Young Earth or Old Earth? Here is where to post your thoughts!

Hi Bret, thanks for providing what you could about the creation of life forms. I believe I understand where you are coming from now. If I attempt to summarize your position from your last post, I would make the following conclusions: the laws of physics are fixed except when God wants to change the normal operation to perform a miracle then God modifies the laws but they are still fixed since they are His laws and He can do anything He wants to with them. We perceive these events as miracles and a violation of the physical laws but they are the same fixed laws of God. Is this correct?

I have trouble with this definition because I have always viewed 'fixed' as unchanging. To me this means that God would not change the law but work through the law.  When I hear of things popping into existance like animals fully formed with knowledge, I would instead say that God used quantum mechanics in this type of event since these types of occurrences at the particle level are common according to the theory. At the macroscopic level unimaginably rare. At the animal level, forget-about-it rare unless God wanted to do it that way (which I really doubt). Since God is in total control of information in this universe, an event like this would only be possible if He wanted it to occur that way. Unfortunately for most physicists and scientists this approach is a hard pill to swallow. It totally defies the Second Law of Thermodynamics and most scholars find miraclulous creation events for each animal incredible (to say the least). I find it preposterous since there are easier ways to create animals through the existing laws of physics and the control of information.   
Why do it the hard way? Why rush, do it the easy way over time. 

At the heart of the issue is the control of information (matter, energy, and spacetime position). We know that God has shown us a phenomenal capacity in this area by the creation of the universe out of nothing with exacting specifications.  He spoke it into existance, or conveyed exacting specifications of how everything was to be and when everything was to occur. Much like a gigantic simulation where He already knew the result. 

By introducing time into the equations, He introduced causality for us  (cause and effect) using the physical laws. Being eternal and omnicient, He knows the state of all the energy, matter, in space throughout the universe for all time including the future.  It would be within His capacity for God to specify the initial conditions and let the physical laws carry out His plans since they are deterministic. He could also interact with us at just the right points in history to adjust or alter the outcome of events through the alteration of this information then let the physical laws continue unperturbed. This interaction would also be part of the original plan and could also be considered as part of the initial conditions since God is outside of time. Some of us are already eternal timeless creatures that are presently in the formative process on the way to eternity with God. We are under the impression that the future has not happened yet but God already knows exactly what will happen. A simple adjustment of the initial conditions will cause the course of history to change. If God wants water to come out of the ground just as Moses strikes a rock there, He sets up the initial conditions to do so and lets the laws of physics carry it out.  He doesn't have to modify the laws each time. It's the advantage of having deterministic physical laws and being eternal (or being timeless). God can act throughout all time in any situation and His or his angels actions  becomes like initial conditions in a simulation that produces a  predictable result.  The rate at which the simulation occurs is meaningless, only the results.  In the case of the universe His interactions throughout its history become initial conditions that produce a known result (defeat of sin) and eternal beings who reside in Heaven with the Trinity.   

As far as miracles go, I have yet to read of one that cannot be explained through the existing physical laws and the adjustment of the initial conditions.        There is no reason to imagine new laws or an alternate set that God needs to use occassionally for miracles like a magician. With the ability to adjust relative time (special and general relativity), gravitational attraction force (the cosmological constant in general relativity), the ability for matter to interact with photons or other bosons (quantum uncertainty), and the ability to use nature by infusing information into the initial conditions, all miracles seem possible to me. For example, let's take the star over Bethlehem. It illuminated the way for the kings to find Jesus in a manger. Take a space object and cleave a fairly flat surface on it by impact with another object and put it in near geosynchronous orbit at a location over the middle east. Adjust its attitude with small meteorite impacts so that it reflected the sun's light in front of the travellers over the months of travel to Jerusalem and Bethlehem while providing a supernatural beacon to our Lord. This scenario is all God driven via initial conditions using natural physical laws that would work perfectly fine to accomplish this miracle.  There are many other miracles similar to this that would be too lengthy to describe in this post.  But I think the idea is clear from the example. If you ask what is the chance that this would occur naturally, the answer is extremely remote. Atheists would claim it to be a preposterous fantasy.  But if you ask how hard would it be for God and His family to do this, the answer is trivial using nature.

That's it for this post on miracles and and how God can use nature, physical laws, and causality to accomplish His will. There is more coming on other miracles in the posts ahead. Let's attack evolution head on next with the Cambrian Explosion. Days Five and Six coming next. 

Your Eternal Brother

Lee                  

(Oct 9 newsletter of the Discovery Institute www.discovery.org)

The Los Angeles Daily News this morning is reporting the California Science Center’s outrageous cancellation of a screening of the new intelligent design documentary, Darwin’s Dilemma: The Mystery of the Cambrian Fossil Record. The California Science Center is a “department of the State of California,” and its IMAX Theater had been rented by a private group, the American Freedom Alliance, to hold the Los Angeles premiere of the film as part of a series of activities commemorating the 150th anniversary of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. But after the screening became public knowledge, the pressure from Darwinist censors apparently became too intense.

So this week the Science Center expelled the film, possibly after being intimidated by the Smithsonian Institution, which clearly was upset by publicity promoting the screening that mentioned the true fact that the Science Center is an official “Smithsonian Affiliate.” The Science Center is now claiming that it canceled the event “because of issues related to the contract,” issues its spokesperson conveniently refuses to identify. If you believe that, I have some swamp land you might like to buy in Florida.

Censorship is apparently alive and well in southern California. Given that the Science Center is a state entity, its heavy-handed cancellation of this event raises significant free speech issues. This is viewpoint discrimination plain and simple. A state agency has decided to ban speech it doesn't like in a public facility that is supposed to be open to all citizens. And that's an outrage.

-- posted by John West

[url][/url]

Brother Lee ask ...
Have you vacated your earlier view that the laws of nature are fixed?
No! ... as I've explained before ... since God created these Laws
along with Space, Time, & Matter ... He is obviously outside of
their restrictions, conditions, & limitations! How (exactly) God
performs His miracles is a Divine mystery!
Did animals pop into existance from God's speech?
His speech! ... a wink of His eye! ... His magic wand! ... you name it!
Did they have memory of prior events and knowledge at their creation even though the memories would be fictitious?
No! ... they were created with the knowledge & instincts necessary
to survive (and flourish)... but no false memories are needed!
Did Adam already know the names of thousands of animals at his creation?
The animals had no names ... until Adam (personally) named them!
A monkey is a monkey because Adam made-up the "name" monkey
and assigned it to the fully-formed Created creature that you & I
now know as a monkey! Adam could have easily made-up names
for ALL of the animals in just a few hours!
Lee ... how do you explain the numerous Miracles in the Bible
that would seem to violate the fixed laws of nature?

Bret*

(newletter from the Discovery Institute www.discovery.org)

Seattle – Richard Dawkins, the world’s leading public spokesman for Darwinian evolution and an advocate of the “new atheism,” has refused to debate Dr. Stephen C. Meyer, a prominent advocate of intelligent design and the author of the acclaimed Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design.

“Richard Dawkins claims that the appearance of design in biology is an illusion and claims to have refuted the case for intelligent design,” says Dr. Meyer who received his Ph.D. in the philosophy of science from the University of Cambridge in England.

“But Dawkins assiduously avoids addressing the key evidence for intelligent design and won’t debate its leading proponents,” adds Dr. Meyer. “Dawkins says that there is no evidence for intelligent design in life, and yet he also acknowledges that neither he nor anyone else has an evolutionary explanation for the origin of the first living cell. We know now even the simplest forms of life are chock-full of digital code, complex information processing systems and other exquisite forms of nanotechnology.”


In Signature in the Cell, Dr. Meyer shows that the digital code embedded in DNA points powerfully to a designing intelligence and helps unravel a mystery that Darwin did not address: how did the very first life begin?

