation commanded him and YAHUWAH shut them in.
17 The flood was forty days upon the entire region. The great walls of the waters lifted up The Ark and it was lifted up above allthe land.
18 The waters prevailed over all life below and covered all the land in that region and The Ark floated on the surface of the waters.
19 The waters covered all, even as far as the eye could see. Even the highest grounds that were in that region were covered!
20 The mountains of the water rose as high as one hundred cubits (50 meters) and then settled fifteen cubits (7.5 meters) so that all of the raised grounds of that region were covered.
21 All flesh died that lived on that land, including birds, livestock, animals, every creeping thing that creeps on the Eartz and every Wordless person.
22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, and of all that was on the dry land, died.
23 Every living thing was destroyed that was on the surface of that land, including all Wordless mankind, the violent livestock, the violent beings and even the violent birds of the skies. They were destroyedfrom that land. Only NUWach was left there and those who were with him on the Ark and the fish in the seas.
24The waters covered the entire region one hundred fifty days.

edit on 3/28/2011 by YAHUWAH SAVES because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by john_bmth
 


Analysis of the Main Principles of Stratigraphy on the Basis of Experimental Data by Guy Berthault

A young earth creationist. Interesting critique here. More specifically:


All the experimental work on which he bases his claims was carried out fifteen years ago or more, and reported at the time in French journals (4), (5), (6). He was careful, in those papers, not to make the radical claims that he and his followers have become known for. The assertion that his work has fundamental implications for geology was made later, in informal presentations and communications, on his website and by his creationist colleagues, quite outside the scientific peer review process. In the last few years, he has published three papers (7), (8), (9) in Chinese and Russian journals. None of these later papers report any new experimental work, and they contain nothing more than highly speculative and tendentious interpretations of his earlier work. Owing to their complete lack of new findings and their very poor quality, it is not surprising that these more recent papers are quite unpublishable in mainstream geology journals (and you can be sure that if Berthault could have published in Sedimentology, Geology, Journal of Geology or Sedimentary Geology then he would).

...

Much of his experimental work in the 1990s took the form of flume studies. Flumes are laboratory tanks or channels in which sedimentologists study the deposition of sediments carried by water. They are, by necessity, limited in length and depth, particularly in comparison to the huge extent and great depth of floods that would be capable of depositing major geological sequences. Berthault’s experimental work was focused on the sorting by particle characteristics of sediments carried in flows of limited width (streams) with different flow velocities or in which the flow varies in time. His experimental work shows that sediments can be sorted in currents by size and density, vertically (ie into layers lying one upon another), longitudinally (ie in the direction of the flow), and laterally (ie across the flow). His work also illustrates the effect of prograding sediments (ie sediments which are moved downstream and sorted by the action of currents). He concludes that sorted layers can be laid down rapidly and concurrently. He uses this fact to claim that he has undermined several of the basic principles of stratigraphy originally set forth by Steno (superposition, initial horizontality, and continuity), and that therefore the conventional interpretation - that strata are the record of sedimentation and other sorts of deposition which can occur at widely separated times - is wrong. Other commentators, in particular Dr Kevin Henke (10), (11) have explained that Berthault does not attack these principles as understood by modern sedimentology (what Henke calls "actualism"), but with Steno’s principles as originally formulated. Henke correctly points out that the interpretation of these principles has been much modified in the light of field geography in the last 340 years, and to that extent, Berthault is attacking a straw man.

Atttacking 340yr old science that has moved on since then. Big whoop.



Assessing Creationist Stratigraphy with Evidence from the Gulf of Mexico by Carl R. Froede Jr., and John K. Reed, Creation Research Society Quarterly 36(2) September 1999.

NOT a credible publication. From their "mission statement":


All members must subscribe to the following statement of belief: 1. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in the original autographs. To the student of nature this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths. 2. All basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct creative acts of God during the Creation Week described in Genesis. Whatever biological changes have occurred since Creation Week have accomplished only changes within the original created kinds. 3. The great flood described in Genesis, commonly referred to as the Noachian Flood, was an historic event worldwide in its extent and effect. 4. We are an organization of Christian men and women of science who accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The account of the special creation of Adam and Eve as one man and one woman and their subsequent fall into sin is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a Savior for all mankind. Therefore, salvation can come only through accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior.



Flood Geology Links Northwest Creation Network
Flood models: the need for an integrated approach by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor, Journal of Creation 14(1):52–59, April 2000.

See above



Geology and the Flood by Henry Morris, Acts & Facts Aug 1, 1973

...of the institute of Creation Research. See above.


Geology and the Flood of Noah PowerPoint presentation by Chris Ashcraft

Not peer-reviewed. See above.


Geology Sinks in the Mud by Creation-Evolution Headlines

See above.


More Creationist Research Part I: Geological Research by Duane Gish, Creation Research Society Quarterly 25(4):161 March 1989

Not a credible scientific institution. See above.


Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood by Stuart E. Nevins. A Symposium on Creation (Vol. III), pp. 32-65

See above.


It's not that hard.

Posting credible scientific sources appears to be. So I ask again. Care to provide peer-reviewed science from credible journals? I.e. not creationist institutions that review amongst themselves (if at all), such as peer-reviewed by NON-creeationists?
edit on 28-3-2011 by john_bmth because: fixed quotes

edit on 28-3-2011 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 


Just because you think a creation science institute isn't credible doesn't mean that's the case. Throw your bias out the window for just one second would ya?

A2D



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 


It's not bias...it's rigor. "Creation science" publications aren't subject to the same scrutiny as publications found in journals like Nature, nor are they really equivalent to them in terms of research. The mission statement of a creationist website or the belief statement of a creationist website isn't a scientific source. Please, provide proper geologic evidence.

