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 Feb 14, 2015 11:04 pm

As emailed to Tas Walker and several others most of whom are not YECs (I also tried to send it to CMI Enquiries in the UK but it refused to send):

"Bolivian salt pans at Salar de Uyuni.

http://creation.com/salar-de-uyuni-bolivia

"... the uplift of the continents mid-way through Noah's Flood" (after
150 days of flooding from 40 days of incessant rain covering the
highest mountains by over 20 feet of water, presumably). Really? There
is no mention of any 'uplift' in Genesis. Or are you referring to Psalm
104:8 in the NASB - but that might be referring to 'creation week' as
described in Genesis 1. Genesis implies that the floodwaters receded
from the mountains because it had stopped raining, because of a 'wind',
and because and the 'springs of the deep' and 'floodgates of heaven' had
been closed. Not because (in part) of any drastic worldwide 'uplift' of
what the NIV says were already 'high mountains'.

"In fact, it is only the receding waters of Noah's Flood that explain
these flat plateaus at high elevation." What about glaciers or volcanic
activity?

"This uplift was the last major uplift of the continents, which formed
the present-day mountains." Those mountains were there more than 5,000
years ago. And huge ranges such as the Andes, the Alps and the Himalaya
do not all date from the same [typo corrected] single year in Earth's history.

"This water that remained trapped from the Flood would have contained
lots of unusual chemicals and organic material that accumulated during
the Flood, quite different in composition from the sort of environments
that are found today. The waters were also likely warmer than for
similar lakes today." Evidence? And the lithium deposits in Bolivia are
not typical of what is found elsewhere as far as I know.

"Most wood and organic material found in Flood sediments gives 'ages'
in this range." That proves nothing (you dispute the dates of '30,000
to 42,000 years' anyhow). Carbon-14 dating cannot be used to ascertain,
in cases where the animal or plant died longer ago than around 60,000
years, how old organic material is likely to be. Besides (as well as no
worldwide flood 4,500 years ago) there has been precisely no 'ice age'
more recently than that date.

I also note that your receding 'worldwide' Noah's Flood conveniently
not only was accompanied in its latter stages by massive worldwide
'uplift' - forming today's very highest mountains apparently - but at
the same time the draining floodwaters also then managed to carry out a
massive amount of localised erosion in just several months to form
these flat Bolivian salt pans at high altitude (as well as the Grand
Canyon etc). Presumably the erosion either all happened once the
'uplift' had stopped - or (if the two happened concurrently at this
high altitude) the 'uplift' did not prevent the simultaneous erosion
from forming an almost perfectly flath surface (where shallow
depressions allowed lakes to form that later drained leaving behind
unusual and valuable salt deposits)?"


PS Further message to CMI sent on 15 February (referring to the latest comments):

"
http://creation.com/salar-de-uyuni-bolivia
The 'correction factor' is not real. You cannot demonstrate that it is. It is pseudo-science - motivated by fundamentalist religion. Falsification factor would be a more accurate term for what you are performing. I will now check my email to see to see whether my previous rebuttal has been acknowledged, let alone refuted, by anyone at CMI."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8171
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 » Fri Mar 20, 2015 11:15 pm

As sent to CMI just now:

"
http://creation.com/evolutionary-programming
It is not 'indoctrination'. It is science education. You are anti-science. Yes - you DO lie about the age of the universe, spreading false information and propaganda. I don't need to be rude or abusive - just speak the truth about CMI. And your so-called 'biblical worldview' teachings go WAY beyond what the Bible actually teaches."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8171
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 Apr 15, 2015 11:08 pm

http://creation.com/dinosaur-bird-evolution
I only skimmed this but I note the admission right at the end: "It may be that dinosaurs had feathers ...".
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8171
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

CMI in a lather about biblical creation

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Aug 19, 2015 11:15 pm

As sent:

http://creation.com/proclaiming-creation
Biblical creation is a myth and a lie. And perhaps there is NO God out there rather than a bad God who also pretends NOT to exist. So no Christian utopia either. And just an appearance of 'design'.
"We must dispel any notion that this defence of an historical Genesis (by an acknowledged minority of today’s Christians) is akin to Custer’s Last Stand —a sort of forlorn hope in the teeth of the evidence from the sciences." But you can't. Or else you would have done so. Science shows our history. Genesis is mythology. The worldwide flood is total fiction. "Moreover, with the easy access to information via the Internet, the fatal flaws in this great delusion of our age are being exposed. An excellent source of such information was compiled during CMI’s Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels project." Which is a PACK of LIES.
You are backing the wrong horse.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8171
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 21, 2015 4:15 pm

Quite a useful succinct summary re 'soft tissue' finds: https://biologos.org/blogs/jim-stump-fa ... really-say
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8171
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Previous

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests