There is irrefutable evidence from Polonium halos that the rock layers of the Grand Canyon where all formed in a short time, the worldwide flood.

[blü 2]

I have read and studied the Bible for over 20 years.
an unbeliever cannot understand the Bible,

Alas, on the evidence of your posts here, that's 20 years down the drain, since you still have the bad habit of inventing claims about what the bible says that seem convenient to your purpose, but being wholly unable to cite any biblical texts that support your claims.

Still, it's never too late to learn. Good luck.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Alas, on the evidence of your posts here, that's 20 years down the drain, since you still have the bad habit of inventing claims about what the bible says that seem convenient to your purpose, but being wholly unable to cite any biblical texts that support your claims.

Still, it's never too late to learn. Good luck.

I have not invented any claims.
an unbeliever cannot understand the Bible.

 

[blü 2]

I have not invented any claims.

Of course you have. After your claimed 20 years' study of the bible, you pretend it mentions a spinning earth and orbits. Yet repeatedly pressed to refer to biblical passages that say such things, you can't. The reason is that they're not there.

And in twenty years you've never noticed all those quotes setting out the authors' cosmology that I've repeatedly quoted to you, and which you continue to pretend aren't there.

an unbeliever cannot understand the Bible.

That would make you an unbeliever.

Bye now.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Of course you have. After your claimed 20 years' study of the bible, you pretend it mentions a spinning earth and orbits. Yet repeatedly pressed to refer to biblical passages that say such things, you can't. The reason is that they're not there.

And in twenty years you've never noticed all those quotes setting out the authors' cosmology that I've repeatedly quoted to you, and which you continue to pretend aren't there.


That would make you an unbeliever.

Bye now.

Wrong.
Your attempts at errors were refuted and the ones I gave of advanced scientific knowledge and fulfilled prophecy you could not refute.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

If the atheist is right, and there is no after-life or reincarnation, then you won't even know about it - so who gains or loses?

i dont think you really grasp the point... you have it completely assabout face.

If there is no God, then both the atheist and Christian end up the same (so the Christian loses nothing)

If there is a God, then the Christian wins and the atheist loses.

So the point is, in either of the above inevitable outcomes, the atheist loses! Surely you have the intellectual capacity to recognise that fact?

 

[AdamjEdgar]

since you can't find that recent universal flood layer, those genetic bottlenecks or that extra billion cubic miles of water.

I have already shown from well known and respected sources (including US government agencies) that the average land elevation is 2400 metres BELOW CURRENT SEA LEVELS.

The average height of land above sea level is less than 1km and covers only 29% of the earth...the rest is ocean (71%)

The billion cubic metres of water you keep harping on about is already in the oceans....there are 2.4km of spare water already covering the earth. We know for a fact that techtonic plate movement has caused the uplift in regions like the Himalayas (as just one example)...so the scientific observations already supports the claim.

If we add to that the fact that if all the ice melted on the earth, it would raise current sea levels by another 70 metres...please grow a brain and do some research instead of raising dimwitted wives tails regarding the idiotic question "where did all the water come from?" The only difference between your view and mine on this issue is the timing.

 

[Esteban X]

i dont think you really grasp the point... you have it completely assabout face.

If there is no God, then both the atheist and Christian end up the same (so the Christian loses nothing)

If there is a God, then the Christian wins and the atheist loses.

So the point is, in either of the above inevitable outcomes, the atheist loses! Surely you have the intellectual capacity to recognise that fact?

And if any other God besides the Christian one, everyone loses

 

[SavedByTheLord]

And if any other God besides the Christian one, everyone loses

like who?
Mercury? Jupiter? The sun?
all those pagan idols have proven false.

 

[Esteban X]

I believe in Pan, The Great GOAT (God of All Things). All matter and energy, and Awesone Kali, time and space, the medium through which he moves. Since these are metaphors, they don't care whether they are worshiped or not.

like who?
Mercury? Jupiter? The sun?
all those pagan idols have proven false.

 

[blü 2]

I have already shown from well known and respected sources (including US government agencies) that the average land elevation is 2400 metres BELOW CURRENT SEA LEVELS.

