Evidences given for a young-earth

[TagliatelliMonster]

This particular piece relates to the period after the continental crust formed....

10 Ways Earth Once Looked Like An Alien Planet - Listverse

The sky hasn’t always been blue. About 3.7 billion years ago, it’s believed, the oceans were green, the continents were black,
and the sky overhead looked like a fuzzy orange haze.
Back then, the makeup of the Earth was very different, and we have every reason to believe that left us with a completely
different color scheme. The oceans were green because iron formations were dissolving into the seawater, spilling a green rust
in and tainting it into the shade of a rusted copper penny. The continents were black because they would have been covered with
cooling lava, and there weren’t any plants to cover it.
And the sky wouldn’t have been blue. Part of the reason it looks blue today is the oxygen in our atmosphere, but there wasn’t very
much of it 3.7 billion years ago. Instead, the sky was mostly methane. As the Sun’s light pierced through an atmosphere of methane,
we would have seen an orange haze hanging overhead.[2]

Do you realize that this description doesn't at all match up with what you were claiming?

 

[Audie]

Where did you get the idea that that is what science says?

Obviously, he made it up.

To explain where he got it,unless he just confesses that
he made it up, there will have to be more falsehoods.

You should not encourage a person to sin.

 

[Audie]

Do you realize that this description doesn't at all match up with what you were claiming?

I wonder who came up with this...

iron formations were dissolving into the seawater, spilling a green rust
in and tainting it into the shade of a rusted copper penny.

Rust is green? Green added to water makes it the color of
a "rusted" penny? "Rust" only applies to iron.

Whoever wrote this is an idiot.

 

[PruePhillip]

What are those "principles"?

How many of its principles do you suppose you violate?

When you see religious people gaining wealth, power and popularity
from "Christian" services then you are seeing a corruption of those
principles.
The example is clearly set in the New Testament: rejection of worldly
power, rejection of money; refusal to take money and rejecting worldly
popularity.
When you read of Popes with the power to crown kings, or ministers
buying private jets ---- that's what I mean by corruption.

 

[Audie]

When you see religious people gaining wealth, power and popularity
from "Christian" services then you are seeing a corruption of those
principles.
The example is clearly set in the New Testament: rejection of worldly
power, rejection of money; refusal to take money and rejecting worldly
popularity.
When you read of Popes with the power to crown kings, or ministers
buying private jets ---- that's what I mean by corruption.

You are just listing several examples of the same thing.

I looked up the principles of Christianity, and you missed them all.

You dont know the principles of your own religion.

 

[PruePhillip]

You are just listing several examples of the same thing.

I looked up the principles of Christianity, and you missed them all.

You dont know the principles of your own religion.

I certainly don't know these principles if they involve wealth, pomp,
political power, riches and such. I find them quite offensive given
the example Jesus and his church gave of Christian living.

 

[PruePhillip]

Do you realize that this description doesn't at all match up with what you were claiming?

Why can't you guys ever be specific?

 

[PruePhillip]

Where did you get the idea that that is what science says?

By reading science.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

By reading science.

Then surely you can cite something.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why can't you guys ever be specific?

It's right there. Read.

 

[PruePhillip]

Provide the evidence that science says this. Then provide the evidence that one potential similarity in a description nullifies the many contradictions and disimilarities, rendering Genesis valid from a scientific perspective. You also might have the courage and courtesy to acknowledge that you have been caught using logical fallacies and making wild claims about the moon and geocentricity.

Is faith such a weak basis for belief in God that some false validity forced on scripture and science is required so that you can comfortably hold your beliefs?

You don't care to find out for yourself. What would providing links do other than
for you to change the subject?
Google "Hadean Zircon" This was the breakthrough which helped scientists to
understand that the "Headean" (from Hades, hell) wasn't a lava world very long.
Many Headean minerals formed not in molten rock but on ancient sea floors.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You don't care to find out for yourself. What would providing links do other than
for you to change the subject?
Google "Hadean Zircon" This was the breakthrough which helped scientists to
understand that the "Headean" (from Hades, hell) wasn't a lava world very long.
Many Headean minerals formed not in molten rock but on ancient sea floors.

And what exactly do you think this zircon proves?

