ID/Creationism - How fast were extinctions?

[Phaycops]

*raises hands also*

Not to mention that if a universal deluge happened, one would expect to find sediment layers deposited by the deluge. The layers (even if they were thin) would be present almost everywhere, since just it was just 6Ky ago.

...

Neither can I remember seeing "deluge layers" anywhere else. Is my memory so poor? Or the areas where I have worked are some sort of biased sample? Why no one has ever published a paper on these deposits?

I agree with pupdog and the "invisible" H3ll - one has to twist science to turn the universal deluge a possibility.

Ok, is the argument: a) that ALL sedimentary rocks are deposited by global deluge, or b) that there was a global deluge and that there is evidence for it?

I was under the impression it was (a), because Nick mentioned some kind of problem with uniformitarianism.

Anyway, if it was (b), yes, of course you're absolutely right. Not to mention that ther are other global records of catastrophic events. I'm thinking here of the widespread iridium-rich layers between the Cretaceous and Tertiary (the dinosaur extinction) that support a large asteroid impact. I don't know if they're completely global, but they're fairly far-flung, IIRC, so if there was a global deluge, there should certainly be some indication of it.

I mean, we know what to look for, we can see floods happening today, and we can determine from their sediment deposits what rocks from a flood should look like.

Sorry, I'm totally derailing this conversation. And it was MY recommendation not to do that.

Nick -- ignore me, go ahead please and think about the water for the flood. I know you don't have a lot of time, but certainly you can find the time to read the articles we link to before replying to our questions, right? Otherwise, don't expect us to have much respect for your arguments.

 

[pupdog]

It seems like YECs want to blame the flood for lots of geology--forming the strata seen exposed in the Grand Canyon; cutting the gorge of the Grand Canyon before the sediments have had time to consolidate so they could maintain steep (some vertical) slopes; forming the fossil-laden sedimentary rocks of the Alps; and others.

It has long been clear that not all sedimentary rocks were formed at the same time, or by the same processes--others have mentioned unconformities and evaporites in posts above. But, as also posted above, we have not recognized a worldwide flood deposit (in contrast to the recognized Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary). Where in the geologic column should we expect to find it (i.e., how old would it be)? If it would be 6,000 to 10,000 years old, there certainly should be evidence; heck, we have evidence of all sorts of regional depositional events that occurred during this time frame.

Maybe it was Pentawater.

 

[fishbob]

It seems like YECs want to blame the flood for lots of geology--forming the strata seen exposed in the Grand Canyon; cutting the gorge of the Grand Canyon before the sediments have had time to consolidate so they could maintain steep (some vertical) slopes; forming the fossil-laden sedimentary rocks of the Alps; and others.

It has long been clear that not all sedimentary rocks were formed at the same time, or by the same processes--others have mentioned unconformities and evaporites in posts above. But, as also posted above, we have not recognized a worldwide flood deposit (in contrast to the recognized Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary). Where in the geologic column should we expect to find it (i.e., how old would it be)? If it would be 6,000 to 10,000 years old, there certainly should be evidence; heck, we have evidence of all sorts of regional depositional events that occurred during this time frame.

Maybe it was Pentawater.

My impression is that the YEC crowd is attributing all sedimentary rocks to a single flood event. Evidence is an alien concept to these people. A YEC would not recognize evidence if it bit him. Unconformities, evaporites, paleo environments, sedimentary structures are meaningless to people that refuse to look at evidence. Randi's point about offending the terminally ignorant (see today's commentary) applies here.

 

[Ceinwyn]

He took them on the ark as the bible says he took two of every kind. Not 2 of every dog, or every horse, but kind. You have a picture of taking every species, but this is not the case. So this would limit the number of dinosaurs required. I have read that the average size of a dinosaur is a sheep, so not all dinosaurs are these massive creatures. So yes he took them and most dinosaurs are extinct. You will scoff at this, but there are many eyewitness accounts of dinosaur like creatures. Loch Ness, Lake Champlaign, etc. Pictures of dinosaurs have been shown to tribes in relatively unexplored places like the congo and places in Africa, and they say they have seen these animals. We know of gigantic snakes. So while I am certainly not dogmatic about some dinosaurs existing today, some people and tribes would say they do in remote unexplored areas. Last comment on the ark is that it took over 100 years to build and God gave the dimmensions in cubits, there have been some large skeletons found, we do not know how big Noah and his son's were, how big was that cubit? Again, not scientific fact I understand, but interesting things to think about.

You're a loony. A bona fide loony.

Why anyone even gives you the time of day, I don't know.

 

[Correa Neto]

My impression is that the YEC crowd is attributing all sedimentary rocks to a single flood event. Evidence is an alien concept to these people. A YEC would not recognize evidence if it bit him. Unconformities, evaporites, paleo environments, sedimentary structures are meaningless to people that refuse to look at evidence. Randi's point about offending the terminally ignorant (see today's commentary) applies here.

