....Fossilization is an exceptionally rare occurrence....
If it is rare, then how is it that there is virtually no place on earth that does NOT have fossils? It is rare or non existent today for fossils to be made.
(...the remains normally need to be covered by sediment as soon as possible...)
Even the evolutionists will admit that fossilization has to be rapid, not over thousands or even millions of years. Even so, today, just covering up a dead body with sediment will NOT make a fossil. There is the vital ingredient of killing ALL, not just most microbes. Decay sets in in days nowadays. Microorganisms would still destroy the dead bodies long before permineralization could be completed. When we preserve food today, boiling is a common method to kill such spoilage organisms. There are also microbes that thrive in anaerobic, oxygen free environments. The boiling hot water violently erupting out of the depths at the time of the great flood over the whole Earth would certainly preserve organic remains as surely as our canneries preserve food today.
From the article: (..On the other hand, it is very unusual to find fossils of small, soft bodied, geographically restricted and geologically ephemeral organisms..)
That is simply not true. Very delicate fossilized life forms are actually quite wide spread, all over the planet. Almost every sedimentary rock formation has evidence of fossils, some of which are very delicate and finely detailed. Whole trees, including the leaves are found, as well as delicate sea creatures. These are not just in single isolated spots, but in widely separated parts of earth.
(...For permineralization to occur, the organism must become covered by sediment soon after death or soon after the initial decaying process....)
Right, exactly how soon and by what means? Is soon a day, a month, a year or what? How does the "initial decay process" get stopped at some point, rather than going to completion? Something HAS to kill the decay causing microbes fairly quickly. If that doesn't happen, the decay will obliterate all details.
The bottom line of all this is, that by some means, delicate organic matter has to be preserved in shape and form. That is crucial and cannot be gotten around. Only after that preservation has taken place, can all the various processes mentioned happen. Even there, it has to be fairly rapid, not the huge amount of time generally given in evolutionary texts and literature.
...Populating it with the birds and the fishes and all that does contradict evolution...
In the end, it comes down what you are going to BELIEVE. Evolution masquerades as science, but it has many assumptions (beliefs). One fundamental evolutionary belief is in the uniformity of natural processes throughout vast ages of time. Actual evidence shows that very few things in nature are uniform. One look at the cratered moon and mars, as well as plenty of evidence on earth shows anything BUT a smooth gentle history.
Another belief is that huge quantities of time can accomplish what nobody has ever done in the lab or observed happening today. For example, nobody has ever made a fossil nor observed one being made today. Scientists have experimented with innumerable generations of creatures, such as the Drosophila fruit flies. However they have never succeeded making anything other than more fruit flies. People have bred dogs for centuries, but all they have ever produced is more dogs.
The biblical statement that living things were made to reproduce "after their own kind" has NEVER been contradicted by any scientific fact. The theory of evolution, is an INTERPRETATION of facts based on assumptions (beliefs). The real time TODAY evidence is against that interpretation in many points.
When push comes to shove, if people truly believe in a Creator God, then the question of responsibility and accountability arises. Evolution gives a way out for people to deceive themselves about the possibility of having to face this God.
That is a big problem that evolution has to grapple with. There is plenty of evidence that things in nature don't happen slowly gradually and uniformly at all, but suddenly and catastrophically. The fact is, that the flood was very violent event and the surface of the earth bears the hallmarks of the violence and still today. How long ago that violence occurred can only be assumed. You always keep citing millions of years ago as if it were fact and not theory based on assumptions of constancy. Why should there be any nice uniform layers, unless the flood were nothing more than a gentle spring rain slightly amplified.
(...The current best supported theory is that the earth's tilt was changed by a giant object...)
To tilt axis of the earth does not require a direct collision. A close pass by of a massive object could do that. We are told that the flood was a very violent event. We are told two additional things as well. The first one is that the fountains of the deep broke open. Enormous quantities of boiling hot water came out of the mantle of the earth as the earth was being gravitationally squeezed like a giant sponge. Second, after the flood the rainbow is specifically mentioned as a new thing which signified God's promise to Noah to never flood the earth again like that. If Noah had been familiar with rain and rainbows, or in fact have ever seen either one before, that would be a nonsensical statement.
(...One more - How would you explain that fossils of creature A only show up in strata A while fossils of creature B only show up in strata B if all fossils were created in a single event?...)
Again, you assume that this flood was like what we experience today when a river rises over its banks. We have seismic evidence that there are quantities of water stored in the mantle of the earth, many times greater than all the water of the world's oceans put together. These waters raged across the surface of the earth at hundreds of miles per hour as the Earth's axis shifted. Living things, killed by the boiling, mud laden water, which also killed all microbes, where washed helter-skelter all over the planet in wave after wave. When the flowing waters finally slowed down, they dropped everything in thousands of feet deep mud flows.
Nobody has ever made a fossil or explained how they were made. No fossils are being made today because living things decay after they die. The fact that there are fossils almost everywhere is the biggest piece of evidence for a universal, violent, boiling hot, water flood.
In your next post, please explain to me how to make a fossil. Please be sure to explain how you propose to prevent decay.
....Once fairly accurate measurements of c became available (post 1960),...
That is the time when the atomic clocks began to be used for the time base for this. The clocks change exactly the same as the quantity to be measured. The earlier measurements were all made using orbital clocks based on gravity. Gravity is disconnected from atomic behavior. Measuring with the distance between points with a ruler that stretches at the same rate as the distance does, will give you a constant measurement. If someone tattoos a ruler on a child's body, that kid doesn't grow at all, as measured by that ruler. Atomic clocks are not an independent measuring stick to measure time or distance.
We KNOW that light is affected by the medium it traverses. Space is not an empty nothing, but has electromagnetic properties that HAVE to change as space expands. The fact is that space is not expanding much any longer and so the change of the speed of light is very small, yet still measurable IF an independent clock is used.