Signature in the Cell has just entered its third printing according to publisher HarperOne, an imprint of Harper Collins, and has been endorsed by scientists around the world, including leading British geneticist Dr. Norman Nevin, Alastair Noble, Ph.D. chemistry, formerly Her Majesty’s Inspector of Schools for Science, Scotland, and Dr. Philip Skell, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

Dr. Meyer challenged Dawkins to a debate when he saw that their speaking tours would cross paths this fall in Seattle and New York. Dawkins declined through his publicists, saying he does not debate “creationists.”

“Dawkins’ response is disingenuous,” said Meyer. “Creationists believe the earth is 10,000 years old and use the Bible as the basis for their views on the origins of life. I don’t think the earth is 10,000 years old and my case for intelligent design is based on scientific evidence.”

According to Discovery Institute, where Dr. Meyer directs the Center for Science & Culture, the debate challenge is a standing invitation for any time and place that is mutually agreeable to both participants.

[url][/url]

Hi Bret. You stated the following:

As far as my take on how ALL living creatures ...
(including Humans)... came into being .......
God "spoke" them into existence fully formed, male & female, ready to reproduce after their own kind, already programed with limited variability to adapt to a changing environment!  Sweet & Simple ... isn't it?

My response- I'm sorry but this explanation was too condensed and unclear for me. It certainly was simple though. I need more detail in your response so that I can understand how 'spoke' translates into the fixed laws of heaven and earth and how it translates into 'let the earth bring forth'. Your response seems inconsistent with the Bible here and earlier statements that the laws are fixed.   It seems to me that new laws of physics are required for speaking animals into existance.  Have you vacated your earlier view that the laws of nature are fixed? Did animals pop into existance from God's speech? Did they have memory of prior events and knowledge at their creation even though the memories would be fictious? Did Adam already know the names of thousands of animals at his creation? Please correct any of my misconceptions about what you are saying and elaborate about how speaking animals into existance happens through your knowledge of the physical laws. Thanks in advance on this for helping me understand your position!

Lee
     

KJV Genesis 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

At first there was no life just chemicals mixed with hot water. As minerals and chemicals percolated, just the right consituents came together, then against incredible odds life started. This transition from sterility to the living requires a miraculous event or series of events to produce the correct sequences of RNA that could self replicate. Other miraculous RNA creation events occured over time that symbiotically supported the various RNA sequences necessary in the first living cell. There is no scientific justification for the fantastic amount of luck needed for the right sequence of nucleic acids that could reproduce. Yet we are living proof that cells came into existance.  
The first evidence of bacterial life on earth has been found in rocks that date to about 3.8 billion years about the same time that the oldest rocks appear.  This does not mean that living cells or RNA colonies did not exist before this time. It means that no evidence has been found beyond the evidence found from the oldest rock samples.  There are strong indications that thermophilic  bacteria were the first or near first forms of bacterial life since they could survive in the high temperature conditions present on the earth at that time. 

As the ocean temperatures slowly cooled from hot to warm and land masses surfaced, the growing variations of environments permitted  new types of bacteria to exist.  Near the ocean surface and on the land, photo synthetic bacteria could now thrive.  Current evidence for the beginning of photo synthetic bacteria then Cyanobacteria points between 3.5 and 2.4 billion years ago. This event led to the oxygenation of our atmosphere.  For details of this history please see the web page at  http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Tree_of_Life/Stromatolites.htm

This was a critical step in the evolution of our planet that would permit animal life to come.  The young planet had an atmosphere rich in carbon dioxide (~70%) and virtually no oxygen.  Cyanobacteria absorbed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and ocean and used light as energy to convert it into sugars for a food source.  As the cyanobacteria as well as other types of bacteria multiply they develop into fibrous mats called stromatolites. Stromatolite fossils dating back to 3.5 billion years can be found extensively around the world.  It is unknown whether the oldest stromatolites were built by cyanobacteria or other types of bacteria. At present this results in a large uncertainty in the Creation of the first photosynthetic cell. However, we do know that by 2.3 billion years ago oxygen levels in the atmosphere were rapidly rising and Cyanobacteria (or algae) provide the only reasonable natural explanation. Relatives of these first photo synthetic bacteria are still alive and making very similar fibrous mats today at a few locations around the world where other life forms have difficulty existing.  

A high percentage of the initial oxygen produced by the photosynthetic bacteria was absorbed by iron and sulfur that existed in high concentrations in ocean water in the Proterozoic Era. After the soluble reduced iron in the ocean had been oxidized, around 2.3 billion years ago the first evidence of sizeable amounts of oxygen in the atmosphere appears. Between the appearance of cyanobacteria and the first animal life the oxygen levels slowly increased until about 650 millon years ago when levels would be sufficient to support multicellular animal life.

1.5 billion to 650 milliom years ago

A commonly accepted view in science is that the photosynthetic bacteria formed endosymbiotic relationships with eukaryotes to form Protists late in the proterozoic era when the Cyanobacteria took up residence in a eukaryote and never left. This relationship was mutually beneficial to both organisms.  Cyanobacteria  convert water and carbon dioxide into sugars which benefit it's host and oxygen that benefit animals. The ability to obtain photosynthesized food was important for host survival. The eukaryote provided nutrients and protection for the bacteria.  The evidence for this comes from the isolated circular DNA strand in the chloroplast of the cell indicative of prokaryote DNA and not eukaryote DNA.

The eukaryotes later developed into multi-cellular life around 650 million years ago permitting lichen, grasses, trees and other plants with seed.  These eukaryotic cells have a structure that is the same for all complex animal and plant life with a defined nuclear membrane in the cell. The seeds of modern plants and trees can be traced back to their beginnings in photo synthetic bacteria, then Cyanobacteria, then symbiosis with eukaryotes and finally the first land plants over 400 million years ago, the ones with visible seeds.

Still after three 'days' the Biblical and scientific accounts are still the same if we consider seeds as the symbiote containing the genetic code that creates the mechanisms and structures that perform photosynthesis.  If so, the seed of plant life traces back to an early beginning in bacteria and up through algae, lichens, and higher plant forms as a perfect design to be used again and again. 

Photosynthesis has more to do with precise geometrical and energy relationships in the chlorophyll that is further built on specific atomic structures.  These complex relationships indicate that photosynthesis is not a result of any random luck but a predetermined process unfolding over time. It must have been planned this way to have any chance of success. The structure of atoms were set at the beginning of the universe. Without plants operating from the power of light from the sun in a narrow frequency band, animals would not have food and could not survive. If animals could not survive, then humans couldn't. The course of the world was set from the very beginning based on this design and needed to evolve in a series of stages to support mankind's existance. This was a stage of necessity.   
Time Period 4:

NIV Genesis 1:14 And God said "Let there be lights in the expanse of sky to separate day from night and let them serve as signs to mark the seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of sky to give light on earth." And it was so...
16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.
17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth,
18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good.

~650 million to ~ 550 million

For billions of years the skies remained overcast.  The atmosphere of the early earth contained more water vapor, carbon dioxide, vaporized meteor dust and volcanic exhaust due to it's youth in a young solar system.  The large nearby moon increased tidal action at shorelines of the growing land masses adding additional nutrients and salts to the ocean.   Higher wind velocities, and wave action driven by earth's higher rotational rate and warm oceans produced more sea-salt aerosols to act as precipitation sites for water vapor.

All of these factors increased the cloudiness of our planet, while the atmospheric chemistry, ocean temperature, and spin rate of the earth slowly changed. Eventually as the earth's rotation rate slowed, wind generated sea-salt aerosol production decreased which reduced cloud formation. The volcanism rate also slowed as radioactive isotopes decayed and the earth cooled. This resulted in a reduction of atmospheric dust and ash that further degraded cloud formation. 

Eventually the humidity over some areas above the surface fell below 100%. Small patches of clear sky at first cleared which allowed periodic views of space through the cloud canopy allowing the stars, sun and moon to be seen from the planet’s water or land surface.  
The luminosity of the sun also increased ~20% during the time from the earth’s creation to this period that precisely matched the changes in the atmosphere. By design this is an amazing balancing act of it's own right.  This prevented cold or hot thermal run-away conditions and maintained the proper temperature ranges at the land surface and near the surface of the oceans for photosynthetic bacteria, algae, and higher level plants to survive and thrive.   As plants flourished more of their oxygen wasteproduct was released which increased the percentage of this gas in the atmosphere to about 21% that we as animals enjoy today. 
Finally the sun, moon, and stars could be seen from the planet's surface through the atmosphere not unlike what we witness today on a clear day and night.  It was all a matter of time, the laws of heaven and earth and precise planning before our universe came into existance. 
So after four 'days' we see that the scientific and biblical accounts still match.  Each step in the evolution of the earth prepares it for the next. In this case animal life coming soon in the Cambrian Explosion. 

Next post coming after my vacation. I need one!

Lee

Lee ...

Sorry for the opening salvo hyperbole!
I was just trying to stir-up some emotions
on both sides of this gargantuan issue!
Lee ... I'm afraid that unless someone from
the Dawkin's Revolution strays in here ...
you might be the lone whipping post for now?
I'm honestly not sure how we are going to
be able to "agree to disagree" on this Topic?
I completely understand where you are coming
from logically ... and that you're just trying to
stay consistent with your previous views.
So much so ... as to even part company with
your mentor Hugh Ross!
I have a ton of respect for your logical consistency,
your extreme intelligence, and your guts to take
on the Christian opposition to Darwinism!
As far as my take on how ALL living creatures ...
(including Humans)... came into being .......
God "spoke" them into existence fully formed,
male & female, ready to reproduce after their
own kind, already programed with limited
variability to adapt to a changing environment!
Sweet & Simple ... isn't it?
You need to explain to us how you believe God
used the process of Evolution to Create all of
the living creatures?
Maybe we should start with the appearance
of the first living thing?
(just a thought?)
Did it evolve from non-life ... or did God jump
start the whole thing?
Good luck Brother!
You really have your work cut out for you this time!

Bret*

C'mon Bret. Based on our rules of engagement we are here to learn from each other and provide convincing arguments why we believe what we do. This is not a shooting gallery for others to present their views to be shot down by someone else. Since you are saying that evolution is all wrong and a great hoax put together by science you need to make a convincing case along that line. First tell us the specific aspects of Darwinism that are not correct: common descent, random mutation, natural selection. Then please tell us what replaced it or in your view how each of the vast varietiies of species actually got here. If they were not created through natural processes as Darwinism suggests, then how: dust directly into animals, out of energy directly, substitute DNA during mitosis, divine selection and modification. We need to present our views in detail to each other and let the readers decide the credibility of them.

Your Brother in Christ
Lee

Darwinian Evolution is little more than a
house of cards built on shifting sands ...
viewed through Coke-bottle bottom glasses
enhanced with thick smoke & mirrors !!!
(but I digress ...)
Famous for my middle-of-the-road stance
on these contentious issues ... let me say ...
"There is absolutely ZERO evidence to support
this perpetuated MYTH !!!"
ALL of the apparent evidence for this Theory
that was spoon-fed to all of us as kids ...
has been EXPOSED as Fakes, Frauds, & Forgeries !!!
What's even more sad ... is the fact that
NOTHING new has come along to replace it !!!
I will gladly volunteer to explain away "ANY"
troubling propaganda that you may have
encountered over the past 150 years !!!
This dogmatic HOAX must be laid to rest !!!
God will NOT be mocked !!!

Bret*

Our Old Earth/Young Earth debate is coming to a resting point, but a new string is starting at this same address -- A CHRISTIAN RESPONSE TO EVOLUTION.

Be the first to post an entry and get the discussion moving.

Posts about the OE/YE controversy are still welcome, but going forward we want to concentrate directly on the topic that we originally set out to discuss.
I am going to wrap up my comments on the YE/OE debate with a congratulations to the conservative Bible believing branch of the Presbyterian Church (PCA). They dealt effectively with the differing views held by members within their denomination. In 2000 they published a 91 page report that summarized a 2 year study on the creation days of Genesis which was produced by thirteen of their conservative scholars. Checkout the full report at www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html (if the link doesn't open, just cut and paste. Here is my summary of their conclusion.

Historically there has been a diversity of views of the creation days among highly respected theologians. From its inception the PCA has allowed for this diversity as long as the full historicity of the creation account is accepted.

The goal of God's general revelation in nature along with His special revelation contained in the Bible is to know Him and enjoy Him forever. God has given us rational minds that are capable of thinking His thoughts after Him. Just as the Holy Spirit illuminates our minds as we read His special revelation, so His providence directs the church of Jesus Christ to know the truth of His general revelation. But until we know in full, Christ’s Church must not be divided over what we do not yet know.

The PCA was unable to come to unanimity over the nature and duration of the creation days. Nevertheless, they were able to present a unanimous report with the understanding that the members hold to different exegetical viewpoints. They found a complete unity on the issues that are of vital importance -- Christ and the Scriptures -- and they agreed that Genesis 1-3 are the inerrant words of God and present a coherent account from the hand of Moses. They believe that history, not myth, is the proper category for describing these chapters, and that the history is true.

Genesis 1-3 contains a record of God’s creation of the heavens and the earth ex nihilo. Adam and Eve are the special creation of God -- actual human beings who are the parents of all humanity -- they are not the products of evolution from lower forms of life. They see the naturalistic worldview and true Christian faith as impossible to reconcile, and gladly take their stand with Biblical supernaturalism.

I agree with them.

www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html

Thanks Bret for your input and explanation. It seems to me that modern day evidence that a monster or dinosaur exists would do nothing to drive the debate; it is a red herring. Even if I personally were able to net a pterosaur perched on my roof or cage a velociraptor and drop it off in Richard Dawkins' office, it wouldn't disprove evolution. All anyone could prove from this is the fact that they are no longer extinct where previously it seemed they were. Some species alive today have existed for hundreds of millions of years and some bacteria types much longer, so what does another coexisting critter discovery do for your argument?  Nothing. I hope you and others can see this. 
I still stand by my assertion that this discussion belongs on a different blog page (Darwinism) since it has nothing to do with the earth's age.  

Lee 

Lee ...

Let me explain my last 2-Posts!
The rotting carcass of an apparent Plesiosaur was posted
as possible evidence that things might be younger than
some of us are willing to consider.
Nobody in the Scientific (secular) community denies that
these photos are real ... & that this (mostly decomposed)
creature looks like what paleontologists have described
as a short-necked Plesiosaur.
After some tissue analysis revealed this creature to most
closely compare with sharks (of known species)... the
best alternative explanation of what we are looking at is ...
a Basking Shark at just the right period of decomposition
when the jaws & gills have already fallen off ... but flesh
still remains on the flippers and the body?
The Japanese fishermen (who did NOT have a dog in this
fight)... just knew that they had dredged up something
that they had NEVER seen before!
Like we talked about last Friday ... Stu feels like these
kinds of things could be (OE) deal-breakers? ... but you
& I both agreed that these things would (most likely) be
just another Coelacanth moment for team-Darwin?
(if these creatures were found ALIVE!)
I only Post these kinds of things ... so we might try to
keep an open mind ... and realize that some NEW evidence
might be discovered tomorrow ... that could start flipping
paradigms like pancakes at a Sunday breakfast?
********************
The "Who believes in Evolution" Poll ... was posted to show
you & Stu that I was not ill-informed about these Stats.
Not a "got-ya" moment ... but just a sharing of some Data
that was discussed at Friday's meeting.
It also shows you some Data to back up my assertion that
(increasingly)... we're faced with overcoming Apathy ...
nearly as much as a belief in Darwinian Evolution!
Since I (personally) think that "Evolution" is the Heart & Soul
of (OE) belief ... both of my last Posts are very "on-Topic".
Lee ... I have NOT given up on trying to understand your
explanation of (OE)! (looking forward to more!)
I hope (as Stu has suggested)... that you would also like to
hear (and understand)... what makes the (YE) Christians tick?
It's not just ALL Bible ...
but Bible 1st ... then Science & Theories 2nd ... !!!
I think that your current beef is with Brother Keith? ... more
than with anything that I've said lately?
But ... with my gift of antagonism ... I can never be too sure?

