A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:15 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:http://gracesalt.wordpress.com/2012/09/28/modern-science-catching-up-with-creation-museum-teaching/#comments

Having just commented on this as below...:
"Tim
I know enough about evolutionary biologists to know that they NOT abandoned a (bushy) 'tree of life' in favour of an 'orchard'. As I understand it, they consider that all life is descended from archaeal or bacterial or eukaryotic cells - but as the three major modern cell designs evolved, horizontal gene transfer and cross-breeding also took place. See also this attachment - it is NOT a Creation Museum creationist 'orchard' of lots of DISTINCT and SEPARATE kinds ever since creation week/abiogenesis/the origin of life! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Horiz ... ansfer.jpg
The answer to your question is 'no'. Sorry.
Ashley"

I see that there are two comments below the blog post (I've been unable to post there for technical reasons, hence I do so by email).

Despite all the rather technical quotes added at the bottom of the blog, a poorly researched and erroneous 'conclusion' imho.


Further to the exchanges with blogger Tim Gilleand (not all of which were posted here because they were too lengthy), I've just come across this talk. She mentions the 'creationist orchard' early on. http://old.richarddawkins.net/videos/64 ... eationists



Now the YEC blogger Tim Gilleand has made the following HIGHLY MISLEADING comment on Georgia Purdom's facebook page:
"“…since embracing Darwin’s tree-like representation of evolution and pondering over the universal Tree of Life, the field has moved on. Nowadays, the evolutionary biologists are well aware of numerous evolutionary processes that distort the tree, complicating the statistical description of models and increasing computational complexity, often to prohibitive levels… as the Tree of Life turns out to be more like a ‘forest’.”
A forest? You mean like the Creation Museum's "orchard of life"?"
http://www.facebook.com/AnswersInGenesi ... rgiaPurdom (see under One Zoom Tree of Life Explorer)

NO, THEY DO NOT - I REPEAT NOT - MEAN THE FANTASY THAT IS THE YEC/CREATIONIST 'ORCHARD OF LIFE'.

I explained to Tim several times by email about a month ago how his claims here were mistaken and misunderstood the situation:
http://gracesalt.wordpress.com/2012/09/ ... -teaching/

A belief which cannot be changed by any facts or by the correction of any wrong understandings is FANATICISM.

EDIT: I was not entirely clear where Tim's quotation tonight actually came from. However, I now see that it was within his blog post of 28 September. It appears to be found within a 2012 textbook entitled 'Methods in Molecular Biology' (NOT on the website flagged by Georgia Purdom, and not a YEC source either). So his use of the word forest again is understandable - although the authors did put the word in quotation marks ie they are not really a proposing a forest rather than a single - very bushy - tree. I believe they are being a little imprecise in their language, and are proposing something like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Horiz ... ansfer.jpg and NOT something like what is depicted here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/granchia/2426513394/

Sometimes analogies do not really help. A bushy tree or mix of several trees (ie a copse) - but NOT an orchard of lots of completely SEPARATE, branching, trees.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:06 am

With respect to this News and Links thread:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3112

The usual AiG pseudo-science, science-denial and eisegesis:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... e-10272012 (ScienceDaily: “Tropical Collapse in Early Triassic Caused by Lethal Heat: Extreme Temperatures Blamed for ‘Dead Zone’”; Unprecedented global heat left its footprints in tiny teeth - News to Note Item 4)
"The dates associated with the current study’s time-tracked temperatures are based on unverifiable assumptions associated with dating methods. Those geologic layers of sediment that were deposited by the Flood and its aftermath were laid down over a short span of time, not millions of years. The fossil record is not a chronicle of gradual evolution and extinction. Much of the fossil record reflects instead the order in which organisms were catastrophically buried during the global Flood.
The global Flood began with the disruption of the ocean basins as “the fountains of the great deep were broken up” (Genesis 7:11). The Paleozoic rock sequence consists of the lowest layers deposited by the Flood. Marine creatures buried by the initial oceanic upheavals dominate it. In the uppermost Paleozoic rocks, amphibians and land animals make their appearance. The “mass extinctions” in the fossil record are really regions representing the massive burial of organisms swept together from various ecosystems. Thus the Permian layers at the top of the Paleozoic sequence likely correspond to the time when rising Flood waters were beginning to overwhelm more terrestrial ecosystems.
The likelihood that hot temperatures prevailed when Permian and Early Triassic sediments were deposited also makes sense in light of biblical history. Geology reveals much volcanic activity associated with the fossil record, notably in the end-Permian and end-Cretaceous layers. That high temperatures prevailed when they were deposited is consistent with the unprecedented level of volcanic activity associated with the global Flood. The break up of oceanic crust would have released tremendous quantities of hot lava into the oceans. However, those remarkably hot conditions did not produce five million years of scorched earth. But the effects of this volcanic heat did continue past the year of the global Flood, promoting meteorological conditions that within a few centuries ultimately produced the Ice Age."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:19 am