Recently there were headlines even, that light has been slowed to crawl in the lab. Don't you think that if light can be slowed down way, it can also be speeded up? There is no way we can actually MEASURE the distances to objects using trigonometry more than a few light years away. The biggest base we have is the orbit of the earth. That is a very tiny distance compared to the galaxy dimensions. The angles become simply too small to measure. The stated distances are arrived at by brightness comparisons and the Hubble red-shift = distance assumption. It is because such vast distances are assumed, that makes the energy output of things like quasars appear to be so great. If the distances are really much less, then these objects become quite normal stars.
from the link article: (..Let's start by considering a pulsar which is 170,000 light-years away..
Here is again one of these flat out statements based on an assumption, namely that said object really is that distant. So there again ONLY if that assumption is true, does all the math pan out and bolster the writer's argument. Slinging math around is great only if the underlying numbers are based on actual measurements and not baseless assumptions.
from the link article: (..The amount of coal and oil existing today greatly exceeds what could have been produced by decaying plants and animals..)
Again, the underlying assumption here is that the growth conditions and the biosphere was similar to what we have today. There is evidence that life on earth was much more prolific when the earth was young.
The creationists also make assumptions about the biblical text that are not really there. Creationists forget that the main purpose of the Bible is not to give us an accurate account of how God did things, but to tell us of His love and what plans he has for mankind.
When it comes to the past, only someone who was actually there can give us an accurate account of what REALLY happened. Since God doesn't give us any where near as much detail as we'd like, both sides have to do a lot of guesswork.
....What comes later.... yes, that causes problems.....
And exactly why should it? If Genesis 1:1 is true, then why doubt the other statements that tells us just a little of how God he did it and in what time frame.
In the context of the giving if the Ten Commandments the reason for keeping of the sabbath was given. It says there that on the seventh day the people are to rest for the reason that:
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
The Hebrew word translated "day" is the same in all places there. A person who can believe Genesis 1:1 should have no problem believing that the same Creator God could have done it exactly has He tells He did and in the time He said He did it.
Everybody blames the president! The greedy or stupid executives and loan officers who threw money into people's pockets are NOT at fault? If someone asks you for a loan do you give it to them just because of their good looks? No? Well, that is about what it amounts to as to what these banks did for those who applied for mortgage loans. Of course, if you were loaning OTHER people's money you would likely be less careful than if it were YOUR money.
Those guys should lose THEIR houses, BMWs and other luxuries as well as their high paying jobs. They should not benefit in any way from the largesse of the taxpayers.
Pay special attention to the references given at the end of the article. I hope you have plenty of time to look into this with an open mind.
Remember, that real progress in science has NEVER been done by the consensus of the majority or a large committee.
Any time constancy and linearity over a large amount of time is promulgated, it is time to get suspicious. About the only thing constant in nature is change. We live in a dynamic, ever changing universe. Postulating slow uniform processes over great spans of time is not in keeping with the observed dynamics of the Universe. The entire solar system bears the hallmarks of a violent past. On Earth there is evidence of sudden catastrophes, such as impacts of asteroids, monstrous volcanic outbursts and floods that made great changes very quickly. One look look at the moon or mars will show you the great number of these events.
Therefore, it is not so far fetched to assume that NOTHING is truly constant for very long. Ask any Physicist. There is NO law of physics that says that the speed of light MUST be constant.
....If fossils were trapped all at once by a single universal flood, you would expect to only find fossils in a single layer....
If you want to find out how this can happen in a single sudden event, go study the floodplain and miniature of the Grand Canyon carved by the Toutle river below Mount Saint Helens. While there, you can also learn that petrification of wood can and does take place very quickly. All you need do is examine the bottom of Spirit Lake at the foot of the mountain.
There are two sources for the water given in the flood account. One of them is rain from the atmosphere, but most of the water came from deep within the earth, specifically the mantle. There is a seismic evidence even today that the quantities of water stored in the mantle could far exceed that in all of the world's oceans put together. A quick look at a diagram of the various sections of the earth, the crust, the outer mantle, the inner mantle and the core shows the relative volumes of these.
Not only would the volume of this water from the inside of the earth been huge, but it would also have been expelled rather violently. We are also told in the flood account of the Bible, that it was only after this event, that seasons as we have today, spring, summer, winter and fall began. The reason we have seasons in the first place is because the axis of the earth is now tilted at about 23 degrees in relation to the plane of the Earth's orbit. There is no way to know exactly what immense forces were at work to cause the axis of the earth to be realigned this way. Perhaps, a planet sized object came close. This would put tremendous pressure from gravitational forces on the entire Earth, squeezing it like a sponge, thus releasing immense quantities of stored water. Furthermore, this water would have been boiling hot.
Nobody has ever made a fossil and we do not observe fossils being formed today. When a living creature dies, its body decays by the action of microbes. The boiling hot waters would have killed these and the enormous raging flows of water sweeping across the surface of the earth, carried mud, rocks and boulders as large as apartment houses and buried the bodies of living creatures under thousands of feet of mud. With no exposure to microbes and oxygen, the impressions of the bodies of these animals, even the delicate parts at times, where preserved as the mud turned into rock.
The biblical record tells us that all of this took place in about a year. One look at the moon and Mars tells us that the solar system had a violent history. The gradualism spread by environmentalists is a huge lie. There is plenty of evidence that the earth itself also had a very violent history.
There is no way to explain how a fossil can be made gradually over time. Fossils were made in a sudden unimaginable water catastrophe. That is why we do not see fossil formation today, especially on a global scale.
None of this is allowed to be put into a textbook used in public schools. Only the gradualist interpretations of evolution are permitted, in spite of all the evidence of violent sudden catastrophe.
...If you disagree, please provide *specific* examples...
OK, here is one. The facts of science are that there is hardly any spot on this Earth where we DON'T find fossils. It is also a FACT that all fossils, without a single exception are found in sedimentary rocks. These are rocks formed by the action of water.
Evolutionists INTERPRET these facts by stating that bodies of water covered and receded these fossil beds over millions of years. The now fossilized creatures lived and died millions of years ago and were slowly buried and then over much more time became fossilized.
The same FACT that there are fossils only in sedimentary layers is interpreted by God believing creation scientists to be caused by a world wide, sudden universal flood catastrophe. The scientists who believe this are not some wild-eyed religious nuts, but are academically equally well qualified.
