Challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.

[YoursTrue]

This is another thing that puzzles me about the Genesis account. According to Genesis 2:18-20, God created all the animals and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. Presumably God knew enough to create male and female animals, even though it had not yet occurred to him to create a female human. Perhaps Adam was observant enough to notice that there were anatomical differences between individual mammals of the same kind, and to wonder both what these differences meant and why there were no humans with the same anatomical structures as female mammals.

By the way, the grammar of your second sentence is incorrect. It should be either 'the woman came from the same genetic stock as the man' or 'the woman came from a different genetic stock from the man'.

I see that God let Adam be without a mate for a while. You're right there. But it does say that male and female he created them. Since He took Eve from Adam's rib, the makeup was very similar but obviously not an exact duplicate of the man.

 

[YoursTrue]

During that argument, it was explained to you at great length that sedimentary material is derived from the erosion of pre-existing rocks (which can be igneous, metamorphic or sedimentary) and that this eroded material is transported by water or wind and deposited as loose sediment which is consolidated by the pressure of more sedimentary material that accumulates on top of it.

Lava, on the other hand, is derived from the solidification and crystallisation of molten rock (magma). Its origin and its petrology are therefore quite different from those of sedimentary rocks.

I've seen other responses that the lava can carry whatever (ground...sediment,,,rocks...) it picks up on the way as it flows.

 

[YoursTrue]

During that argument, it was explained to you at great length that sedimentary material is derived from the erosion of pre-existing rocks (which can be igneous, metamorphic or sedimentary) and that this eroded material is transported by water or wind and deposited as loose sediment which is consolidated by the pressure of more sedimentary material that accumulates on top of it.

Lava, on the other hand, is derived from the solidification and crystallisation of molten rock (magma). Its origin and its petrology are therefore quite different from those of sedimentary rocks.

Here we go again. "Lava is a liquid, that cools into rock, which is a solid... Lava is molten rock (a liquid) that flows on the earth's surface. Lava is formed inside the crust of the Earth by extreme heat; it erupts to form a volcano." Are you saying that the molten flowing rock may not carry anything it flows over? Exploring How States of Matter can Change.

 

[Monty]

I see that God let Adam be without a mate for a while. You're right there. But it does say that male and female he created them. Since He took Eve from Adam's rib, the makeup was very similar but obviously not an exact duplicate of the man.

IOW, since Eve was a clone of Adam then Eve had a Y chromosome. Is that why they were both named Adam (Gen 5:2). And is that why it took them 130 "years" to first become pregnant since they couldn't work out which was Arthur and which was Martha (Gen 5:3).

Or were they about 12 years old when they first became pregnant, ie 130 lunar cycles?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

IOW, since Eve was a clone of Adam then Eve had a Y chromosome. Is that why they were both named Adam (Gen 5:2). And is that why it took them 130 "years" to first become pregnant since they couldn't work out which was Arthur and which was Martha (Gen 5:3).

Or were they about 12 years old when they first became pregnant, ie 130 lunar cycles?

Or God is Almighty and Eve is not a clone but similar with obvious differences and differences in the genetics.
Of course, the false “science” of evolution is devolving toward insanity with the trans dogma.

 

[F1fan]

Or God is Almighty and Eve is not a clone but similar with obvious differences and differences in the genetics.

Where in the Bible does it mention genetics? You can't use science, and then also reject science.

Of course, the false “science” of evolution is devolving toward insanity with the trans dogma.

You are wrong of course. Everyone knows it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The ice cores will have many layers when you consider the effects of the flood,
RIP uniformitarianism, long live catastrophism the real science.

You make endless claims but never support them. They can all be refuted by a handwave. Meanwhile those opposing you have given you links to and quotes from scientific papers.

This is the most epic denial in the universe.

Why do you insist that your God is a liar?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes but we had that argument about rocks and/or sediment being carried by lava a while back.

Yes. And you lost it. Badly.

 

[YoursTrue]

IOW, since Eve was a clone of Adam then Eve had a Y chromosome. Is that why they were both named Adam (Gen 5:2). And is that why it took them 130 "years" to first become pregnant since they couldn't work out which was Arthur and which was Martha (Gen 5:3).
Or were they about 12 years old when they first became pregnant, ie 130 lunar cycles?

