Ask a Young Earth Creationist.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why does God try to trick us by creating rocks that are millions of years old when we are only 6,000 yrs. old?

Would you mind playing a trick back on God and pretend you actually follow him even though you've never heard, seen, touched, tasted, nor smelled him?
 
I'm kind of disappointed that this has turned into such a one-sided gangbang. I was really hoping for an answer. :sad:
 
I'm kind of disappointed that this has turned into such a one-sided gangbang. I was really hoping for an answer. :sad:

Its because you guys are unfairly interrogating for his beliefs.

If you wanted a real answer you people shouldnt of asked questions in such a harsh manner.
 
Yeah, is he ever going to look at his own thread? I mean we can keep going without him, but it wouldn't really be fair...
 
Yeah, is he ever going to look at his own thread? I mean we can keep going without him, but it wouldn't really be fair...

Well, to be fair the thread title is "ask a YEC". Nowhere in there did it say that he must reply, especially when the evidence mounts against him.
 
Well the radioactive decay is not quite so concrete as many people say, because there are many things that can affect the rate of decay. Also the way how the it is measured makes many assumption, such as that they know the exact amount of mother material that would have been at the site. No one would even know that, thus it is assumed.
ANDESITE FLOWS AT MT NGAURUHOE, NEW ZEALAND, AND THE IMPLICATIONS FOR POTASSIUM-ARGON "DATING"
"ABSTRACT
New Zealand's newest and most active volcano, Mt Ngauruhoe in the Taupo Volcanic Zone, produced andesite flows in 1949 and 1954, and avalanche deposits in 1975. Potassium-argon "dating" of five of these flows and deposits yielded K-Ar model "ages" from <0.27 Ma to 3.5 - 0.2 Ma. "Dates" could not be reproduced, even from splits of the same samples from the same flow, the explanation being variations in excess 40Ar* content. A survey of anomalous K-Ar "dates" indicates they are common, particularly in basalts, xenoliths and xenocrysts such as diamonds that are regarded as coming from the upper mantle. In fact, it is now well established that there are large quantities of excess 40Ar* in the mantle, which in part represent primordial argon not produced by in situ radioactive decay of 40K and not yet outgassed. And there are mantle-crust domains between, and within, which argon circulates during global tectonic processes, magma genesis and mixing of crustal materials. This has significant implications for the validity of K-Ar and 40Ar/39Ar "dating"."
Assuming that "Ma" above means mega-annum, this is wrong for multiple reasons, one of which I will outline.

Wikipedia:
"Potassium-argon or K-Ar dating is a geochronological method used in many geoscience disciplines. It is based on measuring the products of the radioactive decay of potassium (K), which is a common element found in materials such as micas, clay minerals, tephra and evaporites.

Potassium (K) exists in 3 isotopes - 39K (93.2581%), 40K (0.0117%), 41K (6.7302%).

The radioactive isotope 40K decays to 40Ar and 40Ca with a half-life of 1.26x109 years. 40Ca is the most common form of Ca, however, so the increase in abundance due to K decay results in a negligible increase in total abundance making it less useful as a geochronometer. The 40Ar isotope is much less abundant however, and is therefore a more useful isotope."


The short version: The half-life is on the 10^9 scale. The error above is on the 10^6 scale. Invoking "basalts, xenoliths and xenocrysts" is irrelevent to the fact that the above quote (again, if Ma means mega-annum) is analogous to measuring a person's height by driving a car across his length and looking at the odometer.
 
Sometimes, a belief is so ridiculous, you can't pose questions with a straight face.
In which case you should stay silent. I thought the moderator made that clear.

How do you explain the flood? I gather that it was a catastrophic event, from conditions that no longer pertain, but could you be more specific?

J
 
In which case you should stay silent. I thought the moderator made that clear.

How do you explain the flood? I gather that it was a catastrophic event, from conditions that no longer pertain, but could you be more specific?

J

Ginormous tsunami. Back in the day after the ice age, glaciers were breaking off and moving, and those create the mega-tsunamis, large enough to cause the flood.
 
Sometimes, a belief is so ridiculous, you can't pose questions with a straight face.

Young Earth Creationism is typically covered in an introductory philosophy class like Critical Thinking, or Science & Pseudoscience. It's just not an intellectually honest position, and there's not much to do but poke fun at it.
 