The Biblical account specifically states that the water covered the highest mountains. Even today, if the earth were flat and smooth, the whole planet would be a water world covered by over a mile of water. However, this equally valid scientific interpretation is NOT allowed to be even mentioned in American Schools by LAW.
...the establishment clause means the separation of church and state...
Indeed is does and rightfully so. The state must not endorse or prefer any particular religion or philosophy over any other. This sadly not the case in practice. The tenets of secular humanism have become the officially recognized religion in public schools and life. That happens to be a religion that believes that the mind of man and his rational understanding is the be all and end all of everything that exists. There is no room for the possibility of anything beyond what can be understood, because that would be supernatural. Any mention of the supernatural or of God is specifically disallowed by this humanistic religion and it has become the law. Like I said before, freedom OF religion is not the same as freedom FROM religion. The establishment clause was intended to give freedom of religion and it has failed in that in today's practice, because the religion of secular humanism is officially allowed to be taught in schools and other public forums. The humanistic sanctioned doctrine of evolution is taught under the guise of science and other views such as those of the founding fathers and other dissenters of the humanistic world view are forbidden by law to enter public life.
...We have seen nothing so far to indicate that decay rates have changed over time (including analysis of spectra of supernovas) so it seems like a reasonable assumption to make...
We DO have some evidence that the electromagnetic properties of the medium of space itself have indeed changed dramatically over time. This would demand that certain numbers, assumed to be "constants" have changed as well. One of these is Planck's constant which is measured to be smaller today than when it was first measured. Light-speed is related inversely to that. That means light moved much faster through the medium of space, when the Universe was very young, small, dense and hot. Just as sound travels faster in rock or water than in air, so too light traveled faster through a denser Universe.
There is evidence from past light-speed measurements using a gravity time-base, which have shown a decrease since such measurements were first done in the early 1600s. When an atomic time-base clock is used to measure the speed of light, as is being done today, this is not seen, since the product hc appears to be truly constant, with h and c moving in opposite directions. If a ruler elongates at the same rate as a distance to be measured by it, the distance will always be measured to be the same, even though it really is changing. Gravity equations have neither h nor c in them. Therefore, any clock based on gravity will not be affected by the changes in h or c and measure them directly, without any correction factors needed.
Since Planck's "constant" appears in equations describing the behavior of atoms, radioactive clocks must also be affected. So there IS evidence that call into question the belief that these "clocks" are truly constant over time.
.....The design hypothesis says nothing whatsoever about the identity, nature, aims, capabilities or methods of the designer. It just says, in effect, "a designer did it"...
That is true, even in human terms. However there are some things we can infer from a design. Since this is a computer oriented nerdy forum, the design of software in general or operating system specifically comes to mind. We can infer that those who designed the UNIX-based operating systems are better, smarter designers than those who came up with Windows. We can safely infer, that those who designed a 747 airliner had a bit of knowledge about aerodynamics and mechanics.
Of course we know nothing about what kind of people they are, what kind of families they have, what cars they drive etc. The only way we can get that kind of information is if these designers choose to reveal it to us and we get to know them in person.
We can infer from the intricacies and complexities of the universe we find ourselves in, that the designer has knowledge and information about the natural world far beyond our own. Especially in living things, he has come up with technology, the workings of which we have only very faint clues. For every answer that science gives, ten new questions arise.
In this book we call the Bible, there are many hundreds of statements along the lines of "thus says the Lord". How can we ascertain the authenticity and authorship of these writings? How do we determine truth or falsehood in human affairs, such as in courts of law? If you are preparing a document, how can you ensure that the recipients of this document will have a reasonable assurance that it is truly from you and not an artful forgery?
This has been and still is an ongoing problem in human communications. We do this with computers of course using encryption and passwords. These are used both to authenticate and to protect the message. The essence of these authentication methods involves knowledge that only the true author possesses.
This is exactly what God has done in the Bible. Because he is eternal and outside of and not subject to time, he uses his perfect knowledge of all time to write history in advance. We humans are singularly bad predicting the future. We can't even accurately predict the weather or the stock market. These predictions of the future in the Bible are not vague or self-fulfilling, but quite specific of events, places and times and NEVER miss. In ancient Israel, anyone who made predictions that clearly failed to come to pass was subject to capital punishment. Being a prophet or soothsayer was a rather dangerous profession back then.
There are plenty of books that describe many of these Bible prophecies, how they were fulfilled in the past and how they are being fulfilled today. If you are truly interested, I am sure you can find some and study them.
...Could you give a few examples of these, specifically examples of these being taught in science class...
Secular humanism is a philosophy and belief that man is the measure of all things and that nothing and no power outside the understanding of the human mind exists. This philosophy is reflected in the explanations and interpretations of scientific observations and experiments written into today's textbooks. Any interpretations of the facts of science where God, Intelligence or the supernatural is mentioned, is officially and legally disallowed. Secular humanism is the only official state promoted religion of the United States.
....That is really a subject for a textbook on philosophy, not for basic level science...
This is exactly right, but these philosophies are written into the present textbooks as "science" and then taught as a scientific truth. If any particular philosophy is incorporated into a science textbook, then in a sense it is no longer a science textbook but a book of philosophy.
If a book that purports to be a science textbook contains interpretations of the facts and observations of science, these interpretations will _always_ involve the philosophy of the interpreter. Therefore, any neutral science textbook should ALSO contain ALL plausible interpretations of the facts put forth by educated, degreed scientists. This would include scientists that graduated with honors from reputable mainstream colleges who DO believe in God and his communication to man, the Bible.
This, unfortunately is not the case in textbooks today. These only contain the philosophic interpretations seen through the lens of confident "there is no God" atheism. Any mention of God is officially and legally outlawed. The Supreme Court has misinterpreted the founders edict on freedom OF religion into a interpretation of freedom FROM religion.
...Er... WHEN would it have been "much faster" than today....
That "when" questioned is not only asked in the science of geology but in all other sciences trying to probe what might have happened in the past. To answer that question, not only in geology, but other sciences as well, present-day observations are applied to the past. It is _always_ assumed that this is a valid way to proceed. Such assumptions may be correct, but they are nevertheless assumptions and always will be. We simply do not _know_ how to answer these "when" questions without making some assumptions.