I don't know what the chromosomal structure was. Adam referred, btw, to the name of mankind. (man) or Adam (Hebrew)) Woman came from the man. But the word 'man' in Hebrew can mean simply mankind. But refers to the first human male as well.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You make endless claims but never support them. They can all be refuted by a handwave. Meanwhile those opposing you have given you links to and quotes from scientific papers.

This is the most epic denial in the universe.

Why do you insist that your God is a liar?

False accusations again as I have never said God was a liar.
And your hand waving truth denials and artful dodging will not save the epic fail of evolution and billions of years nor the non peer reviewed evolutionist sites.

 

[Subduction Zone]

False accusations again as I have never said God was a liar.
And your hand waving truth denials and artful dodging will not save the epic fail of evolution and billions of years nor the non peer reviewed evolutionist sites.

Projection again. I made no false accusations. I need to remind you that to be taken seriously you need to do more than to spout nonsense.

Do you remember how badly you failed when I showed you images that showed that the North Fork of the Toutle River was nothing like the Grand Canyon? Do you remember how badly you failed at the Goosenecks State Park pictures where you could not explain the observed formation at all?

Everyone else has seen that. You are not fooling anyone. Even your fellow creationists are pretty much ignoring you.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Projection again. I made no false accusations. I need to remind you that to be taken seriously you need to do more than to spout nonsense.

Do you remember how badly you failed when I showed you images that showed that the North Fork of the Toutle River was nothing like the Grand Canyon? Do you remember how badly you failed at the Goosenecks State Park pictures where you could not explain the observed formation at all?

Everyone else has seen that. You are not fooling anyone. Even your fellow creationists are pretty much ignoring you.

The North Fork River area is a carved out canyon and the layers of rock there is just like the Grand Canyon.
I remember you trying to hide the evidence with the photo from above which diminishes the features that prove a carved out canyon with rock layers which look like the Grand Canyon’s.
And of course Mount Saint Helen’s is absolute proof of the worldwide flood.

Remembering Mount St. Helens 35 Years Later

The volcano’s main 1980 eruption filled in an entire valley with hundreds of feet of sediment. Another smaller eruption event deposited more material on top of that, and then a third deposition occurred in 1982. Later, a catastrophic flood of snowmelt water and muddy debris tore a gash through...

www.icr.org

 

[Subduction Zone]

The North Fork River area is a carved out canyon and the layers of rock there is just like the Grand Canyon.

Not even close. I gave you an over head photo of the area. It looks nothing like the Grand Canyon. Where are the meanders.

Wait a second, do you even know what a meander is? If you do not understand something just ask. Politely please. If you do so you will be answered.

I remember you trying to hide the evidence with the photo from above which diminishes the features that prove a carved out canyon with rock layers which look like the Grand Canyon’s.

No, that is not "trying to hide" That is trying to show. You do not even know which features are from that burst of flood water. For the most part the channel is only 20 meters or 65 feet deep.

And of course Mount Saint Helen’s is absolute proof of the worldwide flood.

How so? You do not seem to know what "Proof " is. The Goosenecks photos still refute the flood. Even if a channel was dug quickly there that does not help you. There are features of the Grand Canyon that the North Fork of the Toutle River simply does not have. Remember how you couldn't find them?

Remembering Mount St. Helens 35 Years Later

The volcano’s main 1980 eruption filled in an entire valley with hundreds of feet of sediment. Another smaller eruption event deposited more material on top of that, and then a third deposition occurred in 1982. Later, a catastrophic flood of snowmelt water and muddy debris tore a gash through...

www.icr.org

And a known pseudoscience source that orders its workers not to use the scientific method. How do you think that ignorance and lies help you?

 

[vulcanlogician]

The North Fork River area is a carved out canyon and the layers of rock there is just like the Grand Canyon.
I remember you trying to hide the evidence with the photo from above which diminishes the features that prove a carved out canyon with rock layers which look like the Grand Canyon’s.
And of course Mount Saint Helen’s is absolute proof of the worldwide flood.

Can I ask you a question, man? If it was explicitly demonstrated to you (by God himself) that evolution is true, but (also) in this conversation between you and God, if God assured you that he sent his son Jesus to Earth to preach forgiveness would you:

A) Tell God that you hate him and his son because every word of Genesis must be literally true in order for you to genuinely follow Christ.

B) Accept Christ's mercy, despite the fact that Genesis might not be literally true.

or

C) Other. (Please elaborate.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here is an overhead video of the Toutle. Where and how does it look like the Grand Canyon?

