Evolution is a Lie FaceBook page is where I now post and debate. The posts on this page updates every 24 hours for each FB page listed here. So visit often to get the latest news from several creation ministries in one place. With the ability to also comment and debate. ~ Issac
How do you get layers with repelling poles to stay together? You don’t. So it’s not polar flips that caused this. Besides, what is going to have more of an effect on the next layers poles? 1) A magnet pole that is 1,000 of miles away? 2) Or one that is butted right up against it that has a magnetic field of it’s own?
- Astrophysical observations show that the rotation of the earth has been slowing (and the number of days per year has been decreasing) since it first formed. Calculations based on these observations show that there is a very close agreement between the predicted number of days in a year, the measured number of days based on coral growth characteristics, and the measured age of fossil corals. The results are consistent with fossil coral ages extending back some 400 million years ago. How do YECs account for these correlations?
- Response: This is basically the same question asked earlier about corals it’s just done in a different way. I will answer this the same way I answered the other question. Old earth believers are taking the average growth to calculate this. Which means corals grow at different rates. No one know the rate of coral growth from the past so basically this is an assumption based on something that cannot be proven. Today the conditions for corals is not favorable and many are dying. Do you think corals will grow normally in unfavorable conditions? No they want. So the past was more favorable for growth from which it is easy to conclude that corals grew much faster in the past.
- Evidence gathered from core samples taken by the Glomar Challenger show that the Mediterranean Sea has been subjected to repeated cycles of drying and re-flooding over a period of millions of years. Analysis of the core samples reveals a geologic history that involved multiple cycles of deposition of sediments, compression of the sediments into stone, erosion of the stone into canyons (some larger than the modern Grand Canyon), and reburial of these canyons under thousands of feet of new sediments. Contained within these sediments are multiple layers of evaporites and weathered interfaces that take thousands of years to accumulate and that can only form under exposed conditions. How does the YEC model explain this evidence?
- Response: The problem here is this is based on figures that do not include the flood. So why would they support the flood? And some of what was asked here has already been answered in previous responses. It seems that the more I go into these questions the more they are the same just asked in a different fashion.
- Over 160 impact structures that were formed by the collision of extra-terrestrial objects with the earth have been identified. The vast majority of the impacts that formed these massive structures, which occur at various depths in the geologic column above the so-called Flood basement rock, were not recorded by humans. Considering that numerous other earth-altering events (earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, etc.) have been regularly recorded throughout human history, it seems odd that so few of these impacts were noted in historical documents if, as YECs contend, humans have been present on earth since shortly after its inception. Some YECs argue that most of these impacts occurred during the chaos of the Flood, and were, therefore, not recorded. How could these collisions of nuclear bomb proportions have occurred during the Flood without causing massive waves that would have smashed the wooden Ark like a toy?
- Response: How can one know that these meteors would have nuclear bomb proportions? This is actually an assumption based on making the YEC model not work. But let’s take a closer look. The meteors were only needed to bring down the canopy. And while the meteors entered our atmosphere where the barometric pressures were double because of the canopy, there would have been much more friction to slow down the speed of the meteor before it hit. Also taking into account that the canopy itself slowed these meteors down somewhat upon impact means the meteors back then would not had hit with the same forcible impact as they would today. So nuclear bomb proportions is over kill. Of course when one is looking to discredit something to the emf degree over kill is always in order.
- Oil contains certain chemicals that derive from the organic materials from which it was formed. The distribution of these chemicals in oil correlates with the sequence of these organic precursor materials as they appeared in the geologic column. For example, there is no oleanane in oil deposits older than the last epoch of the Cretaceous because the angiosperms from which this chemical is derived did not exist prior to that time. A similar time line exists for chemicals in oil such as 24-norcholestane (which is not present until the appearance of the diatoms) and vitrain (which is not present until the appearance of land plants). How is this relationship explained in terms of the Flood model?
- Response: Oil does not take millions of years to form. In fact that claim is based upon assumptions made about the geologic column. There is a process that is done on turkey and chicken by products (stuff that’s usually thrown away), that when the near to same conditions of how crude oil is found in underground is applied twice, the by products break down to form a petroleum product known as bio-diesel (a form of oil that is used as fuel) in about 2 hours. And there are many things that can be broke down to make this. They are currently working on a process to turn tires into bio diesel or gas. They will do the same with common trash and one company is reportedly doing this with raw sewage. So it’s not what existed, its what broke down to make it. There is also what’s called hydrothermal oil. The video below shows oil being made by nature right before your eyes.
<iframe width=”480″ height=”360″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/VdcHIeH0KsM?rel=0″ frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>
- The Atacama desert in Chile contains river beds that have not had water running in them for 120,000 years. Some areas of this desert have been in a hyper-arid condition for at least 20 million years. How can these facts be accounted for in terms of the YEC model?
- Response: It would first have to be ascertained how the ages of what history is claimed, was concluded. Asking a vague question with no real information won’t get a good answer. But since it is this way I will ask questions on what I see in the questions. 1) How does one know that the river beds have had no running water 120,000 years? Since there is no information on how I can only conclude that this was assumed. And the claim about 20 million years, same question.