For example, scientists come up with dates of rocks and other things based on the phenomena of radioactivity. They can confidently give ranges of dates, but they are all based on the _assumption_ that the rate of radioactivity has always been what we observe it to be today. Again, this may be a valid assumption, but it is still an assumption. In a sense, the interpretations (not the facts) of science are based as much on faith as any religion.
...That is, no contradiction exists until someone "interprets" the bible/science....
No, the contradiction comes in because people interpret both the facts of science and the text of Bible according to their worldview.
A person with an atheistic worldview throws the Bible away entirely and interprets all scientific facts and observations through his lens of " their is no God". Everything that exists, according to this worldview, came into existence by some means that specifically excludes any kind of intelligence or God.
A person with a Christian worldview believes that the Bible is God's communication to mankind and tries to figure out what this communication is truly all about. Such a Christian person will look at the facts and observations of science and interpret them through the lens of Genesis 1:1 where God, Time, Space, matter, and energy are all mentioned together.
According to the written account, what was the purpose of the star? If you search out and answer that question, then the properties and orbits of stars as we know them today becomes irrelevant.
The purpose of the star is clearly given to us. Some cosmic phenomena caused these astronomers of the East to travel at least 500 miles in order to worship and give homage to this person they labeled the newborn King of the Jews. We are not told how they connected whatever it was they saw in the heavens with the birth of his child. Whatever this "star" may have been, as defined by our modern astronomy is irrelevant because its purpose was to guide them to the very place where they could worship the one they were seeking.
Science itself isn't, but some of the interpretations of scientific facts are foundational doctrines or beliefs of secular humanism. All interpretations of scientific facts should be clearly labeled as such interpretations. Also, any qualified scientist, such as any one with a degree from a well-known university, should be allowed to express their opinion and interpretation, even if and especially if it is materially different from or contradicts the interpretations of the majority.
Experimentally established and observed facts of science could be clearly separated from the interpretation of such facts.
...the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved...
How does that statement say that the earth is at the center of the solar system? Maybe some people interpret it that way but that is not what it says.
One of the rules of interpreting not only the Bible, but any written text, is to pay attention to the context. The quote you gave is from Psalm 96:10. The readers thereof are encouraged and inspired to appreciate and worship the one true God who made the heavens and earth. Taking a few words or phrases out of context from the Bible is a favorite activity of cults and unbelievers. The former then fashion these words into their doctrines and the latter use the out of context phrases to ridicule and debunk.
Are you not glad that the Earth is rather "rock solid"? Are you not glad that humans are incapable of making or controlling the weather? Should we be allowed to vote to decide whether it rains tomorrow for the benefit of the farmers or that the sun shines for the benefit of a baseball game? I am very glad that the basic mechanics and operations of our planet are well beyond the shenanigans and whims of mankind.
...I'm sure you will understand the reality of the situation in a year or two.....
That may be, but I also understand that the situation came about because of pure greed. If part of this bailout would require every one of those greedy, or at best incompetent bank officers were fired and required to become janitors for the rest of their lives, a repeat performance of this fiasco might be avoided. Maybe the taxpayers have to bail out the banks to prevent a full-scale depression such as the moneybags precipitated in 1929 by similar greedy behavior. It seems that the rules that apply to little businesses and to you and me, no longer apply to the big guys. Little business people and you and I have to suffer the consequences of our bad decisions, but now, those who made the bad decisions get off scot free. They were paid exorbitant salaries, to manage other people's money entrusted to them. They are not going to lose their big houses, yachts, BMW's and other luxuries. Most of them, will probably get another job or get to keep the present job with a bailed out bank.
....Because ID, not being falsifiable, is not a scientific theory at all...
That line of reasoning is absolutely pure BS. If I find a watch or other complex device somewhere, I can claim it is designed and you can deny that claim. The same is true of complex natural things. We know that man-made things are designed. How do we know this? How do we know for example that Stonehenge is a man-made object and not a natural rock formation? There are many mountains and rock formations on earth. In North Dakota at Mount Rushmore there is a mountainside which is quite different from any other mountainside. It happens to have the likenesses of several American presidents chiseled into it. How do we know that this is not a natural rock formation, but of human, intelligent origin?
The same evidences of design can be found in human systems and devices, is also present in the systems and devices that exist in the natural world.
which is named after Jesus the Christ. He believed in the written word available at that time. He indicated the story of Jonah and the fish to be a historical event. He quoted his Bible, the Old Testament of our present Bible many times, taking it quite literally.
...If your religious dogmas contradict scientific findings...
That may be, but the FACTS of science and what is actually written in the Bible never contradict. It is the interpretation of the facts of science by people and the interpretation of what is actually written in the Bible by other people, that the contradictions arise.
You tell me and we'll both know. There is plenty of evidence that the earth's crust and the continents move around like ice floes in the arctic oceans. We know by measurement how fast they drift today, but there is no way to MEASURE how fast the travelled in the past. We can make some assumptions which may or may not be right. In the absence of having information how the rate of movement changed, I suppose a linear guess is as good as any. However we do know from most phenomena in nature that linearity of anything is strangely rare. So it is likely that the rate of movement, was NOT linear and we are left guessing how LONG the drifting continents took to get to where they from where they were.
Extrapolating anything where the curve of the rate of change is unknown is pure guesswork.
We do observe that the interior of the Earth is rather toasty still. This means that in times past the molten rocks of the mantle, upon which the continents and the oceans float should have been hotter and therefore less viscous and so allowed the continents to move more freely than they do today. Maybe science will figure out how much more fluid things were way back in time and then come up with a reasonable estimate of fast the continents could have drifted around. It would most certainly be much faster than what we observe today.
Slashdot Mirror
....Fossilization is an exceptionally rare occurrence....
If it is rare, then how is it that there is virtually no place on earth that does NOT have fossils? It is rare or non existent today for fossils to be made.
(...the remains normally need to be covered by sediment as soon as possible...)
Even the evolutionists will admit that fossilization has to be rapid, not over thousands or even millions of years. Even so, today, just covering up a dead body with sediment will NOT make a fossil. There is the vital ingredient of killing ALL, not just most microbes. Decay sets in in days nowadays. Microorganisms would still destroy the dead bodies long before permineralization could be completed. When we preserve food today, boiling is a common method to kill such spoilage organisms. There are also microbes that thrive in anaerobic, oxygen free environments. The boiling hot water violently erupting out of the depths at the time of the great flood over the whole Earth would certainly preserve organic remains as surely as our canneries preserve food today.
From the article: (..On the other hand, it is very unusual to find fossils of small, soft bodied, geographically restricted and geologically ephemeral organisms..)
That is simply not true. Very delicate fossilized life forms are actually quite wide spread, all over the planet. Almost every sedimentary rock formation has evidence of fossils, some of which are very delicate and finely detailed. Whole trees, including the leaves are found, as well as delicate sea creatures. These are not just in single isolated spots, but in widely separated parts of earth.
(...For permineralization to occur, the organism must become covered by sediment soon after death or soon after the initial decaying process....)
Right, exactly how soon and by what means? Is soon a day, a month, a year or what? How does the "initial decay process" get stopped at some point, rather than going to completion? Something HAS to kill the decay causing microbes fairly quickly. If that doesn't happen, the decay will obliterate all details.
The bottom line of all this is, that by some means, delicate organic matter has to be preserved in shape and form. That is crucial and cannot be gotten around. Only after that preservation has taken place, can all the various processes mentioned happen. Even there, it has to be fairly rapid, not the huge amount of time generally given in evolutionary texts and literature.
...Populating it with the birds and the fishes and all that does contradict evolution...
In the end, it comes down what you are going to BELIEVE. Evolution masquerades as science, but it has many assumptions (beliefs). One fundamental evolutionary belief is in the uniformity of natural processes throughout vast ages of time. Actual evidence shows that very few things in nature are uniform. One look at the cratered moon and mars, as well as plenty of evidence on earth shows anything BUT a smooth gentle history.
Another belief is that huge quantities of time can accomplish what nobody has ever done in the lab or observed happening today. For example, nobody has ever made a fossil nor observed one being made today. Scientists have experimented with innumerable generations of creatures, such as the Drosophila fruit flies. However they have never succeeded making anything other than more fruit flies. People have bred dogs for centuries, but all they have ever produced is more dogs.
The biblical statement that living things were made to reproduce "after their own kind" has NEVER been contradicted by any scientific fact. The theory of evolution, is an INTERPRETATION of facts based on assumptions (beliefs). The real time TODAY evidence is against that interpretation in many points.
When push comes to shove, if people truly believe in a Creator God, then the question of responsibility and accountability arises. Evolution gives a way out for people to deceive themselves about the possibility of having to face this God.
...we would expect to observe a uniform...
That is a big problem that evolution has to grapple with. There is plenty of evidence that things in nature don't happen slowly gradually and uniformly at all, but suddenly and catastrophically. The fact is, that the flood was very violent event and the surface of the earth bears the hallmarks of the violence and still today. How long ago that violence occurred can only be assumed. You always keep citing millions of years ago as if it were fact and not theory based on assumptions of constancy. Why should there be any nice uniform layers, unless the flood were nothing more than a gentle spring rain slightly amplified.
(...The current best supported theory is that the earth's tilt was changed by a giant object ...)
To tilt axis of the earth does not require a direct collision. A close pass by of a massive object could do that. We are told that the flood was a very violent event. We are told two additional things as well. The first one is that the fountains of the deep broke open. Enormous quantities of boiling hot water came out of the mantle of the earth as the earth was being gravitationally squeezed like a giant sponge. Second, after the flood the rainbow is specifically mentioned as a new thing which signified God's promise to Noah to never flood the earth again like that. If Noah had been familiar with rain and rainbows, or in fact have ever seen either one before, that would be a nonsensical statement.
(...One more - How would you explain that fossils of creature A only show up in strata A while fossils of creature B only show up in strata B if all fossils were created in a single event?...)
Again, you assume that this flood was like what we experience today when a river rises over its banks. We have seismic evidence that there are quantities of water stored in the mantle of the earth, many times greater than all the water of the world's oceans put together. These waters raged across the surface of the earth at hundreds of miles per hour as the Earth's axis shifted. Living things, killed by the boiling, mud laden water, which also killed all microbes, where washed helter-skelter all over the planet in wave after wave. When the flowing waters finally slowed down, they dropped everything in thousands of feet deep mud flows.
Nobody has ever made a fossil or explained how they were made. No fossils are being made today because living things decay after they die. The fact that there are fossils almost everywhere is the biggest piece of evidence for a universal, violent, boiling hot, water flood.
In your next post, please explain to me how to make a fossil. Please be sure to explain how you propose to prevent decay.
..There's a difference between believing that a Creator God could do something, and believing that a Creator God did something..
Well in the scripture I cited, he DID tell us that he did it and how long he took to do it.
....Once fairly accurate measurements of c became available (post 1960), ...
That is the time when the atomic clocks began to be used for the time base for this. The clocks change exactly the same as the quantity to be measured. The earlier measurements were all made using orbital clocks based on gravity. Gravity is disconnected from atomic behavior. Measuring with the distance between points with a ruler that stretches at the same rate as the distance does, will give you a constant measurement. If someone tattoos a ruler on a child's body, that kid doesn't grow at all, as measured by that ruler. Atomic clocks are not an independent measuring stick to measure time or distance.
We KNOW that light is affected by the medium it traverses. Space is not an empty nothing, but has electromagnetic properties that HAVE to change as space expands. The fact is that space is not expanding much any longer and so the change of the speed of light is very small, yet still measurable IF an independent clock is used.
Recently there were headlines even, that light has been slowed to crawl in the lab. Don't you think that if light can be slowed down way, it can also be speeded up? There is no way we can actually MEASURE the distances to objects using trigonometry more than a few light years away. The biggest base we have is the orbit of the earth. That is a very tiny distance compared to the galaxy dimensions. The angles become simply too small to measure. The stated distances are arrived at by brightness comparisons and the Hubble red-shift = distance assumption. It is because such vast distances are assumed, that makes the energy output of things like quasars appear to be so great. If the distances are really much less, then these objects become quite normal stars.
from the link article: (..Let's start by considering a pulsar which is 170,000 light-years away..