Psst... anybody want to see the knives out for YEC Jason Lisle? Please see here, including my comment just now about how the man spreads untruths even about scripture: http://eyeonicr.wordpress.com/2012/10/2 ... mment-4322
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:54 pm

A red rag for Jason Lisle and for AiG should they see this I think (flagged in today's blog): http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2012/10 ... a-reprise/
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

A Biblical Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:07 am

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... fight.html
According to this, the EU structural funds are being used to support "a tourism project in Poland that recreates scenes from the Bible". In the absence of evidence to the contrary, and bearing in mind that this is the EU and that Poland as largely Roman Catholic, I am assuming that the facility is not some kind of creationist museum.
A search here turned up nothing: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/pro ... =ALL&per=2
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:23 am

http://creation.com/jellyfish-judgment
"Despite its primitive structure, the North American comb jellyfish can sneak up on its prey like a high-tech stealth submarine, making it a successful predator" (quote from Science Daily provided in Catchpoole's article).

Jellyfish aren't as primitive as we thought. Evolution (even with God behind it all) has been falsified!!
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A Biblical Earth and universe?

Postby Roger Stanyard » Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:44 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9653643/David-Cameron-in-new-EU-cash-fight.html
According to this, the EU structural funds are being used to support "a tourism project in Poland that recreates scenes from the Bible". In the absence of evidence to the contrary, and bearing in mind that this is the EU and that Poland as largely Roman Catholic, I am assuming that the facility is not some kind of creationist museum.
A search here turned up nothing: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/pro ... =ALL&per=2


The American fundamentalists are well connected in Poland. That Poland is Catholic won't stop them. See Brazil (or a load of other Latin American countries) for the evidence. The fundamentalist have billions of dollars available to proselytise and convert in Europe. the only thing holding them back is the "problem" of seeing a return on their "investment".
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:46 am

"The earth is surrounded by a magnetic field that protects living things from solar radiation. Without it, life could not exist. That’s why scientists were surprised to discover that the field is quickly wearing down. At the current rate, the field and thus the earth could be no older than 20,000 years old".
And there was me thinking YECs hated uniformitarianism:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... etic-field
"Reliable, accurate, published geological field data have emphatically confirmed the young-earth model: a freely-decaying electric current in the outer core is generating the magnetic field." Except that the footnote links to a YEC speech at a creationist conference 25 years ago - ha ha.
"Old-earth advocates maintain the earth is over 4.5 billion years old, so they believe the magnetic field must be self-sustaining. They propose a complex, theoretical process known as the dynamo model, but such a model contradicts some basic laws of physics."
How? Do TELL us, Dr Snelling.
Last edited by a_haworthroberts on Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:49 am

Talking of uniformitarianism: http://gracesalt.wordpress.com/2012/11/ ... tarianism/

I commented as follows (by email):
"Young Earth creationists start with scripture and THEN consider
evidence. They have a starting assumption that evidence can only have
been interpreted correctly if it somehow confirms scripture (and
scripture allows for 'supernatural intervention' if expressly stated or
needed to make an argument). That is not scientific. The international
professional science community (some members of which are religious)
seeks to be, collectively, scientific.

Stating that evolutionists always start with an assumption of
uniformitarianism is simplistic and incorrect. Past big (naturally-
caused) global or regional extinctions arising from eg massive global
warming, massive global cooling, impacts from space, volcanic eruptions
or even huge regional floods are hardly compatible with what we see
today. But - in the absence of any evidence to the contrary - they do
assume that radioactive decay rates remain constant over time and have
not varied one million fold in the 'recent' past.

The YECs' assumption of catastrophism is not a scientific one. Because
it arbitrarily assumes, without supportive material evidence and merely
doctrinal interpretations derived from the ancient Bible which never
mentions fossils or radioactivity, exactly the RIGHT kind of
catastrophism. One that manages to falsify ALL 'evolutionary' science -
whether the ages of the Earth and the universe, dating of fossils of
extinct creatures by the age of adjacent igneous rocks, whether or not
fossils including hominid ones were almost all buried in the SAME year
by a massive flood, the speed of evolution/adaptation in the last 4,300
years and so forth.