Okay how do you respond to the claim that mutation does not always mean a loss of information?
Just because they might add information, but it is not adding new or better information. One of the most widely used examples is the Hox Gene, but that is just duplication not adding new info, which is what is required, For evolution to be true then any mutation must add new information, but that just does not happen. All we see is when we have a genetic duplication that normally does not happen, at best the mutation is useless but at worst the mutation is harmful. The only types of mutations that are beneficial are those that lose some information.
Do you think that the average scientist who works with subjects that contradict your ideology is malicious, or just delusional?
It is amazing what people can believe when they truly believe in what they believe to be true, they will fight to show what they believe. Also often the peer presure does play a role in society, even in the Scientific community. There have been cases in the past when prevailing Scientific thought has been totally wrong.
What ice age? Do you also think that there was an ice age in the last 4000 years (or so)? How do you think the Koalas survived the migration, since they didn't have access to their leaves?

Is the answer similar if I asked about ocelots, monkeys, and anacondas getting back into South America? How did they get there from Turkey?
I was just confirming that God thinks incest is actually okay.
Do you believe in separate rules for Jews and Gentiles? The proscription against incest seems to only have been given to the Jews, much like the proscription against eating pork or the proscription against wearing two threads at once.
1. Well after the Flood the conditions of the earth were way different than what they are now. We are talking about a catastrophic conditions.
The Ice Age and the Genesis Flood
The climate change following the Genesis Flood provides a likely catastrophic mechanism for an ice age. The Flood was a tremendous tectonic and volcanic event. Large amounts of volcanic aerosols would remain in the atmosphere following the Flood, generating a large temperature drop over land by reflecting much solar radiation back to space. Volcanic aerosols would likely be replenished in the atmosphere for hundreds of years following the Flood, due to high post-Flood volcanism, which is indicated in Pleistocene sediments. The moisture would be provided by strong evaporation from a much warmer ocean, following the Flood. The warm ocean is a consequence of a warmer pre-Flood climate and the release of hot subterranean water during the eruption of "all the fountains of the great deep" (Genesis 7:11). The added quantity of water must have been large to cover all the pre-Flood mountains, which were lower than today. Evaporation over the ocean is proportional to how cool, dry, and unstable the air is, and how fast the wind blows. Indirectly, it is proportional to sea surface temperature. A 10 degree C air-sea temperature difference, with a relative humidity of 50%, will evaporate seven times more water at a sea surface temperature of 30 degrees C than at 0 degrees C. Thus, the areas of greatest evaporation would be at higher latitudes and off the east coast of Northern Hemisphere continents. Focusing on northeast North America, the combination of cool land and warm ocean would cause the high level winds and a main storm track to be parallel to the east coast, by the thermal wind equation. Storm after storm would develop near the eastern shoreline, similar to modern-day Northeasters, over the continent. Once a snow cover is established, more solar radiation is reflected back to space, reinforcing the cooling over land, and compensating the volcanic lulls.

The ice sheet will grow as long as the large supply of moisture is available, which depends upon the warmth of the ocean. Thus, the time to reach maximum ice volume will depend upon the cooling time of the ocean. This can be found from the heat balance equation for the ocean, with reasonable assumptions of post-Flood climatology and initial and final average ocean temperatures. However, the heat lost from the ocean would be added to the atmosphere, which would slow the oceanic cooling with cool summers and warm winters. The time to reach maximum ice volume must also consider the heat balance of the post-Flood atmosphere, which would strongly depend upon the severity of volcanic activity. Considering ranges of volcanism and the possible variations in the terms of the balance equations, the time for glacial maximum ranges from 250 to 1300 years.

The average ice depth at glacial maximum is proportional to the total evaporation from the warm ocean at mid and high latitudes, and the transport of moisture from lower latitudes. Since most snow in winter storms falls in the colder portion of the storm, twice the precipitation was assumed to fall over the cold land than over the ocean. Some of the moisture, re-evaporated from non-glaciated land, would end up as snow on the ice sheet, but this effect should be mostly balanced by summer runoff. The average depth of ice was calculated at roughly half uniformitarian estimates. The latter are really unknown. As Bloom states, "Unfortunately, few facts about its thickness are known . . . we must turn to analogy and theory. . . ."

The time to melt an ice sheet at mid-latitudes is surprisingly short, once the copious moisture source is gone. It depends upon the energy balance over a snow or ice cover. Several additional factors would have enhanced melting. Crevassing would increase the absorption of solar radiation, by providing more surface area. The climate would be colder and drier than at present, with strong dusty storms that would tend to track along the ice sheet boundary. The extensive loess sheets south of and within the periphery of the past ice sheet attest to this. Dust settling on the ice would greatly increase the solar absorption and melting. A mountain snowfield in Japan was observed to absorb 85% of the solar radiation after 4000 ppm of pollution dust had settled on its surface.

2. About the Koala. It is quite strange that they are mostly eating a plant that is very combustable for a slow moving animal. If this is the result of Evolution, then Evolution is not good.
Flamin Koalas/Keeping up Standards.
On a visit to the Coffs Harbour Zoo we were informed by the keeper that the koala was so highly evolved that it could only eat certain kinds of leaves; mostly gum leaves.