Here is again one of these flat out statements based on an assumption, namely that said object really is that distant. So there again ONLY if that assumption is true, does all the math pan out and bolster the writer's argument. Slinging math around is great only if the underlying numbers are based on actual measurements and not baseless assumptions.
from the link article: (..The amount of coal and oil existing today greatly exceeds what could have been produced by decaying plants and animals ..)
Again, the underlying assumption here is that the growth conditions and the biosphere was similar to what we have today. There is evidence that life on earth was much more prolific when the earth was young.
The creationists also make assumptions about the biblical text that are not really there. Creationists forget that the main purpose of the Bible is not to give us an accurate account of how God did things, but to tell us of His love and what plans he has for mankind.
When it comes to the past, only someone who was actually there can give us an accurate account of what REALLY happened. Since God doesn't give us any where near as much detail as we'd like, both sides have to do a lot of guesswork.
I suppose you might have noticed my sig by now!
cheers -- have a good day!
....What comes later.... yes, that causes problems.....
And exactly why should it? If Genesis 1:1 is true, then why doubt the other statements that tells us just a little of how God he did it and in what time frame.
In the context of the giving if the Ten Commandments the reason for keeping of the sabbath was given. It says there that on the seventh day the people are to rest for the reason that:
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
The Hebrew word translated "day" is the same in all places there. A person who can believe Genesis 1:1 should have no problem believing that the same Creator God could have done it exactly has He tells He did and in the time He said He did it.
..The president...President Bush....The president...
Everybody blames the president! The greedy or stupid executives and loan officers who threw money into people's pockets are NOT at fault? If someone asks you for a loan do you give it to them just because of their good looks? No? Well, that is about what it amounts to as to what these banks did for those who applied for mortgage loans. Of course, if you were loaning OTHER people's money you would likely be less careful than if it were YOUR money.
Those guys should lose THEIR houses, BMWs and other luxuries as well as their high paying jobs. They should not benefit in any way from the largesse of the taxpayers.
...You know, this would be so much easier if you would do the very basic courtesy of providing sources for your assertions...
Well, if you really want to dig deeply into this, here is a place to start:
http://www.setterfield.org/report/report.html
Pay special attention to the references given at the end of the article. I hope you have plenty of time to look into this with an open mind.
Remember, that real progress in science has NEVER been done by the consensus of the majority or a large committee.
Any time constancy and linearity over a large amount of time is promulgated, it is time to get suspicious. About the only thing constant in nature is change. We live in a dynamic, ever changing universe. Postulating slow uniform processes over great spans of time is not in keeping with the observed dynamics of the Universe. The entire solar system bears the hallmarks of a violent past. On Earth there is evidence of sudden catastrophes, such as impacts of asteroids, monstrous volcanic outbursts and floods that made great changes very quickly. One look look at the moon or mars will show you the great number of these events.
Therefore, it is not so far fetched to assume that NOTHING is truly constant for very long. Ask any Physicist. There is NO law of physics that says that the speed of light MUST be constant.
....If fossils were trapped all at once by a single universal flood, you would expect to only find fossils in a single layer....
If you want to find out how this can happen in a single sudden event, go study the floodplain and miniature of the Grand Canyon carved by the Toutle river below Mount Saint Helens. While there, you can also learn that petrification of wood can and does take place very quickly. All you need do is examine the bottom of Spirit Lake at the foot of the mountain.
There are two sources for the water given in the flood account. One of them is rain from the atmosphere, but most of the water came from deep within the earth, specifically the mantle. There is a seismic evidence even today that the quantities of water stored in the mantle could far exceed that in all of the world's oceans put together. A quick look at a diagram of the various sections of the earth, the crust, the outer mantle, the inner mantle and the core shows the relative volumes of these.
Not only would the volume of this water from the inside of the earth been huge, but it would also have been expelled rather violently. We are also told in the flood account of the Bible, that it was only after this event, that seasons as we have today, spring, summer, winter and fall began. The reason we have seasons in the first place is because the axis of the earth is now tilted at about 23 degrees in relation to the plane of the Earth's orbit. There is no way to know exactly what immense forces were at work to cause the axis of the earth to be realigned this way. Perhaps, a planet sized object came close. This would put tremendous pressure from gravitational forces on the entire Earth, squeezing it like a sponge, thus releasing immense quantities of stored water. Furthermore, this water would have been boiling hot.
Nobody has ever made a fossil and we do not observe fossils being formed today. When a living creature dies, its body decays by the action of microbes. The boiling hot waters would have killed these and the enormous raging flows of water sweeping across the surface of the earth, carried mud, rocks and boulders as large as apartment houses and buried the bodies of living creatures under thousands of feet of mud. With no exposure to microbes and oxygen, the impressions of the bodies of these animals, even the delicate parts at times, where preserved as the mud turned into rock.
The biblical record tells us that all of this took place in about a year. One look at the moon and Mars tells us that the solar system had a violent history. The gradualism spread by environmentalists is a huge lie. There is plenty of evidence that the earth itself also had a very violent history.
There is no way to explain how a fossil can be made gradually over time. Fossils were made in a sudden unimaginable water catastrophe. That is why we do not see fossil formation today, especially on a global scale.
None of this is allowed to be put into a textbook used in public schools. Only the gradualist interpretations of evolution are permitted, in spite of all the evidence of violent sudden catastrophe.
...If you disagree, please provide *specific* examples...
OK, here is one. The facts of science are that there is hardly any spot on this Earth where we DON'T find fossils. It is also a FACT that all fossils, without a single exception are found in sedimentary rocks. These are rocks formed by the action of water.
Evolutionists INTERPRET these facts by stating that bodies of water covered and receded these fossil beds over millions of years. The now fossilized creatures lived and died millions of years ago and were slowly buried and then over much more time became fossilized.