YEC-ism is basically denial of mainstream science - a form of pseudo-
science designed to convince would-be Christians and wavering
Christians that the whole Bible is entirely trustworthy and that
believers in mainstream science are trusting in 'lies' and 'hoaxes'.

If the evidence, rationally interpreted, more or less confirmed
Genesis there would be no need for a rival form of 'science' known as
young Earth creationism.

I'm sorry to inform you that your beliefs about origins (whether or
not a God exists and I do not know the answer to that) is NOT a
'scientific' re-interpretation. It is a religious re-interpretation.

The assumptions of 'evolutionists' are based on the sum of the
available evidence - alone. If you want to call naturalism a 'religion'
or a 'godless religion' you are free to do so. I would call it non-
infallible science.

Will now read the other comments."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:53 am

No guests logged in. I guess most of the guests who visit this site at this time of day live in the US of A. ;)
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:35 am

Message sent to Dr David Catchpoole - who used to be a scientist:

"
http://creation.com/dinos-ate-birds
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ad ... ne.0044012
If you REALLY think this falsifies evolution and millions of years you are more deluded than I realised. Though probably your fans are more deluded about science than you realise.
"There’s no basis for saying it was a ‘slow’ flyer, with ‘slow’ take-offs." Other than that a dinosaur caught two of them in rapid succession.
"Beware of spin."
INDEED.
The Daily Mail putting "in a flap" in a headline about birds signifies precisely nothing! It is a newspaper which likes to spread unwarranted 'angst'.
Rather like you Dr Catchpoole.
Your claim that something requires being 'salvaged' is utter nonsense."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:04 pm

http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2012/11 ... ecord.html
http://www.apologeticspress.org/APConte ... ticle=4537

So evolutionists make statements about timescales in the fossil record that may later need to be revised in the light of new finds?

Better simply to ignore the fossil record and assume that every creature has existed from 'the beginning' eh - like the YEC 'scientists' do.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:43 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:Message sent to Dr David Catchpoole - who used to be a scientist:

"
http://creation.com/dinos-ate-birds
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ad ... ne.0044012
If you REALLY think this falsifies evolution and millions of years you are more deluded than I realised. Though probably your fans are more deluded about science than you realise.
"There’s no basis for saying it was a ‘slow’ flyer, with ‘slow’ take-offs." Other than that a dinosaur caught two of them in rapid succession.
"Beware of spin."
INDEED.
The Daily Mail putting "in a flap" in a headline about birds signifies precisely nothing! It is a newspaper which likes to spread unwarranted 'angst'.
Rather like you Dr Catchpoole.
Your claim that something requires being 'salvaged' is utter nonsense."



I see that Catchpoole - who used to be a scientist - is spewing evasive garbage under his article:
"Adam H., United Kingdom, 13 November 2012
I don't really understand your point. A dinosaur eating a bird disproves dino-bird evolution? Somehow, I don't think you quite understand the theory...
I would also like to point out that you show no knowledge on how the bird anatomy allows full flight. Instead of making blunt assertions, this article could try to find out why the scientists claimed what they did.
Thirdly, scientists are NOT covering up their tracks, otherwise creation.com would never have found out about it.
David Catchpoole responds:
This comment reflects the sentiment of a number of respondents challenging us with "So where's the problem (for evolution)?"
I would ask such correspondents to seriously consider whether they would ever acknowledge any problem for evolution? Historically, there's been example after example of evidence that has utterly overturned the evolutionary storyline of the day, e.g. grass before dinos, but the evolutionary paradigm's flexibility and malleability is such that it's simply re-packaged, and on-sold as if nothing untoward had happened."

Does anyone else find this response distasteful?
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:30 pm

An amusing example of the sheer nonsense and ignorance that YECs, including YEC 'experts', wallow in. See the comment and response under this blog: http://biblicalgeology.net/blog/bill-ny ... eationism/

The Flood caused the continents to separate and move away rapidly from a supercontinent - apparently. At the end of the Flood the mountains were raised up to their present height - apparently.

In the real world the Himalaya and the Alps at least were formed when continents/portions of land on separate tectonic plates COLLIDED.

Keep up the ignorance and scientific delusions YECs!
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A 6,000 year old, and Biblical, Earth and universe?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Nov 21, 2012 1:00 am

A 'perfect' creation existed 6,000 years ago? I don't believe it.
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... n=facebook
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8779
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

PreviousNext

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 5 guests