Prove to me creationism is real

[All Else Failed]

Making progress on what I believe eh? You have the most selective hearing on site.

I can give you "lots and lots" of what you would call "proof" concerning the great flood.

Since you're acting shady, pretending like you don't hear certain things I say, and don't know the definition of proof, why should I entertain you?

then I would like to see it.

 

[debbie t]

then I would like to see it.

i would too ,but im not acting shady

 

[All Else Failed]

I don't get how I'm being "shady".

 

[debbie t]

im not implying that you are ,it is in the quote above as a reason for not wishing to share information..i dont understand it either but it is there

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Evolution is proven, it happens everyday. Intelligent design is just a persons way of explaining what he/she cant explain,YET!

====:ninja
What have we here? A new contender jumps in the ring without warming up ready to do battle. Got time? (you'll find out what I mean soon enough )

Welcome to the arena Baron.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

I don't get how I'm being "shady".

How about sneaky? :ninja

 

[All Else Failed]

I just noticed the quote in your sig, who said that?

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

I just noticed the quote in your sig, who said that?

It's a quote from Morpheus to Neo when he was indoctrinating him about what was going re his questions and the Matrix.

 

[All Else Failed]

Well to answer your question: No, I'm not sure what you are talking about.

 

[IntruderLS1]

I'm done with you for now.

 

[All Else Failed]

So I take it you have no evidence to back up your statements then? Its a matter of faith?

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Well to answer your question: No, I'm not sure what you are talking about.

Do you want to know, what it is?

 

[debbie t]

Do you want to know, what it is?

well im so excited now, i do ,if thats at all possible...and does it have anything to do with creationism before you get me in trouble?

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

well im so excited now, i do ,if thats at all possible...and does it have anything to do with creationism before you get me in trouble?

Patience Debbie, patience.

 

[IntruderLS1]

So I take it you have no evidence to back up your statements then? Its a matter of faith?

:24::24:

Don't be a jack ass.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

:24::24:

Don't be a jack ass.

Step aside please, I'll take this one Scott.

Without so much as cracking a book open, or looking up something in some dusty textbook.

There is eveidence that there was a "great flood" perhaps not bilical, let's say it has nothing to do with the bible at all.

Ask yourself this....How can you find fossils of of what appears to be water borne creatures...On the side of mountains?

I am almost positive that almost the entire planet at some point was practically covered with water, Bible aside.

*taps foot waiting for AEF*

 

[IntruderLS1]

LOL Good show BB. I'm sure he found some article, or page, etc... that disputes or offers different reasons for all of these things. Have fun with his Google war.

His evidence will of course "disprove" your evidence despite the fact that both explanations have equal merit.

Proof proof proof proof proof.

Remember in Princes Bride, the guy who said "Inconceivable" all the time? The Spanish swordsman at one points said "I'm not sure you know what this word means." HAHA That's AEF vs. the rest of the literate world.

I'll have a serious conversation with him again when he creates the thread he said he would. Until then, he's a scared little bunny rabbit, and I try to leave scared little bunny's alone. ... Out of civility of course. :24:

 

[Tim]

A flood does not fit with the presence of marine fossils on the side of mountains for the following reasons:

1. Floods will erode mountains and the soil on them and deposit their sediments in the valleys.

2. The marine fossils are in the same positions as they lived, not scattered all over as if they were redeposited by a flood. This was observed in the sixteenth century by Leonardo da Vinci.

3. Fossilized tracks and burrows of marine organisms, show that the region was once under the sea. Seashells are not found in sediments that were not formerly covered by sea.

4. Shells do not float. So a flood would not wash them up onto a mountain regardless if an additional body of water covered the oceans.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

A flood does not fit with the presence of marine fossils on the side of mountains for the following reasons:

1. Floods will erode mountains and the soil on them and deposit their sediments in the valleys.

2. The marine fossils are in the same positions as they lived, not scattered all over as if they were redeposited by a flood. This was observed in the sixteenth century by Leonardo da Vinci.

3. Fossilized tracks and burrows of marine organisms, show that the region was once under the sea. Seashells are not found in sediments that were not formerly covered by sea.

4. Shells do not float. So a flood would not wash them up onto a mountain regardless if an additional body of water covered the oceans.

Are not some mountains and hill's comprised of layers? Suggesting that at some point water levels continued to drop, depositing sediment, as well as dead aquatic life in the many layers that we find now?

 

[Tim]

Are not some mountains and hill's comprised of layers? Suggesting that at some point water levels continued to drop, depositing sediment, as well as dead aquatic life in the many layers that we find now?

Absolutely... You will find layers in all rock/mountains, but you will almost NEVER find these layers level or flat. The reason for this is that the land heaves and swells creating bulges and ruptures. You may be familiar with "plastic deformations" that's where the rock under pressure with enough time will deform and fold without fracturing.
This is evidence that mountains are moving and changing very slowly over time. The Himalayan Mountains (Mt. Everest) are still growing higher, at a rate of about 2.4 in per year.