Are Fossils evidence of evolution ....or are the evidence of fossils

[BeyondET]

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Plate tectonics are real, and things have moved a bit, but it's ever so slight.  If we have not been here for 'billions of years' as some people have suggested, then that theory is over, anyway.  I have already covered why dating methods abjectly fail. 

But let's say for a moment that hypothetically, Pangaea existed before Noah's flood. You have to imagine, if God flooded the world entirely and waters crashed about violently in Noah's time, the surface of the Earth is just not going to look the same when the flood waters recede, over a year later.   Scripture itself says that God pushed the mountains of today into existence, made the valleys, and set boundaries so that the water would never cover the world again.  I posted that scripture, a few posts back.

If you look today at the Mt Saint Helen's area, the area called the 'Little Grand Canyon' formed in hours when that volcano erupted.  Like 3 or 4 hours it had mud slides, and flooding, etc.  Compare that relatively small incident to a world-wide flood.  If the whole Earth was under water for over a year with God's intention of killing everything, but fish, what would the place look like when it was over? 

It would not be recognizable, and whatever our hypothetical Pangaea looked like, it sure would not look like it once had.

Scientists pretend that the world is just as it was before the flood, and then draw their maps.

On the galactic level, the earth is 16 years old, the sun 20 years old and the expanse is 60 years old, if you could see time on a galactic perspective.

[Sparks]

27 minutes ago, teddyv said:

They are predictions based on current observable plate motions.

Excellent!  I agree, and you know observation is actually science. 

But those from the alleged 240 million years ago, were not observed, at all.   That's not science.  We presume continents are where they are based on the idea that the world is billions of years old, that is neither observed, nor can we really know the age of the Earth with dating methods (a gillion reasons on why they fail).

[BeyondET]

2 hours ago, kingdombrat said:

What baffles me about Pangea is the fact we have volcanic activity all over the ocean floor bed.   And to think the positioning of mass lava would ultimately create a single giant Continent is a rather shaky argument.   The ocean floor bed would have to be slanted towards the center for the mass lava to flow towards the center to create a massive land mass.   And Mathematically speaking here, the percentage of that is slim to none.

I haven't read where scientist think that a giant continent was formed from a volcano. but what is baffling is dry land is still appearing out of the ocean. there are new islands being formed today. one island now has some grass and other vegetation taking root with some birds on it also.

[Sparks]

Just now, BeyondET said:

On the galactic level, the earth is 16 years old, the sun 20 years old and the expanse is 60 years old, if you could see time on a galactic perspective.

I cannot imagine it.

If God made it all in 6 days, it's effectively all the same age.   God said He stretched out the universe, and the stars, so the assumption that it took a gillion light years for the star light to reach us, is not even a factor. 

By the way, we cannot even correctly gauge distance to those stars because we only have 16 minutes to work with, using Trigonomic Parallax.  But again, it means that the light we see, even if it really were extremely far away, was stretched to us according to God.   Better put, it means we saw the light of the stars, long before it would take light to normally reach us over those vast distances, so distance is not a factor in telling age, anyway.

Cepheid Variables, Magnitude (color and brightness of stars), and Inverse Square techniques all have huge assumptions behind them at these distances (kind of like age/dating methods which also don't work).  I don't think they can really measure to 16 billion light years using those assumptions.  Do you?

I can tell you that Inverse Square works perfectly on a dark night, telling the distance to a light bulb as seen across a lake.  But 16 billion light years?

As Biden would say, "Come on man!"

 

[The Barbarian]

8 hours ago, Sparks said:

Yes, a theory.  You said it.  Theory.   Where do we disagree on that?  We don't.

Perhaps you don't know what "theory" means in science.  It's stronger than a law.

Learn about it here...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-a-theory-7-misused-science-words/

A theory is an idea or group of ideas that have been repeatedly confirmed by evidence.   A theory is like a law, in that it predicts what will be seen under specific conditions.    But greater than a law, which merely predicts, a theory also explains.

So Kepler's laws predicted the orbits of planets.    Newton's theory gravitation predicted and explained the motions, and was thus able to apply it to planets, moons, comets, and apples falling out of trees. (among many other things).

Notice this is not the same as Newton's Laws of motion, which do predict, but do not explain.

People who says "just a theory" don't really get what science is about.

 

[The Barbarian]

35 minutes ago, BeyondET said:

I haven't read where scientist think that a giant continent was formed from a volcano.

Couldn't happen; magma is melted mantle material, which is much denser than the rock that forms continents.   You can get some islands forming from volcanoes.   Anak Krakatoa is one that formed in human history, but Iceland, the Hawaiian Islands, and others are so formed.

 

[The Barbarian]

9 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Regardless on what they found, cyclops is a real thing it happens, has there ever been a person live longer than a few days might of.

Since we know that the bones said to be of a cyclops were actually of a fossil elephant, we have sufficient evidence to conclude that is where story began.

 

[BeyondET]

21 minutes ago, Sparks said:

I cannot imagine it.

If God made it all in 6 days, it's effectively all the same age.   God said He stretched out the universe, and the stars, so the assumption that it took a gillion light years for the star light to reach us, is not even a factor. 

By the way, we cannot even correctly gauge distance to those stars because we only have 16 minutes to work with, using Trigonomic Parallax.  But again, it means that the light we see, even if it really were extremely far away, was stretched to us according to God.   Better put, it means we saw the light of the stars, long before it would take light to normally reach us over those vast distances, so distance is not a factor in telling age, anyway.

Cepheid Variables, Magnitude (color and brightness of stars), and Inverse Square techniques all have huge assumptions behind them at these distances (kind of like age/dating methods which also don't work).  I don't think they can really measure to 16 billion light years using those assumptions.  Do you?

I can tell you that Inverse Square works perfectly on a dark night, telling the distance to a light bulb as seen across a lake.  But 16 billion light years?

As Biden would say, "Come on man!"

 

I have learned the astronomers that use giant telescopes can not properly track a star at night by using earth time meaning 24 hour day, because a day is not really 24 hours its rounded up. they use sidereal time measured from star points similar to the pic you posted.

[The Barbarian]

On 4/25/2021 at 10:08 AM, kingdombrat said:

Scripture does not claim God used Evolution, but you still seem to twist every Scripture until it does.

Nonsense.   Scripture doesn't claim many things that are true.   God left us with intelligence and a knowable universe to find those things.   As you should know, my observation is that neither creationism nor evolution is endorsed in the Bible.   Most Christians don't accept creationism because it is at odds with the facts. 

[The Barbarian]

On 4/24/2021 at 11:58 AM, kingdombrat said:

the Pawnees brought in some very large bones, one of which the surgeon of the expedition (it was a college funded expedition for fossils) said was the thigh bone of a human being.

Let me guess; it's now missing and no one knows what happened to it.  Right?