I said that in that case evolution must be crazy. If this is the most highly evolved creature in Australia, how is it that since its diet is essentially diesel fuel, it sits in trees during fires and goes up like a roman candle? Why has it not evolved to use the fuel to outrun the fires and thus survive in its environment?

The keeper was not amused.
Cuddly cold-cures counter critics
It now looks as if the koala’s well-known exclusive diet of gum leaves is really a behavioral addiction, rather than a genetic inability to eat or digest other types of food.

It certainly seems true that koalas reared in the wild feed exclusively on eucalyptus leaves and die without them. Their bodies become literally saturated with the pungent eucalyptus oils until they smell like furry cough sweets.

But according to Roland Siegel, a psychopharmacologist at UCLA, this dependence on these intoxicating substances is learnt in early infancy; the baby koala literally becomes ‘hooked’ through its mother’s eucalyptus-flavoured milk. Yet orphan koalas reared away from any contact with these substances ‘can thrive on a diet of cow’s milk, bread and honey.’

Koalas may have only become addicted to an exclusive gum-leaf diet in this way well after arriving in Australia.
You can see that there are good explanations as to why Koalas exist only in Australia adn their special diet.

To the other animals, how many times must I say that took a boat to South America. You also are assuming that the world has always stayed the same, or are assuming that we believe that the earth has stayed the same as it is right now. One being that the earth was once together and that as a result of the catastrophic tectonic changes that the continents quickly grew apart. ALso you forget that animals can migrate wia being stow aways with humans.
 
To the other animals, how many times must I say that took a boat to South America

Sorry, I thought you were teasing the first time. I've never heard about animals taking a boat to South America. Could you expound a bit on what you mean, because I'm totally unfamiliar with this theory?

And you're also suggesting that continental drift was vastly accelerated ~4000 years ago, but has slowed down?
You can see that there are good explanations as to why Koalas exist only in Australia adn their special diet.

??? You're suggesting that their current diet is a disadvantage to them, I think. If they could have survived elsewhere, we'd expect for Koalas to be thriving elsewhere, and (meanwhile) we'd have the stoner Koalas in Austrailia, too, not doing nearly as well.

But, there's no reason to focus on the Koalas; they're just one of a thousand species that I'm interested in. I think your boat theory is the important one for me to understand. I'm not sure how penguins sailed to Antarctica.
 
It is amazing what people can believe when they truly believe in what they believe to be true, they will fight to show what they believe. Also often the peer presure does play a role in society, even in the Scientific community. There have been cases in the past when prevailing Scientific thought has been totally wrong.
Never this wrong. Remember classical, you're uprooting physics, astronomy, bioogy, and geology all at once from multiple different sides. You're basicly saying everything (or at least a massive chunk) the scientific community is wrong and this is based on the disrepsected research of a few researchers outside of the esatablished scientific system.
 
I'm kind of disappointed that this has turned into such a one-sided gangbang. I was really hoping for an answer. :sad:

It's one sided, because the only contradictory evidence comes from people who really don't have any formal training or know what they are talking about, suffice to say there evidence is taken and destroyed scientifically, over and over and over again.

It doesn't matter though, to expect a YEC to actually do some real scientific research is to lose a YEC, which is partly why they don't do it. Look at the web sites quoted? All by non scientists(or those such as Hovind with mickey mouse qualifications from the creationist university of x) All by laymen. All easily destroyed. Do you know how many YEC scientists there are? Very few, and I mean very few. Science is there biggest fear. Because with rationality and truth and scientific method comes doubt about something that isn't even a widespread belief amongst Christians in general.

The fact is these people are brought up on a fantasy - and are loathe to actually learn something about the subject at hand, usually isolated deliberately from science, relying on there community to fill in the blanks with what are essentially lies and misinformation - is sad. You want an answer? You have one, there is nothing even remotely scientific about YEC, nor will there ever be without resorting to science, peer reviewed papers, which they are so loathe to do. Study science learn about it, then comment. If your going to convince anyone but the brainwashed who are force fed this from birth, you need to do something other than publish crackpottery. It's only convincing yourselves.
 
I'm kind of disappointed that this has turned into such a one-sided gangbang. I was really hoping for an answer. :sad:

Unfortunately I have been busy at work and now I am sick. I will try and get to answer as many question as soon as possible, but things have conspired against me so far. That is what happens living in this fallen world we live in. I wish I could do better, sorry about that.
 
Sorry to jump in here, but I have a quick question:
What are the hallmarks of a YEC?
The most important one is that we defend the Bible's veracity right from the first word to the last.
Read 1 Timothy 2:11-12

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
Do you believe that women should not question their husbands then? Do you believe that women are not aloud to teach the word of God? What do you think about Angela Merkel?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom