God Recreated the Earth 6,000 Years Ago!

[outhouse]

a completely different version of reality from the one we live in.

Yes

Many theist live fanaticism and fundamentalism perverting facts to meet pre determined conclusion's.

And they call that logic and reason, letting the conclusion dictate the evidence.

 

[fantome profane]

...How tall was Mt. Everest before?

Before what?

Everest Facts for KiDs

Geography

• Everest is 29,035 feet or 8848 meters high
• The summit is the border of Nepal to the south and China or Tibet on the north
• It is over 60 million years old
• Everest was formed by the movement of the Indian tectonic plate pushing up and against the Asian plate
• Everest grows by about a quarter of an inch (0.25") every year
• It consist of different types of shale, limestone and marble
• The rocky summit is covered with deep snow all year long

 

[BilliardsBall]

The Decalogue really are not mandatory to Christians unless they're Jewish, but obviously a gentile has a choice if (s)he wants to follow them. As far as the above in regards to idols and also the two Commands in regards to coveting, in which Bible was that done? I have a copy of the NAB, and it's rendered correctly, but maybe you're referring to a previous one?

The Decalogue isn't binding to Gentiles except for the need for the Jewish people to promulgate truth--one God, not three, not pantheism, not 1,000,000 gods.

Reading Romans 3 today, I was reminded that:

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. - Paul makes a careful case in the first three chapters of Romans that the Law is a standard that condemns all as imperfect/guilty/sinners, Jews and Gentiles alike.

If you disagree, I'd ask you if God is the God of the Jews only or of Gentiles as well? For the God who either pardon or condemn each and all is One.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Because the Earth was either flooded on the global scale as per the Bible's narrative or it was not...

There is no reality in which a cup can be both full of water and not full or water the same time.

It is either one or the other.
Even a half-flooded world is not a global submersion.

So, which position do you hold?



If it was covered in Macaroni & Cheese then the ancient aliens could have never sampled the water table...

So what?

There is no evidence that anything forms in that way, so why is this Billiards Ball suggestion even worth entertaining?
Notice that you're not arguing for a Macaroni & Cheese Earth because there is no evidence of such a state of being, right? Because it's obviously ridiculous, right?

Why should your Billiards Ball Earth idea be taken more seriously than Macaroni & Cheese Earth, given that there is no evidence for it?



Yes - it's a possibility in a completely different version of reality from the one we live in.
Find any evidence at all that planetary objects form in this Billiards Ball way and then your entire idea at least becomes worthy of the thought experiment you're trying to create.
Until you have some, your Billiards Ball Earth concept makes as much sense as Macaroni & Cheese Earth.

There are lots of positions, both personally and socially, that humanity has made an about-face on in light of new data.
Do you have data to suggest that the about-face made by Humanity on the historical validity should be reversed?

Thanks, but its hardly a worthy gedanken to point out obvious facts:

1. Current land elevations/sea depths of many places and formations weren't always at their present height, and any naturalist who denies this is also not a valid scientist.

2. There is enough water to cover all the land if sea basins were formally higher and mountainous regions, lower. Any naturalist who denies this is not studying geomatics and has incorrectly calculated the amount of water now on Earth.

3. Sudden catastrophism can cause rapid, dramatic changes in elevation. Japan recently moved almost ten feet closer to America during an earthquake--it wasn't a movement that took thousands of an inch per year for millennia!

4. You and I both may be confusing a plausible explanation with a probable one. I'm not a creation scientist, in fact, I'm not even a scientist. I'm a lay person who looked at 1-2 and 3 above and got over my initial opposition to a recent, global flood.

 

[outhouse]

1. Current land elevations/sea depths of many places and formations weren't always at their present height, and any naturalist who denies this is also not a valid scientist.

And there are no credible scientist that state the earth is only 6000 years old

2. There is enough water to cover all the land if sea basins were formally higher and mountainous regions, lower. Any naturalist who denies this is not studying geomatics and has incorrectly calculated the amount of water now on Earth.

There is no evidence of this within the past 3.5 - 4.6 billion years

3. Sudden catastrophism can cause rapid, dramatic changes in elevation.

Not as dramatic as YEC imagine.