The average height of land above sea level is less than 1km and covers only 29% of the earth...the rest is ocean (71%)

The billion cubic metres of water you keep harping on about is already in the oceans....there are 2.4km of spare water already covering the earth. We know for a fact that techtonic plate movement has caused the uplift in regions like the Himalayas (as just one example)...so the scientific observations already supports the claim.

If we add to that the fact that if all the ice melted on the earth, it would raise current sea levels by another 70 metres

The amount of dry land and its heights above sea level have no changed significantly in the last 5,000 years.

You think the ice caps could all melt within 371 days? Where's your demonstration of the physics that would show that's true?

You think 70 m / 230 feet less water height required will solve the problem?

Mt Everest is 29,030 feet / 8848m high. You have to cover the tip 15 cubits deep ─ a cubit is a forearm's length, so it varies, but Wikipedia notes that the Sumerian cubit is a tad over 20 inches / ~ 52 cm, and 15 of them are 300 inches / 7.6 m. So even if we allowed your zany sums, all you'd have achieved is a virtual lowering of Mt Everest by 82 feet (tectonic) and 25 feet (polar), reducing your water requirement to be enough to cover an Everest now 29,030 - 82 - 25 = 28,923 feet high under 15 cubits of water ─ a total height of 28,923 feet of mountain plus 25 feet of water = 28,948 feet.

You STILL need that EXTRA billion cubic miles of water.

You STILL need that universal geological flood layer (full of dead animals).

And you STILL need to demonstrate a genetic bottleneck in every species of land animal, all the bottlenecks dating to the same date as the flood layer.

But you can't, because the biblical Flood never happened.

And the bible continues to say that the earth is flat and immovably fixed and the sun and stars go round it, and the sky is a solid dome that you can walk on and to which the stars are affixed such that if they come loose they'll fall to earth. You'll find some of the relevant biblical quotes in #152 above.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

And if any other God besides the Christian one, everyone loses

That is a different question and irrelevant to your original statement. The point remains, if you do not play lotto, then logically you cannot win the game! Yours is an argument complaining about those who choose to play the game of lotto...its an absurd argument that will always get the same answer...stop complaining and buy a bloody ticket!

(obviously Christianity isnt lotto)

 

[AdamjEdgar]

The amount of dry land and its heights above sea level have no changed significantly in the last 5,000 years.

You think the ice caps could all melt within 371 days? Where's your demonstration of the physics that would show that's true?

You think 70 m / 230 feet less water height required will solve the problem?

That is the problem here...you keep reverting back to the uniformatarist view of steady state. Then after doing this, its back on that same applecart again.

I will say it again,

Mt Everest wasnt 8km high prior to its uplift and your arguing over time is not an argument in support of your position. Continuing to go on with that argument is dog barking up trees...the point is your argument is a separate question...that is the question of time and not whether or not Everest was once level ground! You are openlly admitting that Everest was once just like the other areas well away from techtonic late boundries.. That position is obvious, we both agree that once upon a time, Everest was likely a flat plain (or at the very least, not on the edge of a subduction/uplift zone and therefore not part of a massive mountains range like it is today!)

Going bac to your "single flood layer claim"... observations show recent evidence from events such as the Mt Sain Hellens Volcanoe that prove it is certainly possible for significant geological change in just a few weeks and in multiple layers. It is your world view that finds it impossible to scale that up to a global scale of the size of Noahs flood (ie genesis saying "the fountains of the deep burst fourth). You are the one who is being narrow minded here...not the creationist!

Also when we consider the massive amounts of sedimentary deposits found around the world we all agree that these observations prove that sedment moved from point A to point B at some time in earths history (either by wind or water). So, given that we have such massive amounts of sedimentary deposit on a global scale, there is significant support for Noahs flood right there already and neither you or I differ in our views on how this occurs fudnamentally! (wind or water)

In addition to the sedimentary deposits we find on a global scale, there are the fossil fuel reserves found globally buried under sedimentary soil despots! These are clearly the result of burial in an oxygen depleted environment. This fits in perfectly with a flood! Scientists have already perform laboratory tests proving that fosilisation can occur with a week in pressures a lot less than those eperienced by a submarine at the bottom of our current oceans...yours is an argument from ignorance of the laboratory tests. So again, generally speaking, we fundamentally agree on the basics of how fossil fuels form in the natural world.

