The Sunset of Darwinism

tfp ^ | 06.04.08 | Julio Loredo

[tacticalogic]

There are many volcanic rocks interspersed between the fossil layers in the rock record—layers that were obviously deposited during Noah’s flood. So it is quite plausible that these fountains of the great deep involved a series of volcanic eruptions with prodigious amounts of water bursting up through the ground. It is interesting that up to 70 percent or more of what comes out of volcanoes today is water, often in the form of steam. [excerpt]

What happened to not relying on unproven and untestable hypotheses?

We've seen flooding associated with volcanic activity, but the volcanic eruptions caused the flooding (melting ice and snow on the volcano). Not the other way around.

[tacticalogic]

Burying that kind of stuff in a volcano does seem like asking for it, doesn't it.

So where do the creation scientists say we should bury it, and what do you propose we should do in terms of political activism to correct the situation?

There's no shortage of political activism from the left wanting it shut down. They know shutting down that facility will effective cripple our nuclear power industry for decades.

[Fichori]

"No, but I can put all the base elements for DNA in a bag and shake it around and get DNA. Would it match your DNA? No, it certainly wouldn't, but that isn't the point is it?" [excerpt]

By that same token, you should be able to put all the ingredients of an animal in a blender and get a living creature.

When I say DNA, I'm NOT talking about a chemical soup.

"It appears to me that ID agrees 100% with the theory of evolution except that the ID'ers believe God started the evolutionary process. And since the TOE doesn't say anything about how life was created I fail to see the conflict." [excerpt]

It may certainly appear that way to you, but that doesn't mean your correct.

I believe in ID, and the idea behind ID is contradictory to Evolution.

I also don't believe that God started the 'Evolutionary Process'
(I belive that God designed all genetic information, which has, since the fall, Devolved.)

I'm pretty sure Berkley would disagree with you about TOE. ;)


BTW, TOE claims a net increase of usable information, TOC claims a net DECREASE of usable information.

Thats a pretty clear contradiction.

[Fichori]

Your catching on!

[Fichori]

You and context seem to have parted ways.

[tacticalogic]

You and context seem to have parted ways.

The only difference in context is who's ox is getting gored.

[Fichori]

I would be perfectly happy if you took longer and replied once to a post instead of quickly replying multiple times.

So where do the creation scientists say we should bury it, and what do you propose we should do in terms of political activism to correct the situation?

There's no shortage of political activism from the left wanting it shut down. They know shutting down that facility will effective cripple our nuclear power industry for decades.

I am well aware that shutting it down will be harmful to our economy/military.

My understanding of them deciding to use Yucca Mountain is that there were politics involved. (not good)

What needs to be done?

I think a bunch of objective scientist need to put their heads together and, without political influence, come up with a safe solution that is not based on dangerous assumptions.

Then, when a safe alternative has been come up with, Yucca Mountain can be phased out. (and emptied)

But, once again, there are politics involved, so, lets hope Yucca Mountain doesn't blow. ;)

[tacticalogic]

I think a bunch of objective scientist need to put their heads together and, without political influence, come up with a safe solution that is not based on dangerous assumptions.

By "objective" sceintists, do you mean scientists working from Biblical/YEC assumptions?

[tacticalogic]

My understanding of them deciding to use Yucca Mountain is that there were politics involved. (not good)

It was a public policy decision. Politics are going to be involved.

Should deciding where to store it be a religious decision, left to the theologians to find the answers in their Bibles?

[tacticalogic]

I would be perfectly happy if you took longer and replied once to a post instead of quickly replying multiple times.

I'll try to do better

Then, when a safe alternative has been come up with, Yucca Mountain can be phased out. (and emptied)

You want all of us to disregard all the scientific evidence that says this is a perfectly good place to store it, and pay to build and have it moved to a new facility somewhere else to be consistent with your interpretation of the Bible.

[Fichori]

"The only difference in context is who's ox is getting gored."

Actually, it was really a strawman.

what you replied to (and excerpted) said: "So it is quite plausible that" [excerpt].
To which you replied:

What happened to not relying on unproven and untestable hypotheses?

We've seen flooding associated with volcanic activity, but the volcanic eruptions caused the flooding (melting ice and snow on the volcano). Not the other way around.

And what is interesting is what I said and you didn't include in your excerpt: "The flood is generally associated with volcanic activity:" [excerpt]

Very clever strawmen.
Where did I say the flooding caused volcanic activity?

What I did say is that the flood and volcanic activity are associated.

What you did was partially agree with something similar to what I said, that 'We've seen flooding associated with volcanic activity', but then you pulled out your strawman and said 'but the volcanic eruptions caused the flooding', which is totally irrelevant to a discussion about a universal flood.
(except for the fact that, as that article pointed out, volcanic eruptions could have been a driving force of the flood.)

I never said that the flood was the exclusive cause of volcanic activity.

Quit playing games and grow up.

[tacticalogic]

Very clever strawmen. Where did I say the flooding caused volcanic activity?

Maybe I misunderstood your post. You said (and I quote):

However, scientists starting from YEC axioms may still be able to determine that the volcano is indeed extinct. (it could have been a result of the Noachin flood, etc)

On review that seems a little ambigous. It's either a claim the flood may have caused the volcano, or that it ws already active, and the flood made it go inactive.

I interpreted it to mean the flood caused it. If you meant instead that the flood may have made the volcano go inactive, then I'll submit the same question to that hypothesis. How can you test and prove that such a flood did in fact occur, and that it would permanently quench an active suupervolcano?

[Religion Moderator]

Information from Jack Chick is not allowed at all. Click on my profile page for more guidelines pertaining to the Religion Forum.

[Fichori]

I apologize for my ambiguity.

By the Noachin flood, I meant the actual flood waters and all associated geological/volcanic activity.

In other words, there were lots of mountains after the flood that did not exist before the flood.
(and having been directly part of the flood, may not become active again, unless we have another flood.)

Once again, my apologies.

[Fichori]

Ooops!

I forgot this was on the RF!

I will try to be more careful.

Thanks for the reminder.

[tacticalogic]

The decision of where to store nuclear waste should be a scientific one, not political or based on philosophical assumptions that are akin to religious dogma.

The YEC assumptions you say the decisions must be based on are not "akin to" religious dogma. They are explicitly religious dogma.

[Fichori]

"The YEC assumptions you say the decisions must be based on are not "akin to" religious dogma. They are explicitly religious dogma."

(I'm going to assume that was not an intentional strawman)

I was talking about the philosophical assumptions of Evolution that directly contradict the evidence, and are akin to religious dogma.

[tacticalogic]

I was talking about the philosophical assumptions of Evolution that directly contradict the evidence, and are akin to religious dogma.

This isn't about evolution. It's about rocks. Nobody is claiming that rocks evolve.