Hell, it should be there, shouldn't it? It should be in secular sources....granted, this is all sort of outside the scope of this thread, isn't it?



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by Kailassa
 

people were doing biblical research just like people were observing their surroundings and hence doing "scientific" research thousands of years ago....you do yourself a huge injustice by pretending to be so asinine.
A2D

So what you're saying, in the politest manner a creationist can manage, that you don't have a clue, you are merely making stuff up.




posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


A huge part of science is OBSERVATION. How is my answer the equivalent of "making stuff up"?

A2D



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 


Ah, the good old Henry Morris, founder of the Creation Institute. Let's see what scientists have to say about his work...the beauty of science is that it allows peer reviews and criticism...something religion won't allow.



Morris received criticism from the scientific community for his philosophy of science, and his representation of evolution as a complete religious system has been called a straw man. In particular, Massimo Pigliucci criticized Morris' omission of material that interferes with his "mission" and "beliefs".





In Evolution & the Modern Christian (1967), Morris hoped to "open the minds and hearts of young people to the true Biblical cosmology." T.E. Fenton, Professor of Agronomy at Iowa State University, wrote "scientific value of the book is nil; the author selectively chooses the areas of science that he accepts and rejects other areas of accepted science".




Morris wrote in The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth (1972) that the craters of the moon were caused by a cosmic battle between the forces of Satan and the armies of the archangel Michael. David Vogel, Professor of Biology at Creighton University, reviewed the book explaining "his theology is shallow; his exegesis is maddening; his science is wrong; and he tops it off by offending millions of Bible-believing Christians who also accept evolution".




His book Scientific Creationism (1974 and 1984), according to Herman Kirkpatrick, "is not very convincing evidence to support the recent creation of the earth". Thomas Wheeler, Professor of biochemistry at University of Louisville, reviewed the second edition and concluded, "Scientific Creationism cannot be recommended for use in public school classes, or indeed anyone interested in learning science". Wheeler cited Morris misunderstanding of science, appeals to religious prejudice, misrepresentation of scientific knowledge, omission of opposing science, double standards in evidence, "absurd conclusions," inappropriate and misidentified sources, attacks on scientists, using discredited arguments, and "silly calculations"




Morris' work with John C. Whitcomb, The Genesis Flood, has been criticized for taking quotes out of context and misquoting sources.[13] For example, in one instance, a source which read "the sea which vanished so many million years ago" was quoted as "the sea which vanished so many years ago."






Geologist John G. Solum has criticized the work for being inaccurate.[14] Solum noted "Whitcomb and Morris are mistaken about the nature of the rocks associated with thrust faults. Their claim about fossils is based on a YEC misunderstanding of how rocks are dated relative to each other, and how the geologic column was constructed."[14] In fact Solum noted, "Morris' explanation of relative dating is not 'somewhat oversimplified' it is entirely incorrect."




In The Long War Against God: The History and Impact of the Creation/Evolution Conflict (1989) Morris wrote that "the denial of God – rejecting the reality of supernatural creation and the creator's sovereign rule of the world – has always been the root cause of every human problem."[15] Morris was criticized by Randy Moore, of University of Minnesota, for writing in the book that "evolutionism" is satanic and responsible for racism, abortion, and a decline in morality.


Your sources can't even hold up to peer review. Even worse, the authors BLATANTLY LIE, MISREPRESENT THE TRUTH, AND OMITT ANYTHING GOING AGAINST THEIR BELIEF.

But that's to be expected if you get your scientific information from a pseudo-scientific website like the Creation Institute. At least bother getting your information from proper, peer reviewed sources. Peer reviews ensure authors can't lie...like Mr Morris.

Source (because I actually post my sources, and bother showing the actual important quotes instead of making random claims)

As for your question:



A huge part of science is OBSERVATION. How is my answer the equivalent of "making stuff up"?


You aren't even making it up, however, you're copying from people that demonstrably are making stuff up...
edit on 28-3-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


The problem is this...those criticizing his work have the same bias as you...
there is relatively zero neutrality when it comes to this subject...

A2D



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


The problem is this...those criticizing his work have the same bias as you...
there is relatively zero neutrality when it comes to this subject...

A2D


And that's why there's peer reviews...where scientists check eachother's work. Now, if one scientist find that another blatantly lies, or omits facts, like it was the case with the source you posted...that study isn't valid anymore.

The arguments you posted are demonstrably wrong, not because of the nature of your source, but because of the actual CONTENT!



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by Kailassa
 


A huge part of science is OBSERVATION. How is my answer the equivalent of "making stuff up"?

A2D


Ah, the, "lemons are yellow, therefore if it's yellow it's a lemon," logic.

If you haven't progressed past this barrier to logic, it's no wonder you support creationism.



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


You haven't falsified any of my statements. You've only posted what other geologists with a bias have to say about it.

Sure, geologists that agree with evolution will agree with each other and disagree on most anything contrary.
On the other hand, geologists that agree with creation will agree with each other and disagree on most anything contrary.

Even those like William Ryan and Walter Pitman, who don't necessarily agree with a biblical flood, were criticized for their black sea deluge theory. It seems as though any theory put forth that correlates to the biblical flood in any manner whatsoever is quickly criticized and regarded as false DESPITE the evidence from any archaeological findings.

A2D



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


How does that even apply to anything I have said?

I never said "well there's water on earth so there must have been a flood" or anything to that degree.



A2D



posted on Mar, 28 2011 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 


Whatever


Of course you've heard of that before, which makes your attempt at trying to claim the scientific community is overall split in 2 on the subject of evolution laughable.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join