The same FACT that there are fossils only in sedimentary layers is interpreted by God believing creation scientists to be caused by a world wide, sudden universal flood catastrophe. The scientists who believe this are not some wild-eyed religious nuts, but are academically equally well qualified.
The Biblical account specifically states that the water covered the highest mountains. Even today, if the earth were flat and smooth, the whole planet would be a water world covered by over a mile of water. However, this equally valid scientific interpretation is NOT allowed to be even mentioned in American Schools by LAW.
...the establishment clause means the separation of church and state...
Indeed is does and rightfully so. The state must not endorse or prefer any particular religion or philosophy over any other. This sadly not the case in practice. The tenets of secular humanism have become the officially recognized religion in public schools and life. That happens to be a religion that believes that the mind of man and his rational understanding is the be all and end all of everything that exists. There is no room for the possibility of anything beyond what can be understood, because that would be supernatural. Any mention of the supernatural or of God is specifically disallowed by this humanistic religion and it has become the law. Like I said before, freedom OF religion is not the same as freedom FROM religion. The establishment clause was intended to give freedom of religion and it has failed in that in today's practice, because the religion of secular humanism is officially allowed to be taught in schools and other public forums. The humanistic sanctioned doctrine of evolution is taught under the guise of science and other views such as those of the founding fathers and other dissenters of the humanistic world view are forbidden by law to enter public life.
...We have seen nothing so far to indicate that decay rates have changed over time (including analysis of spectra of supernovas) so it seems like a reasonable assumption to make...
We DO have some evidence that the electromagnetic properties of the medium of space itself have indeed changed dramatically over time. This would demand that certain numbers, assumed to be "constants" have changed as well. One of these is Planck's constant which is measured to be smaller today than when it was first measured. Light-speed is related inversely to that. That means light moved much faster through the medium of space, when the Universe was very young, small, dense and hot. Just as sound travels faster in rock or water than in air, so too light traveled faster through a denser Universe.
There is evidence from past light-speed measurements using a gravity time-base, which have shown a decrease since such measurements were first done in the early 1600s. When an atomic time-base clock is used to measure the speed of light, as is being done today, this is not seen, since the product hc appears to be truly constant, with h and c moving in opposite directions. If a ruler elongates at the same rate as a distance to be measured by it, the distance will always be measured to be the same, even though it really is changing. Gravity equations have neither h nor c in them. Therefore, any clock based on gravity will not be affected by the changes in h or c and measure them directly, without any correction factors needed.
Since Planck's "constant" appears in equations describing the behavior of atoms, radioactive clocks must also be affected. So there IS evidence that call into question the belief that these "clocks" are truly constant over time.
.....The design hypothesis says nothing whatsoever about the identity, nature, aims, capabilities or methods of the designer. It just says, in effect, "a designer did it"...
That is true, even in human terms. However there are some things we can infer from a design. Since this is a computer oriented nerdy forum, the design of software in general or operating system specifically comes to mind. We can infer that those who designed the UNIX-based operating systems are better, smarter designers than those who came up with Windows. We can safely infer, that those who designed a 747 airliner had a bit of knowledge about aerodynamics and mechanics.
Of course we know nothing about what kind of people they are, what kind of families they have, what cars they drive etc. The only way we can get that kind of information is if these designers choose to reveal it to us and we get to know them in person.
We can infer from the intricacies and complexities of the universe we find ourselves in, that the designer has knowledge and information about the natural world far beyond our own. Especially in living things, he has come up with technology, the workings of which we have only very faint clues. For every answer that science gives, ten new questions arise.
In this book we call the Bible, there are many hundreds of statements along the lines of "thus says the Lord". How can we ascertain the authenticity and authorship of these writings? How do we determine truth or falsehood in human affairs, such as in courts of law? If you are preparing a document, how can you ensure that the recipients of this document will have a reasonable assurance that it is truly from you and not an artful forgery?
This has been and still is an ongoing problem in human communications. We do this with computers of course using encryption and passwords. These are used both to authenticate and to protect the message. The essence of these authentication methods involves knowledge that only the true author possesses.
This is exactly what God has done in the Bible. Because he is eternal and outside of and not subject to time, he uses his perfect knowledge of all time to write history in advance. We humans are singularly bad predicting the future. We can't even accurately predict the weather or the stock market. These predictions of the future in the Bible are not vague or self-fulfilling, but quite specific of events, places and times and NEVER miss. In ancient Israel, anyone who made predictions that clearly failed to come to pass was subject to capital punishment. Being a prophet or soothsayer was a rather dangerous profession back then.
There are plenty of books that describe many of these Bible prophecies, how they were fulfilled in the past and how they are being fulfilled today. If you are truly interested, I am sure you can find some and study them.
...Could you give a few examples of these, specifically examples of these being taught in science class...
Secular humanism is a philosophy and belief that man is the measure of all things and that nothing and no power outside the understanding of the human mind exists. This philosophy is reflected in the explanations and interpretations of scientific observations and experiments written into today's textbooks. Any interpretations of the facts of science where God, Intelligence or the supernatural is mentioned, is officially and legally disallowed. Secular humanism is the only official state promoted religion of the United States.
....That is really a subject for a textbook on philosophy, not for basic level science...
This is exactly right, but these philosophies are written into the present textbooks as "science" and then taught as a scientific truth. If any particular philosophy is incorporated into a science textbook, then in a sense it is no longer a science textbook but a book of philosophy.
If a book that purports to be a science textbook contains interpretations of the facts and observations of science, these interpretations will _always_ involve the philosophy of the interpreter. Therefore, any neutral science textbook should ALSO contain ALL plausible interpretations of the facts put forth by educated, degreed scientists. This would include scientists that graduated with honors from reputable mainstream colleges who DO believe in God and his communication to man, the Bible.
This, unfortunately is not the case in textbooks today. These only contain the philosophic interpretations seen through the lens of confident "there is no God" atheism. Any mention of God is officially and legally outlawed. The Supreme Court has misinterpreted the founders edict on freedom OF religion into a interpretation of freedom FROM religion.
...Er... WHEN would it have been "much faster" than today....