 

[sooda]

You don't care to find out for yourself. What would providing links do other than
for you to change the subject?
Google "Hadean Zircon" This was the breakthrough which helped scientists to
understand that the "Headean" (from Hades, hell) wasn't a lava world very long.
Many Headean minerals formed not in molten rock but on ancient sea floors.

Hadean zircon is the oldest-surviving crustal material from the Earth's earliest geological time period, the Hadean eon, about 4 billion years ago.
Hadean zircon - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadean_zircon

 

[PruePhillip]

And what exactly do you think this zircon proves?

That once earth cooled it quickly became a water world.

 

[Astrophile]

It's not just a painting, it's a science image, done in collaboration with science folk.

Can you give a link to its source, please?

 

[Astrophile]

I did it here once and don't want to repeat it, but it goes something like this
the early earth was oceanic
chances of getting this correct? Let's say 1 in 10.
the early earth was dark
chances of getting this correct? Let's say 1 in 10 - so that's 10x10 = 1 in 100.
the sun shone through
chances of getting this correct? Let's say 1 in 10 - so that's 10x10x10 = 1 in 1000
the continents, as solid rock, emerged from the oceans
chances of getting this correct? Let's say 1 in 100 -- so that's 10x10x10x100 = 1 in 10,000

get the idea? And it's got to be In the correct order.

I have explained this before. When the Earth was first formed (about 4.54 billion years ago), it was not oceanic; the first oceans did not develop until about 4.2-4.3 billion years ago. It is very unlikely that the early Earth was dark. The Sun had already formed, and even very thick clouds don't blot out the sunlight.

Look, I live in Britain, at 52° north; it is December, three days before the winter solstice, so that the Sun's altitude at noon was was only 14.5°; the sky is completely overcast and it is raining, and yet it is daylight, and I can see buildings and trees, and I can see colours. Do you think that 4.5 billion years ago the Sun didn't exist or that the cloud blanket over the whole Earth was so much thicker than on a winter day in Britain that the Earth was completely dark?

Venus has a much denser cloud blanket than the Earth, and yet the Russian scientists who sent the Venera probes found that the surface illumination was similar to that on a cloudy day in Moscow; they even put cameras on the later Venera landers to take photographs of the surface of the planet. If the surface of even cloud-covered Venus is light enough for photography to be possible, why do you think that the early Earth had to be dark?

 

[Audie]

I certainly don't know these principles if they involve wealth, pomp,
political power, riches and such. I find them quite offensive given
the example Jesus and his church gave of Christian living.

There is no "if". Other than that "if" you think those are the principles of
Christianity, you dont know the principles of Christianity.
Try google, or a compassionate local preacher.

 

[Astrophile]

And continents ROSE out of the sea - continents are made of granite which is
lighter and less dense than basalt. Subduction and sea-floor spreading created
granite by driving rock deep into the crust where heat, pressure, water and other
chemistry produced these light highlands we call continents today. The time
scale for all this was staggering.

I think that it is more likely that people in Lower Mesopotamia saw how the rivers Tigris and Euphrates deposited sediments and formed deltas, and then, as sediments accumulated, plants colonised the deltas and mudflats, to be followed by animals, and that the people based their creation myth on these observations. This seems a more plausible interpretation of Genesis 1:9-12 than your suggestion that the authors of Genesis understood the process of formation of continents by subduction and differentiation of igneous rocks.

 

[Audie]

I think that it is more likely that people in Lower Mesopotamia saw how the rivers Tigris and Euphrates deposited sediments and formed deltas, and then, as sediments accumulated, plants colonised the deltas and mudflats, to be followed by animals, and that the people based their creation myth on these observations. This seems a more plausible interpretation of Genesis 1:9-12 than your suggestion that the authors of Genesis understood the process of formation of continents by subduction and differentiation of igneous rocks.

If they had, they not have talked nonsense like "continents rose out of the sea".

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You don't care to find out for yourself. What would providing links do other than
for you to change the subject?
Google "Hadean Zircon" This was the breakthrough which helped scientists to
understand that the "Headean" (from Hades, hell) wasn't a lava world very long.
Many Headean minerals formed not in molten rock but on ancient sea floors.

No one can find support for your claims. That is your problem.

No one is contesting the findings of science. Your claims are not science.