Post-Flood Return To Normalcy

[jo1952]

Rats....yet another technical difficulty duplicate post.

Edited September 25, 2011 by jo1952

[Cobalt-70]

Finally, you seem unaware of the fact that the Grand Canyon is a chasm cut through the Kaibab plateau, which rises above 8000 ft. in altitude, much higher than the Colorado River system upstream from it.

In any event, the entire premise of the study I cited is that the bulk of the Grand Canyon was formed all during one event: a massive flood triggered by the breaching of ancient Lake Bidahochi. The research has been led by scientists from Arizona State University. It is a solid body of work and deserves the attention it is getting.

That "one event" was not, according to the theory in the article, a catastrophic flood event. They talk about a hypothetical "spillover event," but this was not hypothesized to carve out the entire canyon, which they recognize, as all reputable scientists do, that the carving-out process took millions of years. The "spillover event" is what they authors hypothesize started the millions-year carving process that followed. Just to be clear, no reputable scientist is suggesting that the entire canyon formed in a single catastrophic event.

The reason the top of the plateau is so far above the Colorado River is that the crust under the Grand Canyon has been slowly rising for millions of years. As the crust rose, the Colorado River stayed at roughly the same elevation, thus carving the Canyon.

[Franktalk]

The reason the top of the plateau is so far above the Colorado River is that the crust under the Grand Canyon has been slowly rising for millions of years. As the crust rose, the Colorado River stayed at roughly the same elevation, thus carving the Canyon.

Let me see, the river cut through the rock as the rock was pushed up. So if the canyon is a mile deep it is still cutting through the rock. Just how fast is the river cutting through the rock today? Can you show that the river is cutting through the rock faster than the rock is rising? To make that statement I would have to assume that someone actually measured the cutting rate. So where are the numbers?

I looked them up myself. Here is the link.

http://www.durangobill.com/PaleoriversPart1.html

Here is a gem of a quote.

"If we use 391,780 tons per day and a weight of 140 Lbs/CuFt for sandstone (Handbook of Chemistry and Physics), then we get an average sandstone erosion rate of 5.6 million cubic feet per day for the Colorado River Basin. Then, we multiply this result by 5.4 million years and divide by the137,641 sq. miles of contributing drainage area (USGS station # 09402500 – near Phantom Ranch) to arrive at 2,877 feet of erosion for the entire river basin over the last 5.4 million years."

Can't you see the humor in this. I mean I laughed out loud when I read it. The entire river drainage system was eroded down 2877 feet. Come now you must see the joke. Well I think it is funny. Maybe you don't see the joke because you haven't studied erosion. If the entire drainage system eroded down 2877 feet in 5.4 million years then every 5.4 million years we must have uplift of 2877 feet in order to keep our average elevation of the continent. So going back to mid to late Cretaeceous about 100 million years ago when the river system is described as starting we need to have 2877 feet of rise per 5.4 million years.

100 million / 5.4 million = 18.518 2877 feet x 18.518 = 53,276 feet of rise for the entire drainage system. And then this whole rise is eroded away. Remember this is just to keep our average elevation we have today.

But then we have this data.

http://www.utahgeology.com/stratcolumns.php?URLVariable=strat_18

Here you can find many details of the geologic column in various areas around Utah. Most show recent sediments. How can these sediments exist if the entire area has been uplifted 53,000 feet and eroded away?

The joke is on the reader of the article. The author writes down this data and then proceeds like he never wrote it. It makes his whole article worthless but he writes with such absolute authority.

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_elevation

Here you can find the average elevation of each State. Now imagine that each of them has been uplifted by 53,000 feet in just the last 100 million years. But we find that many sediments are dated at 300 million years. But that means that the entire United States must have risen 159,000 feet and eroded down to current levels.

159,000/5280 = 30.11 miles

How can geology measure erosion rates and then ignore them? Like the elephant in the room that everyone ignores. Funny.

Come now don't you get the joke? The sediments in the geologic columns we are told were at the surface 300 million years ago yet they are buried today. But they should have risen 30.11 miles and eroded away. It is a misdirection shell game.

[thesometimesaint]

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=how+the+grand+canyon+was+formed&view=detail&mid=5005458258F147B56FC05005458258F147B56FC0&first=0&FORM=LKVR1

[Franktalk]

http://www.bing.com/...st=0&FORM=LKVR1

Loved the video. Just look at the mudflow and think a million times bigger.

[thesometimesaint]

Non sequitur.

[shalamabobbi]

I agree that God is at the helm... trying to understand.