Bret*

First of all, we need another blog page for this type of discussion. It doesn't belong on the old vs young earth page. Maybe email would be the best venue for this dialogue but today I will blog.  

Second, are we no longer under the new rules?  The remark below seems to demean educated people.   It's a jab at all people that disagree with the YE view and are seeking to increase their knowledge regarding nature and its physical laws and other subjects.  This is especially difficult to accept by those that have spent a lifetime in disciplines like astronomy, earth sciences, or geology carefully reviewing natural data and forming logical conclusions from analysis of this information. Were they all indoctrinated by educators in a national conspiracy?  

Keith wrote:
So I guess the more educated we are, the more likely we are to believe in evolution. Sounds like indoctrination to me....Romans 1:22 While professing to be wise, they became fools.

People would not believe in evolution if there were no facts to support it. The reason that  it's not 100% believable is that there are weaknesses in Darwinian theory. One confusing factor is that Darwinism and Evolution are incorrectly used interchangably .  Evolution and common descent are entirely different matters than Darwinism and we need to keep these different concepts separated as well.  Furthermore, Darwinism is not well defined or testable and most people don't understand it. It seems the time has finally come to start discussing how we all got here in some detail with supporting evidence (not vague generalized condenming verbal jabs at a stereotyped well educated enemy). 

It seems to me Romans 1:20 applies to people at the ICR and YEs as well as graduates from universities; those that stop listening, ignore facts, and ridicule others based on their limited investigation of the subject matter. It's time to stop putting others down and instead put the supporting or disproving evidence down! Tell us what is wrong with common descent over a long time period and why natural selection has no place in design. Please provide more than Biblical verses i.e. your logical reasoning to your conclusion and exactly how those pests, giant squid and other critters got here. 

Lee

(Dave, Can we open a new topic: Darwinism vs Design?) 

Can we vote on the beast. I'm betting on a giant squid cuz of the things dangling high from the top. In second place a leviathon. I don't know how anyone calls it a pleisiosaur! Can someone explain. It looks more like road-kill to me. What has this got to do with the age of the earth by the way?

Lee

So I guess the more educated we are, the more likely we are to believe in evolution. Sounds like indoctrination to me.

Keith

Romans 1:22 While professing to be wise, they became fools.

Interesting?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/darwin-birthday-believe-evolution.aspx


Bret*

Caught off the coast of New Zealand in 1977
by a Japanese fishing troller.
Does this look like a Plesiosaur ...
or a Basking Shark ???






Bret*

The Bible describes a beginning of the universe.  Some religions are based on an eternal universe that they believe has always existed.  In the last century, the scientific community has pulled together a mountain of evidence that shows that our universe did have a beginning.  The physical laws related to General Relativity have shown us that space and time came into existence at the beginning of an event called the Big Bang   After a century of observations and analysis, the weight of the scientific evidence has ruled out other hypotheses related to ours being an eternal universe or a cyclical universe.  These hypotheses are the foundation of belief systems such as atheism and eastern religions like Buddhism.  Imagine all the other universes that you like; this one is the only one that counts and the only one humans will inhabit.   

This finding by science is excellent independent confirmation of the first verse made in the Bible.  As science progressed through this past century, it made other discoveries about the geo physics and history of the earth that confirmed the next nine verses of the Bible. These discoveries told us how the moon came into existance through the laws of physics as well as the atmosphere, oceans and continents. It was an amazing century of good science and for me, it has totally validated Genesis1 and our God as the Creator.  These steps in the development of the world show us divine knowledge imbedded in the Bible that humans would discover approximately 4 thousand years later.     


The following post provides a scientific versus Bible comparison of the first ten verses.  From a scientific perspective, the physical laws have been the same since the beginning of the universe and forced the universe to develop in a precise ways based on those laws.  I will attempt to cover each verse of Genesis 1 in two posts and describe the correspondence of presently held scientific theories regarding our universe while showing excellent correlation between both (given the point of reference is placed at the ocean surface of our planet as specified in the Bible (Genesis 1:2)).  This version is based on my assessment of the technical papers I have read on the subject matter.  Although similar to Dr.  Hugh Ross’ views, there are differences in the two versions if compared.  These differences are slight based on the independent studies of the material and are related to the timing of the major events e.g.  dry land appearance.

Epoch/Day  1

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth.  

According to the consensus of scientists, the physical laws came into existence 13.7 billion years ago starting the formation of the heavens (galaxies, supernovas, stars).  The sun and the earth condensed from gases and dust produced by prior occurring supernovas and other dying stars 4.6 billion years ago.

 The universe started miraculously with a huge pulse of antigravity or inflatons operating on a singularity (nobody really knows for sure, this is the metaphysics creeping in from non-Christians) and expanded from a point containing all the energy of the universe (no dimensions or time yet) into a ten or eleven dimensional incredibly stretched tiny fireball.  The metaphysics continues as the gravitational energy of the stretched dimensions were then transferred into photon energy trapped in the tiny fireball.  Six of the dimensions stopped expanding at about 10–33 centimeters.  The remaining 3 spatial dimensions and time (space-time) continued to expand causing the photons in fireball to cool.  


This is the point that known physics begins to operate.  At first, only photon energy was present, then through a complex series of symmetry breaking, the photon energy transformed to various particles of matter and antimatter. This series of nuclear interactions provides excellent evidence for design.  One needs to be a nuclear physicist to understand this however.    

After about 34 minutes, only matter consisting of protons, neutrons, electrons, alpha particles (helium nucleus), deuterium and a lot of non-interacting energy were basically all that was left. The fine tuned characteristics of the strong, weak, and electro-magnetic forces matched just right with the expansion rate and density levels to provide an abundance of protons, electrons, and alpha particles just right for the next stage of atom and galaxy development.   

This matter (plasma) was so hot that atoms could not form.  It took the next 300 thousand years for the universe to expand and cool enough to allow atoms to form.  The background radiation in deep space is  2.726o Kelvin and extremely uniform at ~1 part in 100,000.  This signature is exactly what we would expect to see from the photons released during the recombination of hydrogen and helium after 300 thousand years and the Big Bang occurring roughly 13.7 billion years ago.     


Initially this gas was very hot, but as the universe expanded and gravity tugged like brakes on these partcles, this gas cooled.  These large atomic clouds of mostly hydrogen and helium atoms slowly started to condense under the influence of gravity from the very slight concentration differences in the cosmic clouds.  These concentration variations have been measured to be about one part in 100 thousand.  These slight concentration variances led to more than 100 billion galaxies to form in the observable universe under the weak influence of gravitational forces.  The density variations are exactly what is needed to form the galaxies and stars that we see today as gravity operated over long time periods on these slight density fluctuations.  Most  galaxies began to form at about 900 million years after the Big Bang.    


