BBC image of Dorset cliff collapse.
Posted on 01/25/2016 9:35:02 AM PST by fishtank
Rapid Erosion Supports Creation Model
by Frank Sherwin, M.A. | Jan. 25, 2016
Recently in Dorset, England, bad weather washed a massive section of a cliff into the sea revealing scores of ammonite fossils.1,2 Creation scientists are interested in this cliff fall because substantial erosion was accomplished in literally seconds. It didn't take hundreds of thousands to millions of years of slow and gradual erosion.
The cliff fall at Dorset isn't the only recent example of rapid and significant erosion. Uniformitarian geologists claim the famous White Cliffs of Dover, composed of calcium carbonate, were formed in the Cretaceous Period between 65 and 140 million years ago. But there is evidence of significant fracturing every decade or so causing authorities to urge visitors to stay far away from the cliff edge lest they topple into the ocean when the rocks give way. In 2001, a huge chunk fell into the English Channel followed by another large section in 2012. Uniformitarian geologists estimate 0.39 inches of cliff erosion per year. But we're seeing a lot—far too much—catastrophic erosion of these cliffs over a short time. At this catastrophic erosion rate, the White Cliffs of Dover would disappear in much less than a million years.
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
BBC image of Dorset cliff collapse.
Creationists have no shame, do they?
If ever a group of people were embarrassment proof, it’s them.
Where’s the picture of the Grand Canyon?
Maybe events like this help to explain the “rising oceans” phenomena that climate change alarmists are always caterwauling about? /snark
I have no shame in my Lord Almighty.
There’s a big difference between eroding topsoil vs eroding granite.
Stop looking for edge case examples which can be construed as possibly supporting a 10,000 year old Earth, and start addressing stuff that OBVIOUSLY took a very long time to happen.
10,000 years isn’t very long. It’s just one hundred 100-year lifespans back-to-back. As I approach half a century in age, and deal with numbers in the trillions on a regular basis, the “young Earth” theory is looking dangerously preposterous.
Then proudly affirm the glory of the heavens He created - which plainly don’t fit in a tiny little 10,000-light-year radius space.
“At this catastrophic erosion rate, the White Cliffs of Dover would disappear in much less than a million years.”
Rampant ignorance at work again, given the fact the erosion contributed to the existence of the English Channel that is causing significant erosion of what remains today. It also fails to recognize the erosion rates were far greater and far less in the past when sea levels were higher and lower than at the present time.
The example of the rock falls in the Yosemite Valley is another silliness, given the presence of glaciers filling the valley for long periods of time and the changes in mountain uplift resulting in much slower rates of erosion in the past.
Oh my God! Is anything NOT evidence of creation?
There’s a lot of scientific and theological wrangling about these issues. It seems a main fear of YEC is that evolution might otherwise look plausible. I snicker at the notion. I’ve looked at the very best attempts of evolutionists and they have managed to construct a system, which if it actually operated, would require a constant cornucopia of pre-planned miracles (no, you DON’T get all the information you need out of natural selection). We have ended up with a dispute between multiple notions of God, basically. We haven’t ruled God out at all.
But again we have ANOTHER loophole for YEC (being fair to those folks) in that we have an apparent change in the working of the laws of physics at the points both of the fall in Eden and at the Flood and even following. The lifespans of humans. The possibility of a rainbow. That throws the whole ability of science as we know it, to project anything reliably past those boundaries, into question. If you are better than Scotty, you have thrown the picture into confusion.
I have learned to fear God and respect mystery. I sure am not dogmatic about this any more. There is quite a good, if not perfect, case for OEC made by Hugh Ross (www.reasons.org). Any fair study of the subject needs to at least embrace OEC as well as YEC and general creation theology.
Actually just about everything is, if we speak about creation in a general sense. Does everything prove YEC? That’s a different debate.
The ICR makes religion look foolish again.
I used to think so too, but there seem to be physics divides in history according to the scriptural account. Physics itself couldn’t ever either prove or disprove this. The theology of the fall of mankind looks smack-on accurate and fits what we know. A divine hand wrote this; just look at the world of philosophy and nobody else ever gets this deep without going to the bible in the first place.
Most geologic erosion occurs over short periods of time, via storms, floods, earthquakes, etc. Otherwise erosion occurs at a more or or less steady slow rate.
The literal Creationist argument against the idea of a universe that is measurable to distances of ~15 billion light years (and then being at least ~15 billion years old) is that we’re being deceived by a natural phenomenon.
This, of course, attributes God with being a deceiver.
Which tells me that at least some literal Creationists are worshipping the wrong god.
By the way, I am a Creationist in that I believe God created a universe that we are only just barely beginning to understand. I am also deeply flattered that my Creator planned my existence at least 15 billion years ago and that He caused mountains and seas to rise and to fall in order to bring me about right here and right now.
Our God is an Awesome God and the revealed secrets of the Universe prove it!
There could be an OEC with physics divides too. Nothing rules it out. The bible warns about “quarrels about words” seeming to recognize that sometimes we may not be able to puzzle out exactly what a passage is getting at. This is where patience, rather than getting dogmatic, pays.
“This, of course, attributes God with being a deceiver.”
No, you attribute it to God being a deceiver. The possibility exists that, if that were the situation, God had other motivations for doing it besides deceiving us. So, if you dismiss those possibilities, that’s a purposeful choice you are making.
I have heard of the “deceiver God” objection and could counter that He makes foolish the wisdom of the wise.
Most people have never gotten around to puzzling out how the stars, etc. could get there. Those people couldn’t be deceived.
Others have figured out, or believe they have figured out, some of the properties of this universe. They are stunning properties no matter how they are looked at. But if you are going to start to reason, you might want to take theology into account too. Nobody asked these modern secular natural philosophers we called scientists to ignore theology. Nobody even hid the bible from them. They may have hidden it from themselves.
If it sounds like I am arguing for both sides, well I am. I see there is a mystery here that is not easy to fathom.
Nice try on the Alinsky tactic of accusing me of doing something in your first sentence as you then go on to do it yourself in your next sentence.
Re: Most geologic erosion occurs over short periods of time, via storms, floods, earthquakes, etc. (quoting myself)
I left out landscape sculpturing by glaciers. Not exactly a rapid process, but glaciers do remove a LOT of material as they grind through bedrock and plow away sediment and rubble. They are responsible for many deep u-shaped valleys throughout the world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.