Thank you,

jo

What do you tell someone that comes to you and quotes the verse that says God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth? They tell you you are wrong to believe He has a physical body.

Do you concede the point and agree that the scriptures are in conflict with themselves?

I will guess here that you do not. (In order to shorten the interchange back and forth between us)

You give a nuanced understanding of that verse that goes something like we are spirits too but that does not mean we don't have physical bodies as well.

Should we when confronted with irrefutable evidence of evolution concede the point of dichotomy or should we arrive at a nuanced understanding that brings harmony between all known facts?

Choose the false dichotomy if you like but know that in doing so you prove the church to be untrue.

President Eyring warned parents that if they teach their children that evolution is not true that they would be presented in their schooling with some pretty strong evidence to the contrary.

I do not personally believe that the verse you reference from revelation means we are going to experience 16 hour days sometime in the future. Call it a hunch..

[thesometimesaint]

jo1952:

I agree to that God is at the helm. However HOW I believe he does it is through understandable( though we don't know all the lawss and theories he does yet) natural laws and theories. Evolution is but one small part of that huge ship called our universe.

[shalamabobbi]

Funny.

It is a misdirection shell game.

Adam made an alter in Missouri. I assume you accept that this event in history occurred previous to the flood?

Uh oh, looks like we have some of that flood produced geologic column underneath the alter..

http://members.socke...chaper/geo.html

http://en.wikipedia....Peter_Sandstone

http://en.wikipedia....Louis_Limestone

http://en.wikipedia....vieve_Limestone

Edited September 25, 2011 by shalamabobbi

[Franktalk]

Adam made an alter in Missouri. I assume you accept that this event in history occurred previous to the flood?

Uh oh, looks like we have some of that flood produced geologic column underneath the alter..

http://members.socke...chaper/geo.html

http://en.wikipedia....Peter_Sandstone

http://en.wikipedia....Louis_Limestone

http://en.wikipedia....vieve_Limestone

So tell me where the altar is? That way I can check what is under it.

[jo1952]

What do you tell someone that comes to you and quotes the verse that says God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth? They tell you you are wrong to believe He has a physical body.

Do you concede the point and agree that the scriptures are in conflict with themselves?

I will guess here that you do not. (In order to shorten the interchange back and forth between us)

You give a nuanced understanding of that verse that goes something like we are spirits too but that does not mean we don't have physical bodies as well.

Hi Shalamabobbi:

Actually, when confronted with that question I do not need to give a nuanced understanding about how we are spirits too, When confronted with questions where people take one verse out of the entire Bible upon which they then base their belief, I remind them that ALL of scripture must be considered. If ONE verse causes a person to interpret other verses as being in conflict; then the problem is with the interpretation of the verse. One should never find need to compromise other verses in order to make them fit a particular set of beliefs. Also, this particular verse is used by Trinitarians in support of the their belief.

Now, in support of our belief, here are the following:

John 4:23-24

²³ But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

²⁴ God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

The JST says:

And the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship him; for unto such hath God promised his spirit. And they who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth.

Indeed, HOW does man worship Father while man is in the flesh? We have no other option than to worship Him in spirit and in truth. We cannot worship Him face to face - our physical cannot communitcate; it is our spirit which communicates with Father.

Should we when confronted with irrefutable evidence of evolution concede the point of dichotomy or should we arrive at a nuanced understanding that brings harmony between all known facts?

Choose the false dichotomy if you like but know that in doing so you prove the church to be untrue.

President Eyring warned parents that if they teach their children that evolution is not true that they would be presented in their schooling with some pretty strong evidence to the contrary.

First of all, YOUR INTERPRETATION of evolution is NOT IRREFUTABLE. If it were irrefutable, not only would you and I not be having this discussion, ALL scientists would hold to the same interpretation as you; but they do not. Also, where you think that because I do not agree with your interpretation that I have somehow "proven" the Church to be untrue is quite a remarkable statement and conclusion for you to come to. I would even offer that NO man has PROVEN that God even exists. Therefore, for any man to think or make the claim that another person has proven the Church to be either true or to be false, is not even a reasonable argument.

I do not personally believe that the verse you reference from revelation means we are going to experience 16 hour days sometime in the future. Call it a hunch.

Revelation 8:12

And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise.