As large rapid burning stars exhausted their lighter elements as fuel and eventually collapsed, the gravitational heating and shock wave caused each star to explode or supernova spewing its contents out into space as a nebula containing the full range of elements and isotopes in the periodic chart.  Eventually the gas and dust of the nebula would re-condense under the force of gravity along with left over hydrogen and helium from the big bang into the next generation stars then repeating a similar cycle of heavier element production.  The sun and our solar system is thought to be a third generation collection of this cosmic star dust that formed roughly nine billion years after the big bang with each generation enriched more with heavier elements.  Our solar system contains relatively high percentages of heavy elements with sufficient amounts to form rocky planets.  The earth was one of inner planets in this solar system with just the right characteristics to support the next phase of development.  It had the right mix of elements, a rare circular orbit, the optimal distance to the sun, large planets in the outer solar system in circular orbits to protect it from asteroids and a nice habitable location in a galaxy that could support mankind’s existence eventually.   

Continuing with Genesis 1:2 now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the spirit of God was hovering over the waters.  

Initially gravitational forces collected meterites into larger and larger body. As it grew in mass, impacts became more violent adding more heat with each collision. This heating turned the young earth solids into a molten state and due to the different materials and densities these materials began to differentiate in this viscous liquid state. Materials such as molten iron migrated downward while silicon and lighter materials floated up. Water and steam, being lighter, migrated toward the surface. As a result,  the early earth (4.6 to 4.5 billion years) had a total water surface on a very deep hot boiling ocean (much deeper than today's deepest ocean).  The reason for so much water is the high percentage of water found in meteors(~4%) which initially aggrgated to form the earth.    This ocean was over molten rock, and under a very thick atmosphere consisting of mostly carbon dioxide, nitrogen, water vapor, hydrogen chloride, other greenhouse gases, water vapor and dust that prevented light from reaching the surface of the planet.  The luminosity after the sun began to shine was about 80% or less of the present value and light from it was further obscured by dust, gas and rock fragments in space before reaching the outer cloud tops of the earth.  The atmosphere was boiling hot on one side and close to absolute zero on the other resulting in tremendous turbulence in the atmosphere.  To get a sense of the conditions, imagine hovering over that water surface in tremendous winds and a deluge of acidic rain, barely able to see anything with storm clouds overhead too dark and thick to let any light through.  To make matters worse air as we know it did not exist yet, there was virtually no oxygen in the atmospheric gases.  
The Biblical account matches the scientific account thus far.  Let's see if our luck continues.  Although the earth was not yet suitable for human habitation, God saw promise in what was there and he continued to evolve the planet with His next miracle.  

Genesis 1 … 3 And God said "Let there by light" and there was light.  4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.  .  .  

Scientists tell us that shortly after the earth was formed there was a planetoid impact with the earth.  How brilliant the impact must have been at ground zero, a planetoid roughly the size of Mars impacted the early earth, and a large portion of the earth’s atmosphere and molten lithosphere including oceans was thrown into space forming the moon (~4.55 billion years ago).  A large proportion of the atmospheric gases and ocean water was permanently lost to space.  After a fairly short period of time by geologic standards, some of the dust, rock, and water returned to the earth and settled back to the surface layers of the earth.  The lithosphere was still molten, the recaptured H2O was at first superheated steam or plasma above the magma after the impact.  The atmosphere was thinned to about one-third the former thickness.  After impact of the planetoid, the gravity of the larger size earth prevented the remaining atmosphere components heavier than helium from escaping into space.  As time passed, light absorbing water droplets and dust in the atmosphere settled into the reforming oceans increasing the light that could reach the surface through a thinner translucent atmosphere.  In addition, dust and debris in space cleared as it collected onto various planets or was driven away from the sun by radiation pressure and the solar wind.  This clearing allowed more of the sun's radiation to reach earth's surface.


 At the magma surface, a thin rock crust reformed as cooling rain fell and later pooled to regenerate the oceans.  The rock surface was so thin at this stage that surface features were still absent.  The earth began to differentiate in this molten state into layers with iron and heavy metals moving to the center and lighter elements and molecules moving toward the surface.  Today our planet has an inner solid core of iron and other heavy elements.  Islands of the lighter matter pooled slowly at the surface of the magma- water interface as the differentiation continued over time.  The moon and sun were hidden behind a thinner and translucent atmosphere full of storm clouds with rain falling constantly.  The earth now had tides, shallow boiling oceans, a thinner atmosphere, and light which were essential for the next steps.  


We have now reached the end of the first 'day'.  My version is more verbose  and detailed than the Biblical version, but the Biblical account still matches the scientific account, so let's continue and see how it goes from here.   


Epoch/Day 2:

Genesis 1:6 And God said "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate the waters from the waters".  7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it.  And it was so.  8 God called the expanse "sky".  

4.5- to 3.5 billion years ago

The planetoid collision added a tremendous amount of heat to planet and likely sufficient to temporarily boil off the oceans with the mixing of large volumes of magma, water, and atmospheric gases.  After the earth reformed into a spheroid where differentiation continued to separate liquid material according to density while the atmosphere contained ultra-heated steam, rock dust, plasma and gases, the earth began to cool again.  A substantial amount of time and cooling was required to solidify the upper thirty miles of magma into rock using the known laws of physics.  The thermal conductance and heat capacity of rock require many millions of years for even the upper mile of rock to reach a solid state.  The existing laws of physics would prevent cooling of this much magma within a 24 hour period.  At this point an oceans worth of water was suspended above the earth.  The superheated gases near the surface may have initially prevented water droplets from reaching the magma surface but as the rain fell above and evaporated, the temperature at the surface began to drop.  As the magma ocean cooled sufficiently to permit liquid water to first contact the surface, then form droplets on the thin solid rock, then later collect into ponds and eventually boiling oceans, water continued to evaporate at a high rate.  During this time period (4.5 to 4 billion years ago) the ocean temperature has been estimated to drop from 100C to 80C (boiling to scalding hot).  The hotter the ocean water temperature, the greater the evaporation into the atmosphere.  Although the lower levels of the atmosphere were near boiling temperatures, the upper levels of the atmosphere were extremely cold and gases radiated the heat energy away into space.  The fainter sun provided less heat for the earth with only about 75% of the current luminosity thereby increasing the temperature difference between the upper and lower levels of the atmosphere which helped to increase the cooling rate.  After oceans were reestablished, the initial atmosphere of the earth was heavily laden with steam, water vapor and water droplets from the boiling ocean surface extending upward to space.  A constant deluge existed due to the steam or hot water vapor from the oceans traveling up into the atmosphere, cooling into water droplets at higher altitudes and falling back into the oceans to be reheated and evaporated once again.   The conditions at this stage of development must have been akin to inside of a pressure cooler. This resulted in a constant downpour as the lithosphere slowly cooled to the point when the atmosphere was no longer saturated with water vapor.  Extreme tidal action from the newly created nearby moon, stronger winds resulting from the higher spin rate of the earth, influx of solar system dust, and atmospheric temperature differences, helped to precipitate rain by infusing aerosols and particles into the atmosphere.  Tremendous levels of volcanic action added even more particulate matter, water, and other gases into the atmosphere.  All of the effects slowly decreased over hundreds of millions of years.  


Eventually for short periods, due to the lessening of one or more of these factors, the deluge of rain would cease as the atmosphere was no longer saturated in a particular area permitting a separation between the ocean (waters) surface and the heavy cloud layer (waters) above.  For the first time there was sky since the rain stopped above the oceans.  The amount of sky grew as time passed, the earth cooled and rotation slowed.   

Epoch/Day 3:


Genesis 1: 9 Then God said "Let the water under the sky be gathered into one place and dry ground appear." And it was so.  10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters He called "seas”.  And God saw that it was good.  

