Live discussion with YEC geologists ALERT

Mark Buchanan

unread,

Apr 15, 2014, 2:16:36 PM4/15/14

to

Tonight you can participate in a live discussion with Snelling & Dr.
John Whitmore online:

http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2014/04/15/interact-live-tonight/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KenHam+%28Around+the+World+with+Ken+Ham%29

"This article delves into what the configuration might have been for a
supercontinent at the time of Noah—and what might have happened to it
during and after the Flood. This discussion will involve topics such as
catastrophic plate tectonics—the supercontinent breaking apart during
the Flood, producing collisions that formed mountain ranges like the
Appalachians. There are lots of fascinating topics to cover during this
live discussion."

I actually wish I wasn't busy tonight. I've asked Snelling questions
before and received some interesting non-anwers.

Mark

Harry K

unread,

Apr 16, 2014, 12:16:26 AM4/16/14

to

On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 11:16:36 AM UTC-7, Mark Buchanan wrote:
> Tonight you can participate in a live discussion with Snelling & Dr.
> John Whitmore online:

> http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2014/04/15/interact-live-tonight/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KenHam+%28Around+the+World+with+Ken+Ham%29

> "This article delves into what the configuration might have been for a

> supercontinent at the time of Noah--and what might have happened to it

> during and after the Flood. This discussion will involve topics such as

> catastrophic plate tectonics--the supercontinent breaking apart during

> the Flood, producing collisions that formed mountain ranges like the
> Appalachians. There are lots of fascinating topics to cover during this
> live discussion."

All the continents broka apart, reformed, moundtains rose 5 miles high all in one year. The mind boggles that even a creationist could by into that bollocks.

Harry K

jillery

unread,

Apr 16, 2014, 6:20:04 AM4/16/14

to

On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 21:16:26 -0700 (PDT), Harry K <tur...@q.com>
wrote:

Apparently bollocks is a staple for many people. Without it, they
couldn't keep themselves together.

eridanus

unread,

Apr 16, 2014, 9:52:26 AM4/16/14

to

well, the separation in two of the red sea is not a minute peanut.
So, the highest mountains would build in a year is also peanuts for the
power of the lord. There is not such a big venomous Australian toad
that a faithful could not swallow. While we, the unfaithful, are too
coward to think other than on rational grounds. So we do not dare to
swallow the toxic toad of Australia. We do not drink cool-aid enriched
with cyanide that easily.

Eri

Mark Buchanan

unread,

Apr 16, 2014, 1:52:52 PM4/16/14

to

Faith can kill:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/snake-handling-reality-tv-pastor-dies-after-snake-bite-1.2539881

Obstinate stupidity also help.

Bob Casanova

unread,

Apr 16, 2014, 12:58:07 PM4/16/14

to

On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 21:16:26 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Harry K <tur...@q.com>:

"Willing suspension of disbelief" is a requirement for
reading SF and fantasy. The difference is that when one
finishes the book one returns to reality.
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

Mark Buchanan

unread,

Apr 16, 2014, 2:19:30 PM4/16/14

to

Creationists are coming up with new and better bollocks:

http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j26_2/j26_2_73-81.pdf

MJ Oard is working on his own special CPT sub model. Just imagine 36,000
meteorite impacts within the first few weeks of the FLOOD to get things
started. As usual the article ends with 'more work needs to be done',
but some of the questions have been dealt with. Like why didn't Noah
notice one or two of these meteorites and write them in the good book?
Answer: he was to busy working away in the bowls of the ark. He and
family were probably shoveling shit like crazy - the real stuff not the
intellectual stuff common today.

I'm actually trying to find a comprehensive flood model - if it exists.
In 1998 Kurt Wise chastised his fellow creationists for not having a
working model of anything.

http://ncse.com/rncse/18/3/1998-international-conference-creationism

Apparently 'much work still needs to be done'.

Josko Daimonie

unread,

Apr 16, 2014, 3:16:28 PM4/16/14

to

Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 21:16:26 -0700 (PDT), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Harry K <tur...@q.com>:
>
>> On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 11:16:36 AM UTC-7, Mark Buchanan wrote:
>>> Tonight you can participate in a live discussion with Snelling & Dr.
>>> John Whitmore online:
>>
>>> http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2014/04/15/interact-live-tonight/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KenHam+%28Around+the+World+with+Ken+Ham%29
>>
>>> "This article delves into what the configuration might have been for a
>>> supercontinent at the time of Noah--and what might have happened to it
>>> during and after the Flood. This discussion will involve topics such as
>>> catastrophic plate tectonics--the supercontinent breaking apart during
>>> the Flood, producing collisions that formed mountain ranges like the
>>> Appalachians. There are lots of fascinating topics to cover during this
>>> live discussion."
>>
>> All the continents broka apart, reformed, moundtains rose 5 miles high all in one year. The mind boggles that even a creationist could by into that bollocks.
>
> "Willing suspension of disbelief" is a requirement for
> reading SF and fantasy. The difference is that when one
> finishes the book one returns to reality.
>

I find that rather... crude? To read Science Fiction or Fantasy doesn't
merely mean you have to 'suspend disbelief'. It is more than just that;
you have to accept the rules of that world. Most of the better fantasy
stories involving wizards have done their best to setup
some kind of logical system.

Just suspending your disbelief, your sense of `this can happen in
reality', is required for accepting scripture. There are no rules,
because goddidit.

Bob Casanova

unread,

Apr 17, 2014, 3:07:45 PM4/17/14

to

On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 21:16:28 +0200, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Josko Daimonie
<josko...@hotmail.com>:

True, but the term I used is not original with me, and it
describes quite well how one can read a novel whose contents
either extend science into unknown areas (good SF) or
operate *against* known science; internal consistency (in
good fantasy) doesn't mitigate against that, and it's that
willing suspension of disbelief which allow us to enjoy that
which we know is not real.

>Just suspending your disbelief, your sense of `this can happen in
>reality', is required for accepting scripture.

Sure. Just like accepting multiple levels of hyperspace to
get around the FTL ban, or accepting the existence of
sorcerers to add plot issues and develop the story. The
difference, as I stated, is that when the story is over we
return to reality (well, some of us do).

> There are no rules,
>because goddidit.

But that *is* the rule. ;-)

Mike Painter

unread,

Apr 19, 2014, 10:17:29 PM4/19/14

to

On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 12:07:45 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
wrote:

>
>Sure. Just like accepting multiple levels of hyperspace to
>get around the FTL ban, or accepting the existence of
>sorcerers to add plot issues and develop the story. The
>difference, as I stated, is that when the story is over we
>return to reality (well, some of us do).

I usually try to do it when I look up rather than when I finish the
book.

Bob Casanova

unread,

Apr 20, 2014, 1:30:05 PM4/20/14

to

On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 19:17:29 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Mike Painter
<md.pa...@sbcglobal.net>:

Well, yeah. Although I've occasionally found myself looking
up at night and more or less expecting visitors... ;-)