I see the above as "shortening of days" - it shortens the length of the day; not the number of days. You are, of course, free to interpret the above how ever you wish to. The 70th week prophesied in the Book of Daniel will commence once the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled. History shows us that the "week" in Daniel is referring to a week of years, IOW a week has seven days in it; a week of years would be seven years. The rest of Daniel's prophesy has been so precise so far, that I see no wiggle room for thinking that the 70th week will not still be a period of seven years. Mid-week (or 3 1/2 years) into the 70th week is when the Abomination of Desolation will take place. Now, when I see the description of the Tribulation which will be taking place, it seems reasonable to believe that God would want to shorten the amount of "time" people will endure it. However, He will not change the prophesy He gave to Daniel, and make the 70th week less than seven years. This would force God into the position of having given a false prophecy to Daniel. So, in His mercy, and in order to protect the Elect who will be experiencing the Tribulation, He is going to shorten the hours in the days; but still maintain the full 1,260 days which make up the 3 1/2 prophetic years (prophetic years are based on 360-day years). If, OTOH, a person were to believe that Father is going to remove days from those 3 1/2 years, then the prophecy becomes false - as it would no longer be for a period of 3 1/2 years.

Anyway, that's how I see it. I don't want to mess with the Revelation as we are warned within this Revelation not to add to or to take away from it. Therefore, I feel much more comfortable with maintaining the full 3 1/2 years of days. This does not conflict, then, with this:

Matthew 24:21-22

²¹ For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

²² And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Also, we KNOW Jesus is speaking about the prophecy recorded by Daniel:

Matthew 24:15

When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

I just want to be clear on this and not put words in your mouth. I believe that the flood baptized the earth with water. In the end times, the earth will be baptized by fire; thus completing the stages it also must go through in order to be reborn. Is it fair for me to say that you do not think that evolution will continue to play a role in the history of our physical earth's rebirth? IOW, evolution will not be a cause for you to need to re-write what is yet in store for the earth; rather, it will only cause you to re-write her past? To me this is inconsistant with what I would expect from a law which God created (which is WHY I do not see that evolution IS a law created by God but rather as a concept of man). If His law allows you to re-write past Biblical history, then why wouldn't it also be applicable to written prophesy which has not yet taken place?

As an interesting side note, when I apply the hours of the day shortening from 24 to 16 (or by one-third as recorded in in Rev 8:12), and apply this equation to the 1,000 year period of the Millenium, I come up with 666.6 in our currently reckoned 24 hours in a day years. IOW 1,000 x 2/3 = 666.6.

Regards,

jo

[shalamabobbi]

First of all, YOUR INTERPRETATION of evolution is NOT IRREFUTABLE. If it were irrefutable, not only would you and I not be having this discussion, ALL scientists would hold to the same interpretation as you; but they do not.

We can tell they are scientists because they are wearing lab coats..

All members of Hominidae except humans have 24 pairs of chromosomes. Humans have only 23 pairs of chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.

The evidence for this includes:

The correspondence between chromosome #2 and a couple of ape chromosomes. The closest human relative, the common chimpanzee, has near-identical DNA sequences to human chromosome #2, but they are found in two separate chromosomes. The same is true of the more distant gorilla and orangutan.

The presence of a vestigial centromere. Normally a chromosome has just one centromere, but in chromosome 2 there are remnants of a second centromere.

The presence of vestigial telomeres. These are normally found only at the ends of a chromosome, but in chromosome 2 there are additional telomere sequences in the middle.

Is it fair for me to say that you do not think that evolution will continue to play a role in the history of our physical earth's rebirth?

That depends on whether or not there will still be cosmic rays hitting the earth at that point in time.

The only difference between evolution and your version of the creative process is the amount of time involved. One could object to creation of ANY kind with the same argument you present which really isn't a valid objection to begin with..

The reality is that we can measure the mutational change in the genome from parent to child..

Edited September 27, 2011 by shalamabobbi

[shalamabobbi]

In the geologic column you will see many proofs that it was not and cannot be created by a global flood. If you read the following carefully you will find several reason's why this is so.

http://www.talkorigi...faqs/geocolumn/

Since there is no geologic column on top of Adam's alter in Missouri, the flood had nothing to do with the geologic column. Yet the geologic column contains remnants of life forms in a fossilized state. Since these predate Adam's alter they predate the fall of Adam. There are portions of the geologic column under the entire state of Missouri, and hence under the alter. Since the alter is clean the flood did not deposit much of anything.

And as for C14 dating it is commonly argued among YECs the flood would have diluted the concentration of C14 and thus made things appear much older than they really were. Except that if it happened and there was this dilution event it would have shown up in the tree ring data. It is absent there as it is in lake varves. So no dilution event on record. Another evidence against a global flood.

http://www.evolution...itional-fossils

Edited October 7, 2011 by shalamabobbi