As the heat radiated away into space and as meteor bombardment dissipated, reducing impact heating, the molten rock slowly cooled over the next 500 million years until the lithosphere started to solidify permanently in large areas at about 4 billion years ago (oldest permanent rock field discovered).  Some zircon crystals with a higher melting point have been found that are older but the surrounding rock shows a younger date indicating it was remelted.  Until significant cooling of the crust took place, tectonic plates could not become large and thick enough to breach the surface of the ocean over 2 miles above; the force of gravity would force molten or soft high temperature rock to flatten out.  The continents began surfacing hundreds of millions of years later, as evidenced by the oldest samples of the sediment produced by wind and water erosion discovered in Australia and dated at around 3.46 billion years.  

The Australia plate, based on available data, solidified, thickened and floated to the water surface first with more plates rising to the surface as time passed.  The motion of the plate over the viscous liquid magma is a result of gravitational forces moving the solid plate downhill from the high end where magma rises (like the mid-ocean ridges) toward the low end (subduction zones at plate boundaries). This is a simple result of the laws of physics operating as they were intended to.  The miracle, if there has to be one, is in the laws of physics and how they transform energy and matter into a desired state from an exacting initial set of conditions.  I would argue that this is not a miracle but well planned and a consequence of the fixed laws of heaven and earth.  I am sure it was God's intention that the iron flowing in the earth's core and mantle with its radioactive isotopes and the heat they release not only produce a magnetic field to protect the forthcoming biology and maintain the right set of gases in our atmosphere but also drive plate tectonics to move, modify and lift the continents while sustaining biology with recycled nutrients from volcanic action.  We can measure the movement of these tectonic plates, the changing magnetic field of earth's dynamo, the weathering of rock, and watch the lava flow at plate boundaries that provide evidence of the steady but slow processes that cause earth's ever changing features and explain its complex topography.  We drill holes on each side of the mid ocean ridges to find older and older rock until reaching subduction zones off the coasts of continents where those samples are 100s of millions of years older than the basalts near the ridge.  We even find numerous polarity shifts of the magnetic field lines of earth frozen in the basalts paralleling the rifts as lava flowed out of the ridges and solidified millennia after millennia all the way across the ocean floor.  We find numerous rock features and compositions on each side of the Atlantic that exactly match.  If the shoreline shape similarity between Europe, Africa, South America, and North America are not sufficient in themselves to convince us, we also have extinct ancient fossils found in matching areas of diverging plates (found nowhere else on earth) now on opposite sides of the Atlantic.  

If one is wary of these discoveries under the sea, a simple drive along the San Andreas fault or an aerial view should be convincing enough as you pass over shifted river beds an fences that move about an inch each year because of the tectonic plate motion that is showing no sign of stopping.  If there is no time for travel, simply check the geologic surveys of Nepal and observe that Mount Everest grows about 2.4 inches each year as the Indian Plate subducts under the EurAsian plate. We know this because MIT scientists are monitoring it with instruments.   

Dry land finally appears when the first continent rises above ocean level from the sea floor miles below and the constant deluge of rain has ended allowing dry land to occassionally appear.

For those seeking to increase their knowledge in this area, a more in depth treatment and additional convincing details that plate tectonics is a real process on earth, I recommend going to the following website: http://science.jrank.org/pages/5327/Plate-Tectonics-Proofs-tectonic-theory.html.  If you desire more detail, read a good book on geology such as 'Understanding Earth'.  Both of these sources provide explanations of what we see on our planet consistent with the natural laws and topography of the earth.  

So after these major changes in the cosmos and earth, the Biblical account still matches the scientific account, but let's stop here for the moment after 2 and a half 'Days' since we transition now to the biological development of the earth. Additional posts are forthcoming. 

Lee

I'll be returning the "Creation, Science, & Genesis" tapes to Stu tomorrow.
Let me just hit a few High points of the last 3-Speakers in the Series ...
Plus a condensed breakdown of the 2-hour Group face-off !!!

Tape #3
Astronomer - Hugh Ross
Finally ... a true polished professional Creation Evangelist!
He gave a very powerful testimony about the unique Truth and irrefutable
accuracy of the Bible vs. the teachings of the other World Religions!
He approached the Bible from his understanding of the Big-Bang Theory
as well as the Billions of years in would take for the Universe to come into
being under that premiss. He seemed to have little to no problem with
interpreting the Genesis account to fit his scientific understanding.
Because there are dozens of completely independent scientific methods of
measuring the age of the Universe ... and the fact that they ALL give the
same 20-Billion year age ... he never even considered that the Bible may
be implying that the Creation week was actually Six 24-hour Days.
He speaks with such certainty about his view, and he is obviously a very
well educated & intelligent man ... that it's no wonder that he is so well
received by the Mensa crowd that are looking for deeper answers to life!
He is very quick to give answers to those who question his views ... and
does it in a calm but somewhat intimidating way.
A solid performance ... and totally unbending in his stance!

Tape #4
Theologian - Robert Saucy
This was probably the Best & most well-balanced explanation of the
Gap-Theory from a Biblical standpoint that I've ever heard!
Kind of a "Have your cake & eat it" view of an Old Earth & Universe ...
but with a Young (literal 6-Day) Creation!
He did not try to pander to the scientific views of the day ... but instead
felt that references to "the Deep" & "Null and Void" implied a possible
pre-Day-1 judgement of Lucifer which may have caused a do-over for
God with Creating the Earth. This would explain either an apparent age
or possibly an actual age being much older than just the Adam to Jesus
chronology listed in the Bible.
He seemed pretty confident that the text was clearly referring to Six
literal 24-hour Days from his Theological understanding of the Scriptures.

Tape #5
Biochemist - Duane Gish
Saving the BEST for last ... Dr. Gish knows Creation!
An extremely well prepared, knowledgeable, and hard-hitting presentation
of the scientific Facts vs. the scientific Claims !!!
He totally dismantles the Godless/Naturalist science of Evolution!
Starting with problems of Chemical Evolution ... then the Impossibility of
the Evolution of Life from Non-life ... and finally an in-depth dissection
of the Fairy-tale evidence for macro-Evolution of ALL living creatures !!!
Gish uses Humor, Sarcasm, and Scientific Truth to strengthen the confidence
of the average Christian believer that God's Word means what it says ... and
that it can be Trusted 100% !!! He was very confident (but humble) when
faced with some tough questions. He seemed to be the most well-received
of the 5-speakers by the audience ... if that reveals anything?

Tape #6
All 5-speakers in a Steel-Cage Death-Match !!!
This quickly became a Gish vs. Ross debate with some occasional commentary
from the other 3-players! Gish used a published article from one of Dr. Ross'
peers to show extreme problems with the Big-Bang Model.
Dr. Ross discounted the article because it was over 10-years old ... and therefore
"out-of-date"! This excuse did not sit well with many on the panel.
They also debated about Entropy, early Man, & population distribution after
the Flood. Ross & Gish both did a pretty good job about holding their ground.
Dallas Willard made it a point to state that even though Genesis could be
interpreted as meaning long-periods of time ... that a straight-forward reading
of the Genesis text could ONLY be understood as Six literal Days!
But even though they could NOT agree on MOST things discussed ... they did
ALL agree to remain friends ... and loving brothers in Christ !!!

Looking forward to some Coffee ... !!!


Bret*

Gentleman,

Its been awhile since I posted, & will check in from time to time. Lee's offer to discuss geology got me to post again, so Lee, feel free to post what you may, and I'll reply as best I can with the time I have. I do not feel plate tectonics supports an old earth, although I used to.

I've been taking a break from the blog as it was my personal opinion that we were all going around in circles just defending our own positions without really breaking much new ground.

For me personally it started to feel like a work of the flesh doing all the reading & then trying to post a thoughtful reply, which often weren't received too well, so its imperative for me to not spend quite the time I was once was. To make matters worse regarding availability of time, I've had a schedule change with work & taking care of our kids so my wife & I can juggle our work schedules which leaves even less time for fun stuff. (And hurling & reading the insults on this blog).