Japan recently moved almost ten feet closer to America during an earthquake--it wasn't a movement that took thousands of an inch per year for millennia!

And to the human eye there was no change at all. AND YOU, are talking about events that would have to be visible to the naked eye.

4. You and I both may be confusing a plausible explanation with a probable one

That is false


You are making stuff up as you go with no credible evidence at all to support your claims.


He is supply9ng credible sources you will never have, nor can ever bring to the table because you argue against known facts.


You go directly against credible academia, telling professors they are wrong from a point of known pseudoscience

 

[jonathan180iq]

1. Current land elevations/sea depths of many places and formations weren't always at their present height, and any naturalist who denies this is also not a valid scientist.

All things are constantly evolving. No one denies this.

2. There is enough water to cover all the land if sea basins were formally higher and mountainous regions, lower. Any naturalist who denies this is not studying geomatics and has incorrectly calculated the amount of water now on Earth.

You mean if the whole of the Earth was closer to being spherical than it is now...
You just can't seem to get away from requiring a magic set of circumstances - that's the whole problem with your theory and I don't know why you're not grasping it.

Who needs Geomatics when you can simply study Geology?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomatics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology

These are two very different things....

3. Sudden catastrophism can cause rapid, dramatic changes in elevation. Japan recently moved almost ten feet closer to America during an earthquake--it wasn't a movement that took thousands of an inch per year for millennia!

Sudden catastophism has never affected anything more than smaller regional areas. And even the movement of Japan isn't something unheard of.
http://phys.org/news/2011-03-quake-japan-feet-usgs.html

Again, this was a rather isolated regional event. There is nothing to suggest that anything like this happens on the global scale.

4. You and I both may be confusing a plausible explanation with a probable one. I'm not a creation scientist, in fact, I'm not even a scientist. I'm a lay person who looked at 1-2 and 3 above and got over my initial opposition to a recent, global flood.

I'm not confused at all - your global flood is not plausible in this Universe.

So you agree that things evolve, you studied some "geomatics", imagined a magical spherical Earth, thought about how cool it would be if small regional catastrophes were played out all over the globe all at once, and THEN you made the decision to believe in a Global Biblical flood just a few thousand years ago? Am I reading that right?

And you had no problem with any of those conclusions?

 

[BilliardsBall]

All things are constantly evolving. No one denies this.



You mean if the whole of the Earth was closer to being spherical than it is now...
You just can't seem to get away from requiring a magic set of circumstances - that's the whole problem with your theory and I don't know why you're not grasping it.

Who needs Geomatics when you can simply study Geology?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomatics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology

These are two very different things....



Sudden catastophism has never affected anything more than smaller regional areas. And even the movement of Japan isn't something unheard of.
http://phys.org/news/2011-03-quake-japan-feet-usgs.html

Again, this was a rather isolated regional event. There is nothing to suggest that anything like this happens on the global scale.



I'm not confused at all - your global flood is not plausible in this Universe.

So you agree that things evolve, you studied some "geomatics", imagined a magical spherical Earth, thought about how cool it would be if small regional catastrophes were played out all over the globe all at once, and THEN you made the decision to believe in a Global Biblical flood just a few thousand years ago? Am I reading that right?

And you had no problem with any of those conclusions?

Please refrain yourself to facts and not, well, being rude. Geomatics would help us to ascertain the volume of water on the Earth. Geology would help us draw conclusions regarding whether the whole Earth was recently or in the distant past closer to being more even in elevation. "More spherical [less elliptical]" has nothing to do with the argument.

I'm thinking at this point you are uninterested in my viewpoint entirely. You also seemed wholly uninterested in the Bible claims that the Earth "shook" during the Flood time. Significant catastrophic upheaval.

Finally, of course, after dozens of patient posts from me, you thought I might not notice your "Sudden catastrophism has never affected anything more than smaller regional areas" remark, a dismissal of my case, made without any citation whatsoever, and denying current scientific theory regarding mass extinctions in the fossil record! GLOBAL extinctions.

I'm not that interested in this debate any longer because you don't read my posts with care and you don't use science, real, modern science.

 

[outhouse]

I'm thinking at this point you are uninterested in my viewpoint entirely.