I wonder what are their explanations for metasedimentary rocks...

Instant post-deluge metamorphism?
Antediluvian layers metamorphosed by the weight of the waters?

And how they explain that layers supposedly deposited during the deluge can be tilted, faulted, folded, buried underneath kilometres of rock (including massive volcanics) or uplifited miles high?
Instant post-deluge tectonics + instant post-deluge erosion?

Tectonics happens very fast and when no one is around to see it?

Or they will say post-deluge volcanic eruptions and earthquakes are enough to explain all these features?

Since they claim that sedimentary rocks were formed by sediments deposited during the deluge, diagenesis and lithification must be quite fast, after a couple of thousand tears. Why don´t we see sediments say, deposited by the time of the pharaos, that became rock? Why loose mud deposited at the bottom of a water body does not become rock almost instantly?

Oh, I got it- artifacts of the Devil to stray humans from god, using logic and reason...

I can almost hear Penn & Teller shouthing "BS"!!!!

edited to fix a couple of typos and (hopefully) for clarity...

 

[Nick Harman]

Flood Water

Did I miss a link you had put up? I didn't see any articles you wanted me to read.

Where did the water come from?

Genesis 7:11 (KJV)
In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.


I already mentioned this earlier. It came from inside the earth and from above. Already mentioned a couple of theories, canopy and steam from volcanic activity. I, nor anyone knows. No creationist believes he can scientifically prove the flood. I have read a lot of books and articles and I have never heard this claimed. The problem of course is that this is an event that will never happen again (per Genesis 9:15). We can not use todays local disasters to give us full insight into what happened in the Genesis Flood. Someone asked if I thought all geology is the result of the flood. This would be a ridiculous thought since we of course see floods, volcanoes, earthquakes, that have caused some of the geology we find.

So there is your answer per the bible and supported to a certain extint by the fact that we have water in the earth today.

Did you have an article you wanted me to read?

Serving a risen Savior,
Nick

 

[Darat]

Hi Nick

Can you explain why you think God told Noah to take 2 of each kind into the bible when as you must have now read he actually tells Noah to take 2 of each but then later on tells him to take 7 of certain kinds? And why the time of the flood changes in the story?

Surely this is an error in the Bible and therefore it could be that the Flood story itself may also be error?

I feel these questions have to be asked because you are claiming you know the flood happened because the Bible says so. However when the Bible passages that describe the Flood actually contradict each other how can anyone be certain of which are facts and which are errors?


(Edited for an are to and.)

 

[Dr Adequate]

So there is your answer per the bible and supported to a certain extint by the fact that we have water in the earth today.

How does the existence of water in the Earth today support the notion that there was once a global Flood?

After all, surely that was equally true before there was a Flood? If people then had observed groundwater, aquifers, etc, and said: "This supports the notion that there was once a global Flood", they'd have been wrong, wouldn't they?

---

Now, can I ask a question about YEC? If the Bible story is literally true, then the the species we see today all migrated from the resting place of the Ark, on Mount Ararat, Turkey.

This does not jibe well with the distribution of species we see today. In particular, I keep wondering about the poor kangaroos and wallabies and spiny anteaters and platypuses and so on making it to Australia.

By contrast, science explains biogeography perfectly.

 

[Nick Harman]

Hi Nick

Can you explain why you think God told Noah to take 2 of each kind into the bible when as you must have now read he actually tells Noah to take 2 of each but then later on tells him to take 7 of certain kinds?

Answer: The certain kinds are what the bible refers to as clean animals. I have not really looked into this, but logic would say that since clean animals were animals that God allowed people to eat, he would want that population to grow quicker.


And why the time of the flood changes in the story?

Answer: I'm not sure I recall this argument before. What change would you be referring to? Save me some looking time.



I feel these questions have to be asked because you are claiming you know the flood happened because the Bible says so. However when the Bible passages that describe the Flood actually contradict each other how can anyone be certain of which are facts and which are errors?
--Good questions, your right, Jesus said, If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
-- If the bible is in error in one part, the whole book is wrong.

Let me know.

Nick





(Edited for an are to and.)

 

[Nick Harman]

How does the existence of water in the Earth today support the notion that there was once a global Flood?
Answer: I intended that as support (not proof) that water came from inside the earth (fountains of deep). You would really have a hard time with the fountains of deep if the earth was bone dry inside it.

After all, surely that was equally true before there was a Flood?
Answer: No body knows if this was equally true. For the fountains of the deep to be true, there had to be more, not equal.


If people then had observed groundwater, aquifers, etc, and said: "This supports the notion that there was once a global Flood", they'd have been wrong, wouldn't they?
Answer: Again, it had to be more not equal.

