Stratigraphy, radiometric evidence, fossil evidence, and genetics.

[TagliatelliMonster]

The rates are great...now. In this present world and nature, atoms behave a certain way. The issue is when you try to apply this to the unknown distant past on earth.

There's no reason to think atoms behaved differently in the past.
There is much reason to think the opposite. Like... all of physics, chemistry etc.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

? You claim there WERE rates of DECAY in the past on earth? Proof? Why would I assume that unless you had a reason?

"assuming" that about the past makes testable predictions about the present and the tests are past with flying colors.

Your assumption is untestable and also ridiculous in the face of all the evidence pointing to the contrary.

Which doesn't matter to you, because you get to invoke magic to explain away any and all incompatible data.
Your entire belief is "protected" by the ultimate copout: The God-Who-Can-Do-Anything-Last-Thursday wild card,

 

[dad]

This only reinforces your religious agenda to reject uniformitism, and not present any scientific basis for your assertions, As previous noted the amount of energy to require all the history of volcanism, metamorphism, continental drift, and erosion of the land would melt the earth if it too place in a short time

In this present nature, I agree...so?? Remember you have no clue what nature existed.

We have vast amounts of direct evidence of incremental movements in the crust of the earth when we have earthquakes.

They can't even predict them. But of course they affect the crust...so?

and the same detailed pattern of incremental movement of the crust over periods of millions and billions of years. Again absolutely no evidence for your Bible based assertions.

False, you just think it sort of looks a certain way, and assign reasons based on the current laws of physics.

Like in the case of the lameli, we have overwhelming evidence of incremental changes in the earth for natural events occurring over periods of billions of years,

Religious twaddle. Yes there were changes...why and when...you do not know. The times and reasons you have assigned to what we see are belief based.

 

[dad]

There's no reason to think atoms behaved differently in the past.
There is much reason to think the opposite. Like... all of physics, chemistry etc.

Not the issue..the only question is do we know that the forces governing how they must behave exist in the far past on earth as we now experience them? The answer is you, of course, do not know. All that matters is if science knows, in case you haven't clued in yet. Once it is demonstrated that they do not know, then their beliefs and assumptions fade into insignificance.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Religious twaddle.

Says the one using the Bible as evidence in a scientific debate.

In the past according to the bible records there was fountains from deep under the earth that brought up water. These may have formed similar deposits.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Not the issue..

Nothing is an issue in your Last Thursdayism style belief. That's exactly the problem with it. Because you allow for magic to happen, you can invoke it at any time you feel like using a get-out-of-jail-free-card.

Ever here in reality though... explanatory models that make testable predictions and the evidence fitting those models, is the only issue when trying to find out things about empirical reality

the only question is do we know that the forces governing how they must behave exist in the far past on earth as we now experience them?

And the answer is yes.
As told you already, explanatory models about the past make predictions that can be tested in the present.
If we assume physics in the universe works the way it works at all times throughout the universe, then our predictions work. If we don't assume that... well... not only don't the predictions work... there actually ARE NO PREDICTIONS. Because such non-explanations and magical last thursdayism nonsense is just magic drivel that makes no sense. It is utterly meaningless and without any explanatory value whatsoever.

As pointless at trying to include undetectable pink graviton fairies in the workings of gravity.

The answer is you, of course, do not know. All that matters is if science knows, in case you haven't clued in yet. Once it is demonstrated that they do not know, then their beliefs and assumptions fade into insignificance.

Yes, science is intellectually honest enough to switch gears when things don't add up. Scientists don't get to invoke magic like you do.

 

[dad]

Says the one using the Bible as evidence in a scientific debate.

When science claims consist of beliefs only, that destroys their validity as a science claim.

When faith in God claims consist of belief, that is par for the course. You can't hide your so called science beliefs under the skirt of other beliefs!

 

[shunyadragon]

In this present nature, I agree...so?? Remember you have no clue what nature existed.
They can't even predict them. But of course they affect the crust...so?

Sounds like the Hindu perspective. Oh Yess!! the past can be predicted by hypothesis modeling and prediction using the scientific methods. By your view any past research cannot be predicted and science would be chaos only able to confirm an expriment done in the present.

False, you just think it sort of looks a certain way, and assign reasons based on the current laws of physics.
Religious twaddle. Yes there were changes...why and when...you do not know. The times and reasons you have assigned to what we see are belief based.

Yes, by scientific methods we can determine the time and type of events.

This sums up your rejection of science based on a faith based scenario based on a literal interpretation of ancient scripture without provenance. By the way science does not prove anything, fortunately. Science falsifies theories and hypothesis based on objective verifiable evidence.

Yes, the objective verifiable evidence demonstrates there is only one way lamela can form based on direct observation. Simply if you can present a hypothesis based on your scenario that can be supported by science you would have an alternative way they could form. but so far you have only presented an unsupported bizarre assertion with no evidence.

Still waiting . . .

 

[dad]

Oh Yess!! the past can be predicted by hypothesis modeling and prediction using the scientific methods.

Nothing predicted requires a same nature in the past! If you claim it does let's see the example.

Yes, by scientific methods we can determine the time and type of events.

Example? Haha

 

[gnostic]

It is apparent you reject the uniformity of natural laws and processes, but all the evidence indicates that the laws of nature, and natural processes are uniform in the history of the earth, and there is no evidence to indicate otherwise. Newtonian science demonstrates your scenario is impossible,

The problem is, shunyadragon, is that dad believed the law of nature were very different shortly after the flood about 4000 years ago. So time, Earth and nature were different then.

 

[shunyadragon]

The problem is, shunyadragon, is that dad believed the law of nature were very different shortly after the flood about 4000 years ago. So time, Earth and nature were different then.

I understand this, and I am holding his feet to the fire to provide objective verifiable evidence that this is so, and so far, of course, he has failed to do so.

 

[gnostic]

Nope you just have a gap in your grasp of issues here.

Once again, you are projecting your own ignorance and dishonesty upon everyone else.

If we were to put you in polygraph test, you would break the device with your constant lying.

 

[gnostic]

I understand this, and I am holding his feet to the fire to provide objective verifiable evidence that this is so, and so far, of course, he has failed to do so.

He is repeating his claims, in the other thread that he had started - Science Is Religion - making more ridiculously absurd claims after others without once backing any of them up, except with “God did it”.

To him God did it is all the evidence he needed.

 

[dad]

The problem is, shunyadragon, is that dad believed the law of nature were very different shortly after the flood about 4000 years ago. So time, Earth and nature were different then.

No. A year was still a year (360 days actually, but basically a year as we know it)

The only occasion time comes into play is when we talk about deep space and distances.

 

[dad]

Once again, you are projecting your own ignorance and dishonesty upon everyone else.

If we were to put you in polygraph test, you would break the device with your constant lying.

Don't conflate your willful and hapless misconceptions with others being dishonest.

 

[gnostic]

Don't conflate your willful and hapless misconceptions with others being dishonest.

No, not “others”, it is just “you”, whom I find dishonest.

I am just wondering what your god would say to you if he was to ever judge you. The number of bogus claims you have made, I don’t see how you have any conscience.

 

[dad]

No, not “others”, it is just “you”, whom I find dishonest.

I am just wondering what your god would say to you if he was to ever judge you. The number of bogus claims you have made, I don’t see how you have any conscience.

Relax. God knows He created it all! We will not be judged for doing as He commands and believing it by faith. Now if people willfully teach something else and do it based on beliefs when they pretend it is more, well, I would suggest that they learn some fear of God.
Honestly though, your shrill little act of false accusations has worn thin.

 

[shunyadragon]

No. A year was still a year (360 days actually, but basically a year as we know it)

As it has been for billions of years. In the case of the lamels over 480,000 years in the lake in Japan.

 

[sooda]

He is repeating his claims, in the other thread that he had started - Science Is Religion - making more ridiculously absurd claims after others without once backing any of them up, except with “God did it”.

To him God did it is all the evidence he needed.

Some religious denominations really handicap their congregants.

 

[sooda]

Relax. God knows He created it all! We will not be judged for doing as He commands and believing it by faith. Now if people willfully teach something else and do it based on beliefs when they pretend it is more, well, I would suggest that they learn some fear of God.
Honestly though, your shrill little act of false accusations has worn thin.

So what church has taught you that the Bible is science and history? What denomination?