That "when" questioned is not only asked in the science of geology but in all other sciences trying to probe what might have happened in the past. To answer that question, not only in geology, but other sciences as well, present-day observations are applied to the past. It is _always_ assumed that this is a valid way to proceed. Such assumptions may be correct, but they are nevertheless assumptions and always will be. We simply do not _know_ how to answer these "when" questions without making some assumptions.
For example, scientists come up with dates of rocks and other things based on the phenomena of radioactivity. They can confidently give ranges of dates, but they are all based on the _assumption_ that the rate of radioactivity has always been what we observe it to be today. Again, this may be a valid assumption, but it is still an assumption. In a sense, the interpretations (not the facts) of science are based as much on faith as any religion.
...That is, no contradiction exists until someone "interprets" the bible/science....
No, the contradiction comes in because people interpret both the facts of science and the text of Bible according to their worldview.
A person with an atheistic worldview throws the Bible away entirely and interprets all scientific facts and observations through his lens of " their is no God". Everything that exists, according to this worldview, came into existence by some means that specifically excludes any kind of intelligence or God.
A person with a Christian worldview believes that the Bible is God's communication to mankind and tries to figure out what this communication is truly all about. Such a Christian person will look at the facts and observations of science and interpret them through the lens of Genesis 1:1 where God, Time, Space, matter, and energy are all mentioned together.
...How about the Star of Bethlehem?...
According to the written account, what was the purpose of the star? If you search out and answer that question, then the properties and orbits of stars as we know them today becomes irrelevant.
The purpose of the star is clearly given to us. Some cosmic phenomena caused these astronomers of the East to travel at least 500 miles in order to worship and give homage to this person they labeled the newborn King of the Jews. We are not told how they connected whatever it was they saw in the heavens with the birth of his child. Whatever this "star" may have been, as defined by our modern astronomy is irrelevant because its purpose was to guide them to the very place where they could worship the one they were seeking.
...How is science the same as secular humanism...
Science itself isn't, but some of the interpretations of scientific facts are foundational doctrines or beliefs of secular humanism. All interpretations of scientific facts should be clearly labeled as such interpretations. Also, any qualified scientist, such as any one with a degree from a well-known university, should be allowed to express their opinion and interpretation, even if and especially if it is materially different from or contradicts the interpretations of the majority.
Experimentally established and observed facts of science could be clearly separated from the interpretation of such facts.
...the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved...
How does that statement say that the earth is at the center of the solar system? Maybe some people interpret it that way but that is not what it says.
One of the rules of interpreting not only the Bible, but any written text, is to pay attention to the context. The quote you gave is from Psalm 96:10. The readers thereof are encouraged and inspired to appreciate and worship the one true God who made the heavens and earth. Taking a few words or phrases out of context from the Bible is a favorite activity of cults and unbelievers. The former then fashion these words into their doctrines and the latter use the out of context phrases to ridicule and debunk.
Are you not glad that the Earth is rather "rock solid"? Are you not glad that humans are incapable of making or controlling the weather? Should we be allowed to vote to decide whether it rains tomorrow for the benefit of the farmers or that the sun shines for the benefit of a baseball game? I am very glad that the basic mechanics and operations of our planet are well beyond the shenanigans and whims of mankind.
...I'm sure you will understand the reality of the situation in a year or two.....
That may be, but I also understand that the situation came about because of pure greed. If part of this bailout would require every one of those greedy, or at best incompetent bank officers were fired and required to become janitors for the rest of their lives, a repeat performance of this fiasco might be avoided. Maybe the taxpayers have to bail out the banks to prevent a full-scale depression such as the moneybags precipitated in 1929 by similar greedy behavior. It seems that the rules that apply to little businesses and to you and me, no longer apply to the big guys. Little business people and you and I have to suffer the consequences of our bad decisions, but now, those who made the bad decisions get off scot free. They were paid exorbitant salaries, to manage other people's money entrusted to them. They are not going to lose their big houses, yachts, BMW's and other luxuries. Most of them, will probably get another job or get to keep the present job with a bailed out bank.
....Because ID, not being falsifiable, is not a scientific theory at all...
That line of reasoning is absolutely pure BS. If I find a watch or other complex device somewhere, I can claim it is designed and you can deny that claim. The same is true of complex natural things. We know that man-made things are designed. How do we know this? How do we know for example that Stonehenge is a man-made object and not a natural rock formation? There are many mountains and rock formations on earth. In North Dakota at Mount Rushmore there is a mountainside which is quite different from any other mountainside. It happens to have the likenesses of several American presidents chiseled into it. How do we know that this is not a natural rock formation, but of human, intelligent origin?
The same evidences of design can be found in human systems and devices, is also present in the systems and devices that exist in the natural world.
...The religion is called "Christianity",...
which is named after Jesus the Christ. He believed in the written word available at that time. He indicated the story of Jonah and the fish to be a historical event. He quoted his Bible, the Old Testament of our present Bible many times, taking it quite literally.
...If your religious dogmas contradict scientific findings...
That may be, but the FACTS of science and what is actually written in the Bible never contradict. It is the interpretation of the facts of science by people and the interpretation of what is actually written in the Bible by other people, that the contradictions arise.
...Why would they assume constant movement?...
You tell me and we'll both know. There is plenty of evidence that the earth's crust and the continents move around like ice floes in the arctic oceans. We know by measurement how fast they drift today, but there is no way to MEASURE how fast the travelled in the past. We can make some assumptions which may or may not be right. In the absence of having information how the rate of movement changed, I suppose a linear guess is as good as any. However we do know from most phenomena in nature that linearity of anything is strangely rare. So it is likely that the rate of movement, was NOT linear and we are left guessing how LONG the drifting continents took to get to where they from where they were.
Extrapolating anything where the curve of the rate of change is unknown is pure guesswork.
We do observe that the interior of the Earth is rather toasty still. This means that in times past the molten rocks of the mantle, upon which the continents and the oceans float should have been hotter and therefore less viscous and so allowed the continents to move more freely than they do today. Maybe science will figure out how much more fluid things were way back in time and then come up with a reasonable estimate of fast the continents could have drifted around. It would most certainly be much faster than what we observe today.