---

Now, can I ask a question about YEC? If the Bible story is literally true, then the the species we see today all migrated from the resting place of the Ark, on Mount Ararat, Turkey.

This does not jibe well with the distribution of species we see today. In particular, I keep wondering about the poor kangaroos and wallabies and spiny anteaters and platypuses and so on making it to Australia.

By contrast, science explains biogeography perfectly.
Answer: I will get back to the Australia question in my next post, but I would like to point out that science also shows animals producing after their kind. Has a horse, a dog, a cat, a crocodile, whatever animal you want to pick given rise to another animal. (not a variation, but an observable change to another kind of animal)

 

[Dr Adequate]

If the bible is in error in one part, the whole book is wrong.

I don't see how that follows at all.

This is not, after all, held to be true of any other book --- I don't see why the Bible should be placed by its admirers under such a severe disadvantage.

---

Another question. Do you also take the following passages of Scripture literally? :

"The world also shall be stable, that it be not moved." 1 Chronicles 16:30

"The pillars of the earth are the LORD's, and he hath set the world upon them." 1 Samuel 2:8

"Bless the LORD... who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain...who walketh upon the wings of the wind... Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever." Psalms 104:1-5

"Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved." Psalms 96:10

I think we know where you stand on Darwin, but what of that dangerous heretic Galileo?

 

[Dr Adequate]

Has a horse, a dog, a cat, a crocodile, whatever animal you want to pick given rise to another animal. (not a variation, but an observable change to another kind of animal)

What do you mean by "given rise to" and "kind"?

On the assumption that you mean "given birth to" and "species", then yes, rather surprisingly, speciation events can take place in one generation. That's not really what Darwin was talking about, though.

I suspect that you're not very familiar with the theory of evolution. Where did you get your ideas about it from?

 

[Nick Harman]

I don't see how that follows at all.

This is not, after all, held to be true of any other book --- I don't see why the Bible should be placed by its admirers under such a severe disadvantage.
Answer: this is not any other book. the bible is the word of God. 2 Tim. 3:16 (KJV)
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
If ALL scripture is given by inspiration of God, and it is in error at any point, that is not a God I want to trust. How do I know when he is right or wrong? So this is very vital to scripture.




--Another question. Do you also take the following passages of Scripture literally? :I think we know where you stand on Darwin, but what of that dangerous heretic Galileo?

Answer: No not literally in the sense that the world is motionless as I believe you are implying. This is talking about God as the creator, the sustainer. He created and he will uphold the earth. This is in harmony with the whole of scripture that tells us we need to trust and dedend in God.

I do not know much about Galileo. Another time maybe. Unless you insist, post me some material.

 

[Nick Harman]

What do you mean by "given rise to" and "kind"?
Answer: offspring/giving birth, yes. (kind = able to reproduce)

On the assumption that you mean "given birth to" and "species", then yes, rather surprisingly, speciation events can take place in one generation. That's not really what Darwin was talking about, though.
--Darwin had a pretty good imagination on the islands. He saw varieties of finches and drew some pretty spectacular conclusions. No I have not read his book.

I suspect that you're not very familiar with the theory of evolution. Where did you get your ideas about it from?

answer: I went to public school, newspaper, magazines, internet, etc.

 

[Correa Neto]

Re: Flood Water

...snip...

Where did the water come from?

Genesis 7:11 (KJV)
In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.


I already mentioned this earlier. It came from inside the earth and from above. Already mentioned a couple of theories, canopy and steam from volcanic activity. I, nor anyone knows.

Consider this: have you ever seen heard of or read about any type of volcanic activity that leaves no trace? What you are implying by "steam from volcanic activity" means that most if not all volcanoes on earth would have to erupt at the same time. Is there any evidence for this (massive tuff, ignimbrites and lava layers of the flood age, at all continents)? No.

Now, could this contribute to an increase in the water level as YEC propose? No. Get a book on geology or do some googling on lava composition. You´ll see that the water ammount is quite small, and besides, magmtic fluids include a lot of dioxide of carbon, methane and suphuric acid. These would make things quite hard for the people in the ark.

Note that none of the theories "answering" the water source, alone or together withstand a minumum ammount of criticism. Forget about the canopy. Get a book on the Earth´s atmosphere and you´ll see why.

No creationist believes he can scientifically prove the flood. I have read a lot of books and articles and I have never heard this claimed. The problem of course is that this is an event that will never happen again (per Genesis 9:15). We can not use todays local disasters to give us full insight into what happened in the Genesis Flood.

Yes we can. We can study the record of past cataclysmic events, we can model them and we can predict what would be the evidences of such a flood. You want me to describe what would be the expected sedimentary deposits of a universal flood? I am sure that others geologists here at JREF would also help. Than all you would have to do is try to find them. But don´t be disappointed if you fail to find them.