That being said, I'd still like to participate at some level. Also I do feel some of the posts are incredibly long. I know this is a sign of thoughtful input but at the same time if its more than a page long per post, it starts to read like a research paper & not like an internet blog which is typically more "short & sweet". Sometimes I find it difficult to make it through the really long ones I am not suggesting everyone revamp their posting style since I know this is a reflection of each person's identity & personality, I'm just saying I find the shorter ones more interesting & compelling. Reminds me of book report assignments or speeches that had strict maximum lengths, it was actually quite challenging to be concise & pithy within those constraints.

Just my opinion, gentlemen; so please take it with a grain of salt.

I did catch up by reading all the posts, including the sarcastic ones...and while I do feel we should treat each other with respect I didn't see anything that made my eyes pop in surprise. I even had to look up "uber nerd", actually sounds like more of a complement than anything else. Perhaps it can be taken wrong.

Lee, I'll be watching from afar for your geology take. This is a little closer to home for me as I do have a geology background.

Keith the Rockhead

I really never intended for my simple open ended posting
of the "Delk Track" to reach this level of controversy.
I'm seeing a lot passion & intensity from my good friend
& Christian brother Stewart on putting this Topic to rest.
I feel that I would be remiss if I failed to clarify & correct
some of the information presented in Stu's last post.
I totally agree with Stu that the "ICR" & "AIG" are (by far) the
best & most reliable Creationist organizations in the World!
The fact that they both decided to retract their support for
the Paluxy River Tracks evidence back in the 80's has nothing
to do with the "Delk Track". (apples & oranges)
The accusations that Alvis Delk sold fake artifacts & that his
friend is a murderer can only be traced back to an anonymous
Blog posting ... and would actually have no scientific relevance
to the authenticity of the "Delk Track" even if they were true.
While accusing Dr. Baugh of dubious credentials ... Glen J. Kuban
was sited as the most studied, balanced and unbiased researcher
on the Paluxy River controversies.
Posted on his own Bio ... Glen states:
"I was born and raised near Cleveland, Ohio. In 1979 I graduated
from the College of Wooster in Wooster, Ohio with a B.A. in biology
and secondary (K-12) teaching certificate. I am currently employed
as a programmer and systems analyst Ceva Computer Corportation."
(with much difficulty ... I will refrain from sarcastic comments)
Dr. Carl Baugh has never claimed to hold 3-Doctorates!
Dr. Carl Baugh was never the President of Pacific International University!
Dr. Carl Baugh's real Bio:
http://75.125.60.6/~creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=21
Dr. Carl Baugh's 495-page Doctoral dissertation:
http://75.125.60.6/~creatio1/carlbaugh.htm
Does this information make the "Delk Track" 100% verified?
Of course not!
But ... I think that it puts the "Delk Track" back in play.
Maybe it's fake? ....... But what if it's REAL? (Wow!)
That's all that I'm saying.

Bret*

A warm thank you to my YE friends for suggesting I explore this fascinating topic. I spent many hours poring through YE and OE websites, books, and YouTube presentations. I started with an open mind and came to the following conclusions, but I will try to remain open and teachable on the subject.

1. Dinosaurs really did exist and left their remains behind
2. Job chapters 40 and 41 do not provide grounds for believing that dinosaurs lived 4000 years ago
3. There is no legitimate scientific evidence that the great dinosaurs lived contemporaneous with mankind
4. It is possible that species of "terrible lizards" may be living today and could be the source of some of the great dragon myths. But until one is caught I'll have to keep it in the myth category.

Biblical evidence
Starting with the Biblical evidence, Hebrew scholarship and proper hermeneutics show that the language of Job 40:15-41:34 is poetic. Behemoth and Leviathan are described as real creatures (possibly the elephant, hippopotamus, or crocodile), but the descriptions are highly hyperbolic. The point is that although these creatures are mighty and fearsome to Job they are under the sovereign reign of God. This aligns with the whole purpose of God's final chastening of Job in chapters 40-41 where He talks about how His power is also shown through the creatures He has made. These are not chapters from which from which to draw scientific facts.

YE perspectives
My research showed that Dr. Carl Baugh's Delk track "evidence" is not legitimate and that he is not qualified or credible to speak on the matter. Also it revealed that many legitimate YE scientists have distanced themselves from the Paluxy River dinosaur/man tracks as I originally stated.

The first witness I offer is Dr. John Morris, Ph.D. in geology and president of Institute for Creation Research. His paper at http://www.icr.org/article/paluxy-river-mystery/ represents ICR's position on the matter since 1986 when the article was first published. Below I have copied and pasted the relevant paragraphs.

The Paluxy River Mystery, by John D. Morris, Ph.D.

... Due to an unknown cause, certain of the prints once labeled human are taking on a completely different character. The prints in the trail which I have called the "Taylor Trail," 5 consisting of numerous readily visible elongated impressions in a left-right sequence, have changed into what appear to be tridactyl (three-toed) prints, evidently of some unidentified dinosaur. The changes in the impressions themselves are mostly confined to lengthening in the downriver direction. The most significant change, however, is that surrounding the toe area. In almost each of the prints in the trail, three large "toes" have appeared, similar to nearby dinosaur tracks. These toes, typically, are coloration phenomena only, with no impressions, in most cases. Frequently the "mud push up" surrounding the original elongated track is crossed by this red coloration. The shape of the entire track, including both impression and coloration, is unlike any known dinosaur print ....

In view of these developments, none of the four trails at the Taylor site can today be regarded as unquestionably of human origin. The Taylor Trail appears, obviously, dinosaurian, as do two prints thought to be in the Turnage Trail. The Giant Trail has what appears to be dinosaur prints leading toward it, and some of the Ryals tracks seem to be developing claw features, also ....

The various controversial prints labeled as human by Carl Baugh in recent years are of uncertain origin, and at best are not comparable in quality to prints at the sites discussed above, thereby providing no support for the original position. Earlier prints which had been removed from the river before being documented, even if genuine, cannot be considered as compelling evidence, in view of their uncertain source ...

Even though it would now be improper for creationists to continue to use the Paluxy data as evidence against evolution, in the light of these questions, there is still much that is not known about the tracks and continued research is in order. We stand committed to truth, and will gladly modify or abandon our previous interpretation of the Paluxy data as the facts dictate.

John Morris reconfirmed this view in 1996 when the president's mantle of ICR was passed on to him by his father Dr. Henry Morris. In a statement noted as PART IX: PASSING THE MANTLE he said:

Another research project of some note involved the alleged discovery of human and dinosaur footprints in the Paluxy River, central Texas. Having been nominally involved since the late 1960's, I undertook a major role in 1975 from nearby Oklahoma, culminating in a summary book, Tracking Those Incredible Dinosaurs, and the People Who Knew Them, in 1980. This book was withdrawn in 1985 when further research called the original interpretation into question. Research continues, but I am of the opinion that the evidence is, at best, ambiguous and unusable as an anti-evolutionary argument at the present time.

Curiously, however, for years afterward ICR continued to sell books promoting the human track claims, in contradiction to their own recommendations. Recent editions of Scientific Creationism and The Genesis Flood continue to advocate the human track interpretation of the Paluxy tracks, without any corrections or qualifications.

Other YE Creationists
When I researched what Answers in Genesis says on the subject, Ken Ham was in agreement with John Morris and linked readers to The Paluxy River Mystery http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/topic/arguments-we-dont-use. Answers in Genesis said the Baugh has "muddied the water for many Christians. . . . People are being misled." In 1996, when Carl Baugh presented his "man-tracks" in the controversial program The Mysterious Origins of Man, Ham criticized Baugh: "According to leading creationist researchers, this evidence is open to much debate and needs much more intensive research."