Only those who are stubborn in their religion and very biased to education holding NO credibility follow that viewpoint.

No in doing real science is interested in any pseudoscience what so ever.

 

[`mud]

To Bill and those of his ilk,
seem to live in a world of mystery,
and there isn't really any majik !
~
'm

 

[jonathan180iq]

Please refrain yourself to facts and not, well, being rude. Geomatics would help us to ascertain the volume of water on the Earth. Geology would help us draw conclusions regarding whether the whole Earth was recently or in the distant past closer to being more even in elevation. "More spherical [less elliptical]" has nothing to do with the argument.

In your view a more equally-planed Earth is not the same thing as having an overall smoother, less varied, more uniform, more spherical overall appearance?
If a more uniform and topographically similar surface is not what you call more spherical, then what would you call it?
Also, do you really think the Earth's equatorial bulge is what would keep the Biblical Flood from having ever happened?

The Earth's bulge at the equator should have no impact at all on this supposed Global Flood. ( I can only assume that's what you mean when talking about this "elliptical" Earth...)
Perhaps you should refresh yourself on the terms that you're using: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipse
It should be noted that all planets have this bulge - Venus being the most spherical object in the Solar System, and even it has a bulge along the equator.
Also, the only way to reduce the bulge would be to slow down the Earth's rotation or to alter it's mass somehow... Are you suggesting those things also happened during the magical flood period?

http://www.usgs.gov/water/
The United States Geological Survey has a source page dedicated specifically to water. It includes maps and data sets for all of the water in the country, including real time information on lakes, rivers, streams, groundwater, aquifers, wells, glaciers, reservoirs and anything else you could possibly think of. No geological study is complete without understanding the factors that are at play on those solid bodies, like water, in this case.

Why would you trust Geomatics for studying the Earth's water system when you could just go straight to the source and study Hydrology?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrology

Using Geomatics to ascertain global water levels is akin to studying microbes without a microscope... You're using a lesser tool and studying something the tool wasn't designed for.

I work in GIS for a living - you need to rethink your arguments.

I'm thinking at this point you are uninterested in my viewpoint entirely. You also seemed wholly uninterested in the Bible claims that the Earth "shook" during the Flood time. Significant catastrophic upheaval.

Show some evidence of a global shaking and upheaval that happened just a few thousand years ago and you'll be taken seriously.

Finally, of course, after dozens of patient posts from me, you thought I might not notice your "Sudden catastrophism has never affected anything more than smaller regional areas" remark, a dismissal of my case, made without any citation whatsoever, and denying current scientific theory regarding mass extinctions in the fossil record! GLOBAL extinctions.

Are you talking about the same fossil record that you earlier suggested was completely misunderstood by mainstream science - or a different one?
I'll take whichever angle you prefer and still show why and how your argument is ridiculous.

I've cited dozens of things to you over the course of this conversation and you've only ever supplied us with an article about dinosaurs having fresh tissue and a personal opinion piece from a UNC Electrical Engineering professor who wrote about Young Earth Creationism and his view of what's wrong with radiometric dating. I don't think you want to start calling people out on their citations, do you?

You cited Mount Saint Helens as evidence that catastrophic events can cause huge changes to the global environment. I am responding by saying that those catastrophic events only drastically change their local areas... Do you want evidence of my counter argument? Well, ok. Answer this simple question - How much of Florida was affected by Mount Saint Helens' eruption? How much of California was affected by the eruption? If the answer is "not very much" then you've lost that point.

And before you haphazardly attempt to throw it in there, even events like the K-T Extinction (the boundary between the Cretaceous and the Paleogene period) didn't happen overnight. Even if you assume a beginning at the very moment of impact, you're looking at anywhere from 500,000 to 1M years before the last of the cretaceous' upper organisms died off. There's evidence of dinosaurs having survived at least 700,000 years after the impact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous–Paleogene_extinction_event

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/education/events/cowen1b.html

http://www.britannica.com/science/K-T-extinction

I'm not that interested in this debate any longer because you don't read my posts with care and you don't use science, real, modern science.