Here is another photo. Do you see those flat areas next to the steep valley walls? The steep valley walls are old. They are pre-explosion. The "flood" that you are talking about eroded that little bit of ash, that is about 65 feet of ash. The creationists tried to fool you by taking a picture that included the original old valley walls:

You can see a braided stream. That is not at all like a meander.

 

[Polymath257]

The North Fork River area is a carved out canyon and the layers of rock there is just like the Grand Canyon.
I remember you trying to hide the evidence with the photo from above which diminishes the features that prove a carved out canyon with rock layers which look like the Grand Canyon’s.

So the erosion from the eruption occurred rapidly. But those layers of rock were there *before* the eruption and had to be laid down before that eruption. They were not formed when the canyon was carved. In other words, even if the erosion was rapid, the formation of the layers was not.

In the same way, the Colorado river has cut through the rock layers in the Grand canyon relatively quickly, but the layers themselves were formed over many millions of years.

So please make a distinction between the layers themselves and the carving through the layers.

As far as the actual carving goes, notice that the 'canyons' produced by the Mt St Helens eruption were straight with only gradual curves. In contrast, there are many places in the Grand Canyon where the river meanders in a way that *cannot* happen rapidly. A rapid flow of water makes straight erosion valleys, not meandering ones.

And of course Mount Saint Helen’s is absolute proof of the worldwide flood.

Remembering Mount St. Helens 35 Years Later

The volcano’s main 1980 eruption filled in an entire valley with hundreds of feet of sediment. Another smaller eruption event deposited more material on top of that, and then a third deposition occurred in 1982. Later, a catastrophic flood of snowmelt water and muddy debris tore a gash through...

www.icr.org

Oh goody. A good example of not understanding how radioactive dating works and what it is actually dating. Not to mention that it has nothing to do with a world wide flood.

 

[YoursTrue]

Can I ask you a question, man? If it was explicitly demonstrated to you (by God himself) that evolution is true, but (also) in this conversation between you and God, if God assured you that he sent his son Jesus to Earth to preach forgiveness would you:

A) Tell God that you hate him and his son because every word of Genesis must be literally true in order for you to genuinely follow Christ.

B) Accept Christ's mercy, despite the fact that Genesis might not be literally true.

or

C) Other. (Please elaborate.)

if, if, and if? demonstrated by God? If?

 

[vulcanlogician]

if, if, and if? demonstrated by God? If?

Yeah. Hypothetical questions. They aren't impossible to answer.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yeah. Hypothetical questions. They aren't impossible to answer.

Maybe by comedians if these hypothetical questions don't add up to reality or consistency.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So the erosion from the eruption occurred rapidly. But those layers of rock were there *before* the eruption and had to be laid down before that eruption. They were not formed when the canyon was carved. In other words, even if the erosion was rapid, the formation of the layers was not.

In the same way, the Colorado river has cut through the rock layers in the Grand canyon relatively quickly, but the layers themselves were formed over many millions of years.

So please make a distinction between the layers themselves and the carving through the layers.

As far as the actual carving goes, notice that the 'canyons' produced by the Mt St Helens eruption were straight with only gradual curves. In contrast, there are many places in the Grand Canyon where the river meanders in a way that *cannot* happen rapidly. A rapid flow of water makes straight erosion valleys, not meandering ones.


Oh goody. A good example of not understanding how radioactive dating works and what it is actually dating. Not to mention that it has nothing to do with a world wide flood.

He is also probably confused about how large of a channel that the Toutle carved out after the explosion. The river already existed in an old channel and this picture shows it. On the right side you can see the top of the valley, it forms a cliff. Below that is a scree or talus slope. That is from the slow natural erosion of the cliff. The rocks fall forming that slope. That could not have been formed by a flood. Those rocks just fell straight down, as you can see from how they are piled against the cliffs. They were not taken you by that flood. That would have moved them down stream. You can also see where in a bend of the stream that the talus slope was removed by that flood in just one spot. The actual channel from the flood is the area between the two flat shelves down below. The flat shelves is what remains of the ash. It was only 20 m deep the Grand Canyon is about 2,000 meters deep, or a hundred times as deep. The Grand Canyon also has meanders and it does not have a braided stream bed.

I think that @SavedByTheLord thinks that the whole valley was carved out by the eruption.