is Genesis History

[teddyv]

25 minutes ago, Sparks said:

So, you got nothing from the fact that the small canyon was cut in hours?  Not trillions of years.  Because as you know, we are witnesses to that canyon being cut.  It's history.   You don't think that an even bigger lake could have burst open, and carved the Grand Canyon in the same way?  If not, why not?

For some reason, you were taken off my ignore list, so I get the pleasure of reading your posts again.

A canyon at Mt St Helen's was cut through mainly poorly to weakly consolidated ashes and tuffs. You can watch this in action when any mass wasting event occurs. They are then comparing this to a several thousand foot thick series of highly consolidated, lithified rock strata - limestones, sandstones, siltstones, mudstones. Each type have their own mechanics and hence you see the various slopes developed - shales generally break down easily, sandstones and limestones are very hard.  

Further, if you re-read my post you would see that I don't necessarily have an issue with a large lake burst as part of the erosional process. This process of mass erosion has been demonstrated elsewhere (i.e. Scablands). I do have an issue with the claim by Dr. Austin, that the entire sedimentary pile was laid down, lithified, and then eroded through the lake burst in a condensed timeline as is required. Additionally, the sea creatures that Dr. Marcus was going on about, were being deposited and fossilized over this same time period. Fossilization is the remineralization of the original skeleton or shell. There are examples of quick fossilization, but again, the exception not the rule. I see that Dr. Wise gets around this by invoking different realities for different time periods.

Not done the movie yet, about half-way through.

My feeling so far is that this production has been written and prepared for consumption by Christians that are already committed to this view. There is little discussion about why mainstream geology has come to the conclusions (or interpretations, if you prefer) as to the reason why the world looks the way it does. 

[teddyv]

The collagen in bone issue (around 1 hour in) is an interesting one, but mainly because the interviewee in question has been so quick to jump to his conclusion as the only possible one. Dr. Schweitzer, who made the original discovery (also a Christian, I believe) does not hold to the creationist claims here, which is left unmentioned.

[Sparks]

36 minutes ago, teddyv said:

There is little discussion about why mainstream geology has come to the conclusions (or interpretations, if you prefer) as to the reason why the world looks the way it does. 

The answer is obvious why mainstream geology has come to their conclusions.  If they came to the right conclusions, they would have to acknowledge God exists, and that they were staring at God's judgement and they don't want to do that, so they come up with silly things like uphill running rivers cut the Grand Canyon over trillions of years.  It's the same with all of evolution theory; if you take away time, the fairy tale ends.

I will wait for you to conclude the documentary ...

 

[one.opinion]

4 minutes ago, teddyv said:

Dr. Schweitzer, who made the original discovery (also a Christian, I believe)

Correct, she had an interview with BioLogos several years ago.

https://biologos.org/articles/not-so-dry-bones-an-interview-with-mary-schweitzer/

[teddyv]

2 minutes ago, Sparks said:

The answer is obvious why mainstream geology has come to their conclusions.  If they came to the right conclusions, they would have to acknowledge God exists, and that they were staring at God's judgement and they don't want to do that, so they come up with silly things like uphill running rivers cut the Grand Canyon over trillions of years.  It's the same with all of evolution theory; if you take away time, the fairy tale ends.

I know several Christian geologists, myself included, who have zero problems with the mainstream geological theories, because its not contingent on the YEC strawman that we are seeking a way not to answer to God. There may be some geologists out there that have ruled out God because of geological evidence which I would find unfortunate - they can rule out YEC easy enough, but that does not leave them an excuse. Very few, if any, are intentionally developing geological theories as an excuse to not believe. I want to say that that is just a fantasy of YEC, but I think those in this documentary would dispute that.

2 minutes ago, Sparks said:

I will wait for you to conclude the documentary ...

Getting there.

[teddyv]

Finished it.

I don't have a pile to say about the latter half as it delves into areas out of my expertise (archaeology, biology). Shark dude seems to have a skewed idea of what evolution is. It was nice to see Dr. Wood as he one of the several respectable creationist scientists out there. Dr. Faulkner seems like a really nice guy, but his talk on here seemed more like spit-balling without a whole lot of evidence - mostly "it could be this". The pastor at the end I found the most disappointing. He just did not seem to fit into the overall narrative structure of the program.