You've threatened to leave this debate before, which I suppose is a clever tactic to employ when you've been backed into a corner and have no way to successfully defend your position.

Either argue your position with supporting documents or admit that it's a faith-based fairy tale.

You either have something to support your Biblical Flood - Billiards Ball Earth -Young Comets - No Oort Cloud - Flawed Radiometric Dating - Geomatics - Fake Fossil Record - Young Earth idea... or you don't.

It's really quite simple.

 

[gnostic]

Finally, of course, after dozens of patient posts from me, you thought I might not notice your "Sudden catastrophism has never affected anything more than smaller regional areas" remark, a dismissal of my case, made without any citation whatsoever, and denying current scientific theory regarding mass extinctions in the fossil record! GLOBAL extinctions.

The last mass extinction occurred about 65 million years ago - the Cretaceous-Paleogene that saw the demise of the dinosaurs and the rise of the mammals.

No human were around at this time.

Humans - or the Homo sapiens have only been around 200,000 years ago. There have been no mass extinction event in human history

The recent glacial period (Pleistocene ice ages) wasn't truly a mass extinction event, because the ice sheets didn't cover the Earth globally...and because there was interglacial period between glacial periods.

And certainly not in the last 10,000 years ago.

If we are to believe that Flood occurred, it has been calculated, according to numbers of years in the OT bible, that it would have occurred at some times between 2400 and 2100 BCE, around the time, they were still building pyramids. If the Flood killed everyone in Egypt, then there wouldn't be enough people building these pyramids for centuries, and yet they kept appearing with each succession during the Old Kingdom (5th & 6th dynasties).

And the Genesis is terribly inaccurate, since it stated that EGYPT DIDN'T EXIST UNTIL AFTER THE FLOOD, as Egypt was named after Ham's son. That's absurd considering that recognizable Egyptian culture (from artifacts) have been around as early 3500 BCE, in late Neolithic period. And pyramid-building began at the start of the 3rd dynasty, more than a century before Gizan pyramids.

The claims of Genesis "historicity" is a joke.

 

[`mud]

MAJIK

 

[BilliardsBall]

In your view a more equally-planed Earth is not the same thing as having an overall smoother, less varied, more uniform, more spherical overall appearance?
If a more uniform and topographically similar surface is not what you call more spherical, then what would you call it?
Also, do you really think the Earth's equatorial bulge is what would keep the Biblical Flood from having ever happened?

The Earth's bulge at the equator should have no impact at all on this supposed Global Flood. ( I can only assume that's what you mean when talking about this "elliptical" Earth...)
Perhaps you should refresh yourself on the terms that you're using: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipse
It should be noted that all planets have this bulge - Venus being the most spherical object in the Solar System, and even it has a bulge along the equator.
Also, the only way to reduce the bulge would be to slow down the Earth's rotation or to alter it's mass somehow... Are you suggesting those things also happened during the magical flood period?

http://www.usgs.gov/water/
The United States Geological Survey has a source page dedicated specifically to water. It includes maps and data sets for all of the water in the country, including real time information on lakes, rivers, streams, groundwater, aquifers, wells, glaciers, reservoirs and anything else you could possibly think of. No geological study is complete without understanding the factors that are at play on those solid bodies, like water, in this case.

Why would you trust Geomatics for studying the Earth's water system when you could just go straight to the source and study Hydrology?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrology

Using Geomatics to ascertain global water levels is akin to studying microbes without a microscope... You're using a lesser tool and studying something the tool wasn't designed for.

I work in GIS for a living - you need to rethink your arguments.



Show some evidence of a global shaking and upheaval that happened just a few thousand years ago and you'll be taken seriously.


Are you talking about the same fossil record that you earlier suggested was completely misunderstood by mainstream science - or a different one?
I'll take whichever angle you prefer and still show why and how your argument is ridiculous.

I've cited dozens of things to you over the course of this conversation and you've only ever supplied us with an article about dinosaurs having fresh tissue and a personal opinion piece from a UNC Electrical Engineering professor who wrote about Young Earth Creationism and his view of what's wrong with radiometric dating. I don't think you want to start calling people out on their citations, do you?