Next claim: Mars rover finds “puddles” on the planet’s surface (New Scientist Link). Then there is an update on the page that says: Update: The researchers have retracted their claim about the possibility of standing water on Mars after readers pointed out the terrain lies on the sloped wall of a crater. It takes readers from a blog to point out NASA’s mistake? Or maybe attempted deception? Why deception? Well there is about a trillion dollars involved in sending a manned space ship. That much money can corrupt most people.
No oceans, flowing streams, waterfalls? NASA is ready to commit to anything as evidence for water on mars, and here’s why:
They have already committed to oceans of water being on mars. Spent money to animate it, and they want to spend a trillion dollars to send a manned spaceship there. So there is a lot of grant money involved in selling the idea to the public and to the government. But selling is not proving. Anyone can animate an idea to sell the idea, but only finding evidence of what could have been on mars, is not proving what has been on mars.
Just about everyone has heard about Noah’s Flood. The main objection to it being true is that there is not enough water to flood the whole earth to the highest mountain. And this objection has gone unanswered for years because no one really knows how much water is on and underneath the crust of this planet. Or do they?
There has been testing and research done on the upper mantle of the earth. A mineral called “wadsleyite”, holds about 3% water by weight. Does not sound like much but the estimated amount of wadsleyite that exists, the water contained in it works out to be about 30 of our oceans. 30 oceans worth of water is more than enough to flood the earth to the highest mountain.
Suddenly, there was somewhere to put water deep inside the mantle. “You can have oceans and oceans of water stored in the transition zone,” says Jay Bass of the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. “It’s sopping wet stuff.” Researchers think wadsleyite can hold as much as 3·3 per cent water by weight. It may not sound like much, but there could be an awful lot of wadsleyite.
According to Smyth, models of the mantle’s composition suggest that at the depths where wadsleyite is stable, between half and three-quarters of the material is the right stuff for making this mineral. “If the region between 400 and 525 kilometers were, say, 60 per cent wadsleyite, and that phase was saturated at 3·3 weight per cent, that’s ten oceans of water,” says Smyth. But Dan Frost, an experimental petrologist at the Carnegie Institution of Washington’s Geophysical Laboratory in Washington DC, thinks the mantle could contain even more water.
Frost says that solidified lava that has erupted at mid-ocean ridges contains glass that can be analyzed for water content. His research team has calculated how much water the lava’s parent material in the mantle must have contained. “It ends up being between 100 and 500 parts per million,” he says. And if the whole mantle contained 500 parts per million of water, Frost calculates that would be the equivalent of 30 oceans of water.
Scientists scanning the deep interior of Earth have found evidence of a vast water reservoir beneath eastern Asia that is at least the volume of the Arctic Ocean.
The discovery marks the first time such a large body of water has found in the planet’s deep mantle.
Reference: Live Science
A seismologist at Washington University in St. Louis has made the first 3-D model of seismic wave damping — diminishing — deep in the Earth’s mantle and has revealed the existence of an underground water reservoir at least the volume of the Arctic Ocean. It is the first evidence for water existing in the Earth’s deep mantle.
A seismologist has made the first 3-D model of seismic wave damping, or diminishing, deep in the Earth’s mantle and has revealed the existence of an underground water reservoir at least the volume of the Arctic Ocean.
Reference: Washington University in St Louis
The question is, why has not science shared this information with creationists? Can you guess why? It’s because it support Noah’s flood of the whole earth to the highest mountain, and not Evolution. This does away with the ideas of a local flood and shows that God knew before science did, that there was enough water. He created it.
But science also over looked something else while trying to debunk Noah’s Flood. When that much water comes up, the surface area of the earth decreases by a great amount making it to where a lot less actual water is needed to flood the earth to the point the Bible speaks of. But there is more. They try to claim that subduction put all that water in the upper mantle of the earth. If subduction pulls that much water into the upper mantle, by now there would not be any water left on the surface of this planet. So the flood is the only working mechanism that could have placed it there.
How can the water go into the mantle without boiling off?Solution: The water for the flood was 7 miles above the earth’s crust (sea level), and 6 miles to the deepest ocean. Pressure applied to water increases the boiling point. According to scuba diving books, every 33 feet you descend into water equals 1 atmosphere. One atmosphere = 14.7 psi. So you take how many feet are in a mile. Divide that by 33. And you get how many atmospheres are in one mile. Times that times 13 miles and you get the least amount of pressure for the least amount of water required to cover the earth for the flood. After you have the amount of atmospheres in 13 miles of water, you times that times 14.7 and you get the actual pressure at the bottom of the ocean during the flood.
From there you can figure a boiling point. But remember, water can only reach a certain boiling point and can go no higher regardless of pressure. You can research this on the web. The other point is that salt raises this boiling point (much like antifreeze raises the boiling point of water in a car radiator) along with any other mineral that was present. So if would be safe to add 10 – 30% higher boiling point when figuring this up. I did not figure up the math for this here because I think people should see this for themselves.
Side notes: Black smokers shoot water out at over 700 degrees F. This is due to the black smoker being deep in the water where great pressure exists (several atmospheres). And it has been known that some upper mantle minerals have held water at temps around 1000 degree C. This is due to extreme pressures, and the mineral’s capability to increase the boiling point.
What does this prove?
That the water receding after the flood can go into the upper mantle without boiling off. And it is not being able to come back up without broiling the earth fulfills a promise God made. He told Noah that he would never flood the whole earth again. So the water being locked in that mineral proves God’s promise.
So explain away as they might try, we now have enough water, and a working mechanism to get the water down there.