At the very end, Del Tackett makes this statement while surrounded by the beauty of the Colorado Rocky Mountains:

“It is glorious, but it represents the judgment of God".

When I marvel over a beautiful natural feature, I marvel at the creativity of God, not the judgment of God on the world. It seems like a disconnect. I'm not even sure if such a statement can be Biblically justified. But maybe that's just me.

******

Overall, it is an exceptionally well-produced program with fine visuals, great locations, interesting people. I thought the animations used throughout were really effective and well done.

The tone of the host and all the interviewees was also refreshingly pleasant for a subject that seems to bring out the worst in Christians. I may fundamentally disagree with them on several topics but there was little in the way of caricaturing any holder of mainstream scientific theories, be they Christian or otherwise.

The style and nature of the movie is basically a brief summary of many of the YEC ideas on a raft of topics and I get that you can't really get into the details, both from their interpretation or the current mainstream views.

I will restate that this movie appears to be made for the current Christians who already hold to this view. I would be surprised if any non-YEC would become YEC because of this. 

Anyhoo, I am glad that I finally took the time to watch this.

 

[Sparks]

11 hours ago, teddyv said:

Finished it.

I applaud that you did.  Well done!

11 hours ago, teddyv said:

I don't have a pile to say about the latter half as it delves into areas out of my expertise (archaeology, biology).

You don't have to be an expert in something to understand what is going on. 

11 hours ago, teddyv said:

At the very end, Del Tackett makes this statement while surrounded by the beauty of the Colorado Rocky Mountains:

“It is glorious, but it represents the judgment of God".

He's right.  What you see is the judgement of God, and His creativity.  There is no disconnect.  God trashed the place on purpose, world-wide, and the evidence is everywhere you look.  Especially if you dig and see the layers left behind.

Incidentally, the water that cut the mini canyons is like sandpaper and saw blades.  Water is a powerful and destructive force, and it with enough of it, it can make a canyon 400 feet deep, and 1000 feet wide in a couple of hours.  The ground is not soft after 22 months, and the ground will become more stone like as time goes on.  The Grand Canyon is no different.  The amount of water it took to carve out that place was gargantuan.   If the US Great Lakes burst forth today, it would not slightly dampen the ground and move on because the ground was hard.  It would slice canyons.

[teddyv]

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

I applaud that you did.  Well done!

You don't have to be an expert in something to understand what is going on. 

He's right.  What you see is the judgement of God, and His creativity.  There is no disconnect.  God trashed the place on purpose, world-wide, and the evidence is everywhere you look.  Especially if you dig and see the layers left behind.

Incidentally, the water that cut the mini canyons is like sandpaper and saw blades.  Water is a powerful and destructive force, and it with enough of it, it can make a canyon 400 feet deep, and 1000 feet wide in a couple of hours.  The ground is not soft after 22 months, and the ground will become more stone like as time goes on.  The Grand Canyon is no different.  The amount of water it took to carve out that place was gargantuan.   If the US Great Lakes burst forth today, it would not slightly dampen the ground and move on because the ground was hard.  It would slice canyons.

Man, I had full reply and accidentally closed the browser. Sigh.

There are a lot assertions in the movie. There is not enough context for the layman to properly evaluate the claims. It would take a lot of work. Viewers are ultimately resting on the qualifications and expertise of these speakers. But we don't really get to see their backing evidence without doing a pile of work. I can actually parse their claims due to my education and experience - not everyone can do that.

As to water, I will restate (again!) that I am well aware of the power of water. I'm not sure where the 22 months number you mentioned came from, but regardless, that is a pretty tight timeline to lay down a variety of sediments (shales, limestones, sandstones) in a variety of environments (shales and limestones are mainly in quiescent environments, the sandstones are subaeriel, eolian deposits).

Let's also consider the pyramids, the earliest are dated to 2650 BC. The Flood, (according to AiG/Ussher) is dated at 2384 BC. How did these survive the Flood? Sure, there is different topography from Egypt to the western US, but we are talking an incredible deluge which would have likely torn the pyramids apart. Interestingly, many blocks of the pyramids contain the fossils of marine organisms.