I think the difference between the world views here is when! As shown by lab research, it isnt even a question of time! Again, this supports the global flood view.


A bit of a sidetrack in finishing up...

It is my belief that more than likely, the resting of the ark on the mountains of Ararat was the result of techtonic uplift rather than just the rapid drying out of the earth. Id suggest that the breakup of the fountains of the deep (huge techtonic plate activity) was ongoing throughout the year of the flood and it likely continued well after the flood. One evidence of this i think is found in the statement God made when he said "i set my rainbow in the sky..." it is clear that when Noah and his family left the Ark, what they experienced around them was terrifying such that God needed to reassure them it was safe to leave the vessel. The world was clearly a very different place in terms of the nature of the geology and the weather after the flood.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Knowing that god created The Earth is fine but there’s only one way to know in my opinion and that’s with your heart not by looking at rocks or anything else.

Good to a point, but can be misleading….

Jeremiah 17:9 - The Sin and Punishment of Judah

The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

biblehub.com

It’s imperative to look at all the facts surrounding an event, any event, and then examine the evidence that resulted from the event.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

There is direct irrefutable evidence from Polonium halos that the rock layers of the Grand Canyon where all formed within a short time, during the worldwide flood.

Robert Gentry has made several startling discoveries about certain granites, certain coalified wood samples, and polonium radio halos which he found in each. These have shown that the earth was formed instantly and that the rock layers of the Colorado Plateau where all formed in about 1 year, the result of the worldwide flood. This is all documented in his book “Creation’s Tiny Mystery”.

The part that shows that the rock layers of the Colorado Plateau where all formed within a short time, the result of the worldwide flood, is documented in chapter 4 of the book. In particular, Gentry has documented that there was a single event that produced these rocks layers, which evolutionist claim took supposedly took about 50 to 200 million years. Each coalified wood samples from each of 3 separate rock layers has a set of secondary polonium 210 halos, some elliptical and some circular. The elliptical ones were at one time circular but were flattened by the weight of the above layers while the lower layer containing the polonium 210 halos was still wet and in a gel like state. The circular ones formed after when those layers were hardened. This was documented in these 3 layers.

Please read that chapter as well as the rest of the book if you can so that you can understand this completely.

You can read of his work with primordial polonium 210, 214, and 218 halos which proves that the earth was created instantly. You can also read about why these granites were not from a cooled molten state. You can read about a falsification test challenge that Gentry has given for both of these. You can read about the polonium 210 halos that prove that the worldwide flood happened. You can read about the ratio of U-238 to Pb-206 that is off by a factor of 10,000 in these samples. You read about the discrimination that and censorship he faced due to the implications of his discoveries. And a lot more.

While I agree with you that the Flood occurred, I don’t agree with YEC geology.

Those layers of strata were laid down eons ago…. While the river now called the Colorado began the erosion process, it was the Flood that finished the job, cutting through those layers, cleaning and removing the 900+-cubic-miles of debris, and depositing them 100’s of miles away.

 

[blü 2]

That is the problem here...you keep reverting back to the uniformatarist view of steady state. Then after doing this, its back on that same applecart again.

Please refer me to an evidence-based refutation of uniformitarianism that does not begin with the untenable assumption of an infallible bible.

Mt Everest wasnt 8km high prior to its uplift and your arguing over time is not an argument in support of your position.

And your evidence-based and geologically sound demonstration that this claim is true is what, exactly?

You are openlly admitting that Everest was once just like the other areas well away from techtonic late boundries.

What is your non-religious argument with this science-based report? Note particularly figure 4, about a colliding process that began some 70 million years ago. From that you may take it that I have not the slightest reason to think the Himalayas were a "flat plain" at any time since the coming of H sap sap perhaps around 200,000 years ago or for tens of millions of years prior.

Going bac to your "single flood layer claim"... observations show recent evidence from events such as the Mt Sain Hellens Volcanoe that prove it is certainly possible for significant geological change in just a few weeks and in multiple layers. It is your world view that finds it impossible to scale that up to a global scale of the size of Noahs flood (ie genesis saying "the fountains of the deep burst fourth). You are the one who is being narrow minded here...not the creationist!