Another YE advocacy group, Creation Ministries International agrees. Don Batten wrote: "Some Christians will try to use Baugh's 'evidences' in witnessing and get 'shot down' by someone who is scientifically literate. The ones witnessed to will thereafter be wary of all creation evidences and even more inclined to dismiss Christians as nut cases not worth listening to."

The Delk Print
In July 2008, Dr. Baugh was in contact with Alvis Delk and James Bishop, who claimed to have found a dinosaur-human print fossil. Bishop is a convicted murderer and Delk has a history of selling faked artifacts http://www.mineralwellsindex.com/local/local_story_225091209.htm. Baugh bought the "fossil" from Delk who used the money to pay his medical bills. On the authenticity of the claims, reporter Bud Kennedy noted, "since no scientists were involved, about all we really know so far is that the museum has a new rock."

The most studied, balanced and unbiased researcher I found on the subject is a long-time watchman of the Paluxy River controversies, Glen J. Kuban. Since 1980 Kuban has been intensively researching the Paluxy "man track" controversy, and has published his work in a number of mainstream and creationist publications, including doing a joint project with ICR http://paleo.cc/paluxy.htm. Kuban published an 11 page analysis of The Alvis Delk Print: An Alleged Human Footprint on a Loose Rock (last edited 9/5/2008 and after the Baugh's CT scan) http://paleo.cc/paluxy/delk.htm . Kuban concludes:

The Alvis Delk Print is not a convincing human footprint in ancient rock. Its advocates have failed to present the necessary data and details to adequately support their assertions. ... the collective weight of several lines of evidence, including the uncertain circumstances of the discovery, lack of in situ documentation, the knowledge that similar tracks have been carved in the Glen Rose area, the serious morphological abnormalities in the prints, and the considerations about potentially misleading scanning artifacts such as beam hardening, point to the strong likelihood that both the "human footprint" and dinosaur track on this loose slab were carved or heavily altered from less distinct depressions.

Dr. Carl Baugh
The research on Dr. Carl Baugh was even more dissatisfying. Baugh has claimed several degrees professing to earning three doctorates. All three "doctorates" are from unaccredited schools. His 1989 "doctorate" and Masters Degree in Archaeology comes from the non-accredited Pacific International University, of which Baugh was the president.

Baugh is founder of the Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, TX. The exhibits at the museum have been strongly criticized as incorrectly identified dinosaur prints, other fossils, or outright forgeries. Purported dinosaur claws, were identified by University of Texas at Austin paleontologist Wann Langston as crocodile teeth. Footnotes and sources can all be checked out starting at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Baugh#cite_note-matterofdegree-30 .

Dave ...

First ... can I ask you to please remove Stu's vestigial Topic String?
*******************************
Second ... I'm NOT in attack mode anymore!
I am just asking for some clarification on your expressed views.
I went back to your Post about how God must of somehow changed
the Water-Canopy from opaque to transparent on Day-4 so that the
Heavenly Bodies (that already existed) would be revealed to the
Earth's surface. I failed to read back further to your re-posted point.
(my bad)
But ... this is why I honestly need you (Stu & Lee) to give me your
best guesses of some kind of Time frame for each Day (or Time period)
of the Biblical Creation Week?
I agree with you about God being the source of Light on the 1st 3-Days!
But for me (personally) that's just 72-hours.
Your Timeline (I'm guessing) will vary greatly from that of Stu & Lee?
Plants can live for well over 24-hours in complete darkness.
But ... I believe (like yourself) that God provided some light for these
plants until the Sun took over the job.
Where I need some clarification is ... was God inside of the opaque
Water-Canopy for the duration of Day-3 to provide the light?
Also ... approximately how long (in years) was Day-3 ?
Actually ... how long (~) was each Day of Creation?
(and what was Created, brought forth, or revealed on each Day?)
This is the part of the OE view that I just can't seem to find
enough clarity for me to have an informed understanding?
Dr. Ross has done a great job of laying out his OE view!
Stu has stated that he's not ready to buy the whole package as is?
I understand that he is going to do some more research into this
Topic before rolling out his personal take ... and that's commendable!
I am not being sarcastic here ....... I want to learn!
Thanks for all of the extra effort put into answering my questions!

Bret*

My personal view is that I'm not smart enough nor do I have data enough to claim ownership of Hugh Ross' timeline. Although I believe the book of nature and the book of nature's Creator harmonize and ultimately reconcile, I am not a strict concordist and don't need to line up every scientific fact with a biblical passage. I sometimes forget that the Bible's primary purpose is theological and it is not meant to be a scientific text. The Bible needs to be allowed to speak its independent theological message without being forced into a reigning scientific paradigm of the times -- whether it be young earth, old earth, Ptolemaic, Copernican, whatever.

As you know, I believe the current scientific data and discovery trends favor an old earth interpretation. So when I have to take a position it is OE. I have the highest respect for Hugh Ross both as a Christian and as a scientist and highly recommend his Reasons to Believe ministry (www.reasons.org). I understand a detailed explanation of the timeline is given in his book A Matter of Days. I just ordered a copy and hope to have it in "a matter of days" for our meeting next Friday.

Where then do I stand in the YE/OE debate? As you must know by now my primary concern is to see us stop fighting among ourselves, accept one another as fellow Christians, unite in our apologetics to non-believers (some Christians believe in YE, some OE, some framework, et. al.), and join forces to defeat the common enemy -- Naturalism. GOD DID IT is the point -- and that's the trump card; not OE or YE. The battleground is the public square where Satan works to prevent any divine toenail from entering. HOW GOD IT is nice to know, but not necessary. Our time spent infighting sometimes just feeds Satan's diversionary tactics.

DEFEATING NATURALISM is my game. I am very impressed by the work being done by proponents of the Intelligent Design (ID) movement. They have been able to pose a new paradigm in the scientific realm without introducing a religious bias. I think they deserve all our support.

Once the divine toenail gets into the public arena it will start filling up with Light -- "Who/what is this intelligent designer?" That's why the opponents are hell bent on eradicating the movement before it gains a toehold. Just like big bang cosmology got us away from having to believe that the universe is infinite in time and space and had a creation event, ID shows us that universe is designed and purposeful and that things don't have to arise by purposeless natural mechanisms. Once ID is acknowledged, the God hypothesis is back on the table. That's why the academic freedom issue is so important to me.

No intimidation here...Dr. Ross has more resources than I do!

Here is my Day 3 post again...

Day 3

God then allowed dry land to show and gathered the waters into seas. Once again, Moses seems to be offering an account of what he saw. All by inspiration of God. He then had the land “produce” [dasha] or sprout vegetation. Interestingly, God doesn’t use either of his creation words in this portion of scripture, bara or asah. Could he already have created vegetation before then? Perhaps vegetation was already made before, and it is much older than this creation? Perhaps God just caused it to grow again once he revealed dry land? One thing for certain; the Sun wasn’t available yet for photosynthesis, so God’s light must have served that purpose.

Another thing; there is no implication here this was the first time there was vegetation on the Earth. It doesn’t say there was either. But it leaves open the possibility for there to have been vegetation on the Earth before then.

How long was this? The same presentation goes for this as for day one. Moses perceived it as a day, but if the Sun doesn’t exist yet, it doesn’t seem that it has to be a 24 hour day. It could be a 24 hour day though in my mind, accounting for God’s omnipotence.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The point being, God could have had vegetation on the Earth in a previous use for the Earth, but it died off as a result of a past destruction. On day three he "brought forth" vegetation...not the creation words he used in previous instances.

I do mention that God's light must have kept the vegetation alive, because it was before the Sun was available...which brings up an important point I will respectfully submit Bret: If you claim the Sun is necessary for photosynthesis and the survival of plants, how do you explain its creation before the Sun?

---