You cited Mount Saint Helens as evidence that catastrophic events can cause huge changes to the global environment. I am responding by saying that those catastrophic events only drastically change their local areas... Do you want evidence of my counter argument? Well, ok. Answer this simple question - How much of Florida was affected by Mount Saint Helens' eruption? How much of California was affected by the eruption? If the answer is "not very much" then you've lost that point.

And before you haphazardly attempt to throw it in there, even events like the K-T Extinction (the boundary between the Cretaceous and the Paleogene period) didn't happen overnight. Even if you assume a beginning at the very moment of impact, you're looking at anywhere from 500,000 to 1M years before the last of the cretaceous' upper organisms died off. There's evidence of dinosaurs having survived at least 700,000 years after the impact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous–Paleogene_extinction_event

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/education/events/cowen1b.html

http://www.britannica.com/science/K-T-extinction

You've threatened to leave this debate before, which I suppose is a clever tactic to employ when you've been backed into a corner and have no way to successfully defend your position.

Either argue your position with supporting documents or admit that it's a faith-based fairy tale.

You either have something to support your Biblical Flood - Billiards Ball Earth -Young Comets - No Oort Cloud - Flawed Radiometric Dating - Geomatics - Fake Fossil Record - Young Earth idea... or you don't.

It's really quite simple.

You don't read my posts.

Earth's equatorial bulge? I was correcting you, not me, for making your spherical statement. But I misunderstood you to say you thought I was thinking of an ellipse.

Thanks for commenting re: American data on water. Is there a similar knowledge base for all Earth's water? Of course there is. That's where we got the "not enough water" argument to begin. But you showed your colors--geomatics is wrong and the holy geology is right. Nice.

You cited Mount Saint Helens as evidence that catastrophic events can cause huge changes to the global environment.

I said no so such thing, ever. I cited Mount Saint Helens as evidence that rapid changes to an environment can occur via catastrophism.

I will likely leave the thread soon, yes, as you are yet to argue or discuss what I say, merely you parrot the same things over and again.

 

[BilliardsBall]

The last mass extinction occurred about 65 million years ago - the Cretaceous-Paleogene that saw the demise of the dinosaurs and the rise of the mammals.

No human were around at this time.

Humans - or the Homo sapiens have only been around 200,000 years ago. There have been no mass extinction event in human history

The recent glacial period (Pleistocene ice ages) wasn't truly a mass extinction event, because the ice sheets didn't cover the Earth globally...and because there was interglacial period between glacial periods.

And certainly not in the last 10,000 years ago.

If we are to believe that Flood occurred, it has been calculated, according to numbers of years in the OT bible, that it would have occurred at some times between 2400 and 2100 BCE, around the time, they were still building pyramids. If the Flood killed everyone in Egypt, then there wouldn't be enough people building these pyramids for centuries, and yet they kept appearing with each succession during the Old Kingdom (5th & 6th dynasties).

And the Genesis is terribly inaccurate, since it stated that EGYPT DIDN'T EXIST UNTIL AFTER THE FLOOD, as Egypt was named after Ham's son. That's absurd considering that recognizable Egyptian culture (from artifacts) have been around as early 3500 BCE, in late Neolithic period. And pyramid-building began at the start of the 3rd dynasty, more than a century before Gizan pyramids.

The claims of Genesis "historicity" is a joke.

Correct. Egypt's original name was similar to Al-khem, as in alchemy, magic. I don't know the Hebrew term used, I do know it became "Egypt" in English.

I understand you feel there were no mass extinction events in human history, if so, that forces the following:

Modern man has been around 100,000 years and invented writing, agronomy, etc. approximately 5,000 years ago - pre-5,000 year items are fragmentary at best, quite rare and the dating methods, suspect.

The Bible seems to say a global Flood occurred 5,000 years ago.

Thanks.

PS. Bible historicity is no joke. Scholars have identified 84 items in Luke alone, 59 in John, hundreds if not thousands in the OT that indicate the books were written by contemporaneous eyewitness historians--in the case of the Flood, of course, Moses wrote much later...

 

[BilliardsBall]

Turns out Bible Hebrew for Egypt is "Mitsrayim".

 

[jonathan180iq]

You don't read my posts.

I've responded to almost everything you've written in this thread.

Earth's equatorial bulge? I was correcting you, not me, for making your spherical statement. But I misunderstood you to say you thought I was thinking of an ellipse.

Then correct me if I'm wrong. What argument are you making for the possibility of a Global Flood if not that at some point in the Earth's past you think it was more even in topography, more Billiards Ball in shape, allowing for the known water-level to flood the entire thing. What are you saying, if not that?

Thanks for commenting re: American data on water. Is there a similar knowledge base for all Earth's water? Of course there is. That's where we got the "not enough water" argument to begin. But you showed your colors--geomatics is wrong and the holy geology is right. Nice.

Yes, there is a similar knowledge base for Earth's entire water cycle, and that knowledge base comes from studies in Geology and Hydrology.
What about Geomatics and GPS data collecting makes you think the knowledge for the data used in those systems is independent to those systems? Geomatics is a tool - Hydrology and Geology are the sciences. How could this possibly be confusing you?

GEOMATICS - "Geomatics (also known as geospatial technology or geomatics engineering, or geomatic engineering, géomatique in French) is the discipline of gathering, storing, processing, and delivering geographic information, or spatially referenced information. In other words, it "consists of products, services and tools involved in the collection, integration and management of geographic data".[1]"

HYDROLOGY - "Hydrology is the scientific study of the movement, distribution, and quality of water on Earth and other planets, including the hydrologic cycle,water resources and environmental watershed sustainability. A practitioner of hydrology is a hydrologist, working within the fields of earth orenvironmental science, physical geography, geology or civil and environmental engineering."

GEOLOGY - "Geology (from the Greek γῆ, gē, i.e. "earth" and -λoγία, -logia, i.e. "study of, discourse"[1][2]) is an earth science comprising the study of solid Earth, the rocks of which it is composed, and the processes by which they change. Geology can also refer generally to the study of the solid features of any celestial body (such as the geology of the Moon or Mars)."

I said no so such thing, ever. I cited Mount Saint Helens as evidence that rapid changes to an environment can occur via catastrophism.

So you're saying you never once tried to equate sudden catastrophic events like M.S.H. to your Global Biblical Billiards Ball Earth Theory? That not even one time did you try and convince me that all of the volcanoes and plate tectonics rising up all at once could somehow magically flood the whole Earth, just a few thousand years ago?

Well that's strange then, because I remember you saying all kinds of things like that:

1. I believe there is scientific support for the Deluge. We can start with deductive reasoning and the fact that observations in the modern era, e.g. at St. Helens, demonstrates that certain processes formerly believed to take thousands to millions of years could take months, even, in some cases, hours. In the light of St. Helens, it seems a little stuck to insist on lengthy pre-Flood era processes that might just be post-Flood rapid processes!

2. Yes, I get it. I understand that modern geology and other scientific disciplines reject concepts of a global Flood. For one of several more problematic areas, there simply isn't enough water on Earth to cover landmasses to their current heights. Some scientists--yes-real scientists--including geologists--both Christian and skeptic geologists--have recently been considering possible catastrophes in Earth's past to account for anomalies/mysteries in geology. When we look, for example, at very rapid formations created by and destroyed by volcanism, (Mt. St. Helens and Krakatoa show sudden, dramatic changes we can see in current times) we are forced by the data to conclude that not all island and mountain formations (or reductions) are entirely the process of millions of years or even thousands of years. Scientific creationists and skeptics alike are looking into theories like catastrophic plate techtonics... these hold value for Flood-promoters, sure, but also might someday help to close gaps and anomalies in current scientific thought.

3. The Bible says the Earth "shook" in the days of Noah. Along with catastrophic plate techtonics....

4. You also seemed wholly uninterested in the Bible claims that the Earth "shook" during the Flood time. Significant catastrophic upheaval.

All I've ever asked is for you to provide the evidence that these events took place. You've touted over and over again your trust and study of science. Just show us the Science behind the Global Biblical flood and totally change the world...

I will likely leave the thread soon, yes, as you are yet to argue or discuss what I say, merely you parrot the same things over and again.

I think you'd find this conversation flowing a lot more smoothly if you'd just answer some of the challenges or present some substantiating evidence.