Please explain to me in terms of modern geology what the biblical expression "the fountains of the deep" denotes. Point out some existing examples.

And what exactly caused the water to emerge all at once.

Then explain how water from below the earth can raise the net level of water above the earth, given that the cavities from which the subterranean waters are supposed to have come could not remain empty but must have been filled with returning water, or by land subsidence, making the net difference in volume above insignificant and certainly not able to cover a mountain 29,000 feet high.

You claim there was a flood that covered Mt Everest, and that it happened in the last five or six thousand years. So where did the water come from and where is it now? Where is the single geological flood layer that it must have created? And where are the genetic bottlenecks in all species of land animals that resulted from each species being descended from only one, two or seven breeding pairs just a few thousand years ago?

 

[Subduction Zone]

i dont think you really grasp the point... you have it completely assabout face.

If there is no God, then both the atheist and Christian end up the same (so the Christian loses nothing)

If there is a God, then the Christian wins and the atheist loses.

So the point is, in either of the above inevitable outcomes, the atheist loses! Surely you have the intellectual capacity to recognise that fact?

To say the least this is a false dichotomy. and you forgot all of the things that a Christian misses out on if his Jesus myth is false.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Going bac to your "single flood layer claim"... observations show recent evidence from events such as the Mt Sain Hellens Volcanoe that prove it is certainly possible for significant geological change in just a few weeks and in multiple layers. It is your world view that finds it impossible to scale that up to a global scale of the size of Noahs flood (ie genesis saying "the fountains of the deep burst fourth). You are the one who is being narrow minded here...not the creationist!

The most that I have seen from the Mt. St. Helens event are two different layers from two different events. You need a lot more than that.

Also, layers are not necessarily strata. Plus the radiometric evidence refutes your beliefs as well.

 

[blü 2]

If there is no God, then both the atheist and Christian end up the same (so the Christian loses nothing)

If there is a God, then the Christian wins and the atheist loses.

The Christian only wins if the God turns out to be the Christian god.

Even if it's the Christian God, you have to be the correct flavor of Christian to win. The Triune Christian God and the Father-only Christian god have no time for each other.

And even if it's, say, the Triune Christian God, well, if you're not a Roman Catholic, you lose; or if you are, you lose, whichever way it turns out to be.

And then there's the Mormon view, and then there's the Rastafarian view ... and so on.

(Of course, perhaps all gods are real, in which case I'd hope Ganesha and Aphrodite went to each other's parties.)

 

[SavedByTheLord]

The Christian only wins if the God turns out to be the Christian god.

Even if it's the Christian God, you have to be the correct flavor of Christian to win. The Triune Christian God and the Father-only Christian god have no time for each other.

And even if it's, say, the Triune Christian God, well, if you're not a Roman Catholic, you lose; or if you are, you lose, whichever way it turns out to be.

And then there's the Mormon view, and then there's the Rastafarian view ... and so on.

(Of course, perhaps all gods are real, in which case I'd hope Ganesha and Aphrodite went to each other's parties.)

Well what you say has some merit.

But the God of the Bible is the only God and that is easily proven to be true.
And what the Bible says is crystal clear.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Then explain how water from below the earth can raise the net level of water above the earth, given that the cavities from which the subterranean waters are supposed to have come could not remain empty but must have been filled with returning water, or by land subsidence, making the net difference in volume above insignificant and certainly not able to cover a mountain 29,000 feet high.

But really, you’ve just explained how the planet’s topography, prior to the Flood, would have been flatter.

Thus, in other words, there were no high-altitude mountain ranges before the Event.
And Psalm 104 supports that conclusion, by saying ‘the mountains rose, and the valleys fell’ during the deluge.

With the “vast” subterranean waters in those no doubt immense caverns acting as reservoirs; with those “vast springs” underneath the surface — would that have slightly affected the Earth’s circumference? Certainly… it would have been slightly larger.

When the lands began falling, basically the earth imploding, it would have forced the waters upward, inundating the surface.

But mountains have roots, don’t they? Yes, they do. So those parts of the land, where the thicker crust (roots) existed, didn’t fall…. Their roots supported them, forming the ranges we have today, and beginning an increased tectonic plate movement we now observe.

But the water we find that exists on Earth - and finding more water underground every year - is more than enough to have done the job.