BTW, if you maintain your statement that nothing can be proven scientifically about the flood, than this discussion is pointless. Without evidence you will never convince us, and if you do not accept evidence that may deny anything that is written in the Bible, nothing will be gained. We will seek for evidence, none will be found and YEC will continue sticking to the Bible as a flawless source of information.

...Someone asked if I thought all geology is the result of the flood. This would be a ridiculous thought since we of course see floods, volcanoes, earthquakes, that have caused some of the geology we find.

So, these phenomena, in your interpretation, created the geology that existed previous to the flood? If so, than you have to admit that Earth is older than 6kY. The rate if occurence of these phenomena and the time they take to shape the landscape have not suffered great changes in the past. These phenomena slowly build and reshape the crust.

So there is your answer per the bible and supported to a certain extint by the fact that we have water in the earth today.

As you should see, the answer is far from being satisfactory.

...Did I miss a link you had put up? I didn't see any articles you wanted me to read.
...snip...
Did you have an article you wanted me to read?

Any book on general or physical geology will do. As soon as you start to know a bit about geology you will understand how impossible is the universal flood. Not everything can be learnt from the Bible.

 

[Nick Harman]

Now, can I ask a question about YEC? If the Bible story is literally true, then the the species we see today all migrated from the resting place of the Ark, on Mount Ararat, Turkey.

This does not jibe well with the distribution of species we see today. In particular, I keep wondering about the poor kangaroos and wallabies and spiny anteaters and platypuses and so on making it to Australia.

In the Answers Book from AiG, they point out that animals are moved around by humans, so this could contribute. They also noted that fossilation is rare, so it is not a huge surprise that we do not see a fossil path of migration. Per the book examples would be buffalo, and lions in Israel until recently but we do not find their fossils.

Nick

 

[Nick Harman]

Re: Re: Flood Water

Consider this: have you ever seen heard of or read about any type of volcanic activity that leaves no trace? What you are implying by "steam from volcanic activity" means that most if not all volcanoes on earth would have to erupt at the same time. Is there any evidence for this (massive tuff, ignimbrites and lava layers of the flood age, at all continents)? No.

Nick: One of the theories is that steam from eruptions supplied for global rain.



Note that none of the theories "answering" the water source, alone or together withstand a minumum ammount of criticism. Forget about the canopy. Get a book on the Earth´s atmosphere and you´ll see why.

Nick: I assume you are talking about temperatures on Earth would get too hot?




Yes we can. We can study the record of past cataclysmic events, we can model them and we can predict what would be the evidences of such a flood. You want me to describe what would be the expected sedimentary deposits of a universal flood? I am sure that others geologists here at JREF would also help. Than all you would have to do is try to find them. But don´t be disappointed if you fail to find them.

Nick: This is not an argument of proof from lack of evidence but my point is that we can make assumptions but the flood of the bible can not be tested today. What we observe today is not like the event of the bible's flood. That is my point.

BTW, if you maintain your statement that nothing can be proven scientifically about the flood, than this discussion is pointless. Without evidence you will never convince us, and if you do not accept evidence that may deny anything that is written in the Bible, nothing will be gained.

Nick: Then I guess any discussion of origins is pointless. You can not prove life evolved from natural processes, but it is in the text books. Life evolving from non-life is the dumbest idea ever. Evolution scoffs at the flood, but is all about life evolving from non-living material. Where is your science to even come close to supporting that idea.

You have a totally different world view to interpret the evidence so it is certainly tough to find common ground on what can and cannot be proved.



So, these phenomena, in your interpretation, created the geology that existed previous to the flood? If so, than you have to admit that Earth is older than 6kY. The rate if occurence of these phenomena and the time they take to shape the landscape have not suffered great changes in the past. These phenomena slowly build and reshape the crust.

I am not following here. I didn't say anything about geology that existed before the flood.

 

[Nick Harman]

question

Do any of you believe in God?

Nick

 

[Nick Harman]

Have a good weekend

Looks like it died in here, I have to run. I will be back in here on Monday. Would like to hear more on how life started on Earth. Later.

In Christ,
Nick Harman

 

[Dr Adequate]

In the Answers Book from AiG, they point out that animals are moved around by humans, so this could contribute. They also noted that fossilation is rare, so it is not a huge surprise that we do not see a fossil path of migration. Per the book examples would be buffalo, and lions in Israel until recently but we do not find their fossils.

I'm really having a hard time imagining people driving herds of duck-billed platypuses from Turkey to Austalia. Not to mention the spiny anteaters, the kangaroos, and... why did they just take marsupials and monotremes? Why not a few sheep or something? I hear they do well in Australia.