So far, other than getting upset that I challenge the fact that you haven't supported anything with evidence, you've attempted to discredit radiometric dating, you've attempted to discredit Astronomy- most notable the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud, you've attempted to discredit Geology, you've attempted to elevate GIS mapping to something it's not, and you've attempted to flaunt the accolades of an Young Earth Creationist who also happens to teach at UNC... You've also accused me or not reading your posts, not using science, and not citing any sources. To counter that last argument against me, I'll simply refer you to every source that I've ever posted for you throughout the course of this conversation (in order of appearance...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko (Post #355)
http://www.universetoday.com/11283/kuiper-belt-like-disks-around-two-nearby-stars/ (Post #367)
(Post #376 shows photos of similar geologic structures, patterns, and weathering on both Earth and Mars)
http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/617/1/645/pdf/0004-637X_617_1_645.pdf (Post #407)
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v426/n6962/full/nature02068.html (Post #407)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1950BAN....11...91O (post #407)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MACS0647-JD(Post #441)
(Post #483 Shows Glacially carved stones in my own backyard)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocktown_(Georgia) (Post #488)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_millennium_BC(Post #541)
http://study.com/academy/lesson/geological-folds-definition-causes-types.html (Post #582)
https://www.aip.org/history/climate/cycles.htm (Post #617)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3rd_millennium_BC (Post #630)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_millennium_BC (Post #630)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24th_century_BC (Post #630)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_millennium_BC (Post #630)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5th_millennium_BC (Post #630)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6th_millennium_BC (Post #639)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7th_millennium_BC (Post #639)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8th_millennium_BC (Post #639)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9th_millennium_BC (Post #639)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10th_millennium_BC (Post #639)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_prehistory (Post #639)
http://archserve.id.ucsb.edu/course...rseware/Chronology/08_Radiocarbon_Dating.html (Post #639)
(Post #640 shows geologic explanation of the Marianas Trench)
http://journals.cambridge.org/actio...e=online&aid=9428308&fileId=S0003598X00061329 (Post #677)
http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/ht...istorymag.com/htmlsite/0905/0905_feature.html (Post #677)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinča_symbols (Post #677)
http://www.ancient.eu/writing/ (Post #677)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Etna (Post #677)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlit_Yam (Post #677)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziusudra (Post #716)
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-shocker-115306469/?no-ist (Post #740)
http://www.livescience.com/41537-t-rex-soft-tissue.html (Post #740)
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/316/5822/277.short (Post #740)
http://network.asa3.org/ (Post #754)
(Post #754 also shows a chart comparing the Earth's timeline using Tree-Ring coring and stalagmite data.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_Present (Post #801)
http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/Fundamentals/ADBCYears01.pdf (Post #801)
http://stylemanual.ngs.org/home/C/carbon-14 (Post #801)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/38th_century_BC (Post #801)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_millennium_BC (Post #801)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ġgantija (Post #801)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Göbekli_Tepe (Post #801)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnenez (Post #801)
https://www.questia.com/article/1G1-15143748/new-radiocarbon-dates-from-bougon-and-the-chronology
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/viewFile/3317/2909
http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ngmdb/ngmdb_home.html (Post #844)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics (Post #868)
(Post #879 shows varying graphics which evidence that no astronomical body is Billiards Ball in form)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Maximum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Glacial_Maximum
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In contrast, you've quoted the Bible, and offered these two references:
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating2.html
http://kgov.com/dinosaur-soft-tissue
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So while you're free to attempt to make the claim that I have not supported my claims with evidence, you'd be foolish to do so.

 

[gnostic]

I understand you feel there were no mass extinction events in human history, if so, that forces the following:

Modern man has been around 100,000 years and invented writing, agronomy, etc. approximately 5,000 years ago - pre-5,000 year items are fragmentary at best, quite rare and the dating methods, suspect.

The Bible seems to say a global Flood occurred 5,000 years ago.

How did you arrive at 5000 years?

What make you or any other pseudoscience creationists expert in geology and archaeological dating methods. The only "suspect" are the bible itself, and those believers who have no idea of what science or their methods are.

There were only 292 years between the start of flood and Abraham's birth, or 392 years to Isaac's birth (shortly after Abraham receiving the covenant of circumcision, and had his name changed from Abram).

5000 years ago, or 3000 BCE, would push every single timeline of 600 to 800 years back in time. That mean the Babylonians sacking 1200 BCE and Jesus' birth about 600 BCE, at the minimum. And 5000 years ago would mean that Abraham was born about 2610 BCE (at the minimum).

Every year, there have been floods, and some of them quite large, all around the world, but none of them were ever "global".

Not 100,000 years ago...not 10,000 years ago...not 5000 years ago or since then.

If the entire Earth was under water for better part of a year and that cover even the highest mountains, so the bible claimed, then there should be evidences of this in the earth's layer, that would be everywhere (all around the world) AT EXACTLY THE SAME POINT IN TIME.

And the highest region in the world was still the Himalayas, with Mount Everest still the highest mountain in the world 5000 years ago. The current peak of Everest is today 8848 metres. Given that Everest is moving upward 4mm each year, that mean Everest was only shorter by 20 metres, 5000 years ago. That mean that in 3000 BCE, Everest's peak was about 8828 metres.

Do you know much water needed to cover Everest?

Even if every single ice sheet, glaciers and both ice caps melted today, there still wouldn't be enough water cover Mount Kosciuszko, Australia's highest peak - a measly 2228 metres.

The increasing rise of the whole Himalayas was never really about volcanic activities, but the uplift of the earth, because the tectonic plate of the Indian subcontinent kept pushing into the Eurasian continent that began 70 million years ago. Before 70 million years ago, what was the Himalayas was underwater.

And Mount Ararat (Greater Ararat) is today, 5173 metres. This peak, as well as surrounding mountains, were the results of both uplift and folding of the earth in the Anatolia that began about 50 to million years ago, and dateable volcanic activities.

The last big volcanic activity occurred between 2500 and 2400 BCE, on Greater Ararat itself. But the layer of lava at this stage, destructive it may be to nearby settlement, it was considerably smaller than that occurred over 2.5 million years ago. There have been less than half-dozen activities since then, but each one was very minor in comparison. The height of (Greater) Ararat, like that of Everest, don't show large difference between heights of today and that of 5000 years ago.

All of these mountains that I have mention, showed that the earth surfaces weren't as flat as you believe it to be, nor the mountains were much shorter as you claimed it to be (when comparing them today with those of 5000 years ago).

It is these geological evidences and the knowledge of hydrology that debunk any claims made by creationists.

 

[gnostic]

Turns out Bible Hebrew for Egypt is "Mitsrayim".

So?

The Egyptian cultures predated the unification of two Egypt (upper kingdom and lower kingdom (or Delta Nile)) in 3100 BCE, which coincided with the beginning of Bronze Age Egypt, and start of 1st dynasty. If your claim of flood had occurred 5000 BCE instead of later 2340 BCE, then that would set the date of flood within the 1st dynasty in Egypt. That should have killed off everyone in the kingdom, and yet the 1st dynasty flourished and lasted from about 3150 BCE to 2890 BCE.

Again that prove the bible historicity is nothing more than a sham.

And Moses supposedly wrote the genesis as well as other books of the Torah, but there are strong possibilities that Moses and his exodus didn't exist. And everything actually pointed that the Torah was written in the Iron Age 1st millennium BCE, not late Bronze Age of the 2nd millennium BCE. So what could have non-existence Moses possibly know 3000 years before this time.

The Hebrew oral tradition is very strong and active, but only in the 1st millennium BCE, but no evidences to support that there were Hebrew oral tradition or oral history in the previous millennium BCE.

You are basing all your claims, like the flood and the date of 3000 BCE on wild wishful thinking, not on historical recordings, and certainly not on geological evidences.

 

[outhouse]

The Bible seems to say a global Flood occurred 5,000 years ago.

And yet there is NO evidence for it what so ever.

And all evidence shows it was plagiarized flood mythology from previous civilizations that started with a real river flood.

 

[outhouse]

You don't read my posts.

You ignore everything we write.

Because you cannot address anything with credibility, and have no credible sources to substantiate a single word you write.