[Sparks]

58 minutes ago, teddyv said:

Man, I had full reply and accidentally closed the browser. Sigh.

Sorry about that.  But unless your browser deletes all cache (cookies, etc) when you close it, you can click on the editor on a post, and it should show the stuff you typed in.  It keeps it.  Mine does, anyway, and I get to choose to clear the editor, or keep what I already typed. 

58 minutes ago, teddyv said:

There are a lot assertions in the movie. There is not enough context for the layman to properly evaluate the claims.

Well the main assertion is that what the Bible says, is true.   They are asking if, hypothetically, the Earth were completely flooded, what evidence would you see?  The trillions of years theory does not work out for a myriad of reasons, not the least of which, is that the alleged geologic column only exist in the right order, in text books.  

58 minutes ago, teddyv said:

I'm not sure where the 22 months number you mentioned came from, but regardless, that is a pretty tight timeline to lay down a variety of sediments (shales, limestones, sandstones) in a variety of environments (shales and limestones are mainly in quiescent environments, the sandstones are subaeriel, eolian deposits).

22 months is how long the lake sat there, before bursting forth.  It's simply history.  As for the sediments, we are talking about hydro-logic sorting.   You can do this in your own kitchen with a jar full of dirt.   Simply fill a jar with dirt and water, as seen below, shake it violently, and leave it on the kitchen counter.  It will sort, just like shown below.   It's identical with great big floods and it's why you see the layers around the Earth, no matter where you dig.

 

58 minutes ago, teddyv said:

Let's also consider the pyramids, the earliest are dated to 2650 BC. The Flood, (according to AiG/Ussher) is dated at 2384 BC. How did these survive the Flood? Sure, there is different topography from Egypt to the western US, but we are talking an incredible deluge which would have likely torn the pyramids apart. Interestingly, many blocks of the pyramids contain the fossils of marine organisms.

Simple, the secular dates for the Pyramids are wrong.  All of these structures were post flood.  Incidentally, AiG says they were post flood.

[teddyv]

31 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Sorry about that.  But unless your browser deletes all cache (cookies, etc) when you close it, you can click on the editor on a post, and it should show the stuff you typed in.  It keeps it.  Mine does, anyway, and I get to choose to clear the editor, or keep what I already typed. 

Yeah, I know about that, but did not show up in the reply box.

31 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Well the main assertion is that what the Bible says, is true.   They are asking if, hypothetically, the Earth were completely flooded, what evidence would you see?  The trillions of years theory does not work out for a myriad of reasons, not the least of which, is that the alleged geologic column only exist in the right order, in text books.  

They are not asking, they are saying. And your repeated use of "trillions" of years is just unnecessary hyperbole. And let's not turn this into a Gish Gallop.

31 minutes ago, Sparks said:

22 months is how long the lake sat there, before bursting forth.  It's simply history.  As for the sediments, we are talking about hydro-logic sorting.   You can do this in your own kitchen with a jar full of dirt.   Simply fill a jar with dirt and water, as seen below, shake it violently, and leave it on the kitchen counter.  It will sort, just like shown below.   It's identical with great big floods and it's why you see the layers around the Earth, no matter where you dig.

 

Was that 22 months in the movie? I don't recall that being stated.

I am very aware of hydrologic sorting and it can be observed in fining up sequences in rock.

BUT

While your home experiment is obviously real, you now have to expand that to demonstrate that the Grand Canyon layers would have separated out in that way.

I can look at the column of strata in the Grand Canyon and see fine-grained shales deposited underlying coarser sandstones, and layers of limestones which were somehow deposited in there. Show me limestones that can form on continents in a very high energy environment.

So get out your jar and see if you can reproduce those layers.

31 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Simple, the secular dates for the Pyramids are wrong.  All of these structures were post flood.  Incidentally, AiG says they were post flood.

Simple, or just convenience? What's your evidence of that?

Of course AiG says that, but what is their evidence. And AiG relies on secular dating when it suits them, then tosses it when it does not.