Oh, Jim, that wasn't a discussion of interpretation or what type of
literature we are looking at. It was a count of how many times a word is
chosen to translate 'eretz'. Write or wrongly, that is an objective
measure. It is not like someone saying Genesis 1 is history vs. someone else
saying it is poetry. Big, Big difference.
><<Once you go down that road, you can't stop multiplying the miracles.
>After a
>while, everything is miraculous so why bother with science????>>
>
>You know, God may be asking that very same question. Why are we so
>concerned with refuting via natural presuppositions an event that was
>supernatural? Doesn't that sound a tad foolish?
Sure. But as I said, God could have thoroughly mixed the fossils up and we
would have strong reason to believe in the global flood. As it is there is
an order to the appearance of fossils in the geologic record which demands
explanation.
>> one needs to be careful of repeating canards.
>
>I was actually quoting (badly) Baumgardner: "There's an abrupt beginning to
>the portion of the geological record that contains fossils."
Absolutely false. Baumgardner is out of touch and behind the times. The
Cambrian Precambrian boundary is now NOT the boundary between life and
non-life, or fossils and no fossils. The Precambrian Ediacaran fauna has
been known for over 50 years. And with today's advances, Grotzinger et al
note (the Vendian is Precambrian):
"Implications for early animal evolution. A large gap in the
record has been long perceived to exist between the youngest
Ediacaran fossils and the oldest diverse invertebrate fossil
assemblages near the base of the Cambrian System. However it now
seems likely that the Ediacaran animals existed throughout much
of the Vendian and that early faunal groups may have experienced
greater overlap than previously recognized; the lesson learned
from the fossils at the top of the Spitskopf is a reminder that
their absence in other contemporaneous strata is more likely an
artifact of preservation than an evolutionary obituary. At the
same time, a growing number of skeletalized invertebrate fossils
can be shown to overlap with the Ediacaran fossils, extending
well below the Precambrian-Cambrian boundary. Cloudina, once
thought to be the only Vendian skeletalized invertebrate, is now
joined by the globlet-shaped fossils of the Nama Group. Their
ranges completely overlap with the most diverse Ediacaran fossil
assemblages, and they are locally so abundant that they form
biioclastic sheets. In addition, through correlation of carbon
isotope anomalies, some Cambrian-aspect shelly fossils may now
have ranges that extend into the Vendian. Anabarites and
Cambrotubulus appear in uppermost (negative del13 C values)
Vendian strata of Siberia, and d Anabarites may be present in
somewhat older (positive del13 C values) strata of Mongola."
"Once held as the position in the rock record where the
major invertebrate groups first appeared, the Precambrian-
Cambrian boudnary now serves more as a convenient reference point
within an evolutionary continuum. Skeletalized organisms,
including Cambrian-aspect shelly fossils, first appear below the
boundary and then show strong diversification during the Early
Cambrian. Similarly, trace fossils also appear first in the
Vendian, exhibit a progression to more complex geometries across
the boundary, and then parallel the dramatic radiation displayed
by body fossils."~John P. Grotzinger, Samuel A. Bowring, Beaverly
Z. Saylor and Alan J. Kaufman, "Biostratigraphic and
Geochronologic Constraints on Early Animal Evolution," Science
270, Oct. 27, 1995, p. 603-604 (598-604)
I don't know why anti-evolutionists consistently remain behind the most
recent advances in the fields.
><<But if EVERYTHING was miraculous, then the my view is wrong.>>
>
>Perhaps what would be miraculous you admitting your view is wrong. ;-)
No, If I find something grossly wrong with it, like I did with my previous
YEC views, I will reject it rapidly. In fact I would reject it faster than
I did my YEC views. Now we know that I will change my opinion of how the
Bible and science relates--I have a track record. I do tire of the above
charge, because I don't see much evidence of you or others like changing
their opinions with the advent of new information. Why do you think that is?
>
><<If God makes it look like the naturalistic lens is the correct lens, then
>god is deceptive.>>
>
>No, God doesn't make the lenses. We do. That's called presuppositionalism.
>And if we make the wrong lenses, we see the wrong things.
But as I said, if God had thoroughly mixed the fossils up we would have no
excuse for applying the wrong lens. Why do you think God left that as an
option? Is it because God didn't do what you WANT him to have done?
>
><<Global
>flood advocates have mankind and other animals surviving throughout the
>flood floating on plant matter. They forget that salt water is hard on the
>
>kidneys and leads to death. Without fresh water, the animals would die in
>the first 2 weeks of the flood (or the first 392 feet of sediment). They
>should not have been there to leave tracks. 5000 feet up the column.
>>>
>
>Is this what ALL global flood advocates maintain?
They have to explain how footprints are found on layer after layer after
layer of flood deposited sediments. I have not heard of any other
explanation. If all the sedimentary column was deposited in one year, then
the Permian is approximately 6 months through the episode. Most Dinosaur
tracks are above the Permian and into the Cretaceous (which some
creationists think is at the very, very end of the Flood). So here you have
animals surviving for nearly a year, outside of the ark. They are surviving
so well that in the Cretaceous of Texas an area of about 400 miles by 100
miles has hundreds of layers of tracks each with thousands of footprints.
Sounds to me like the dinos didn't need the ark.
>
>But here's my question. Why are you assuming these tracks had to be left
>just before the flood?
I didn't say that. These tracks HAD to be made DURING the flood. Most
creationists tend to believe that the base of the Cambrian (with the
supposed sudden appearance of fossils--which isn't true) represents the
onset of the flood. Thus all sedimentary rocks above that level are FLOOD
sediments. The tracks are far above the Cambrian /Precambrian boundary and
below one of the earlier boundaries for the flood.
>I assume there was abundant time for the tracks to
>be preserved.
Here is a visual. You can walk from the bottom of the Grand Canyon north up
Kanab canyon and then continue north in to Utah. You will run into the
following sections all in their proper order.
-----
Tertiary invertebrate, amphibian bird mammal foot prints
First modern type of mammal tracks, camels horses man.
End of flood somewhere around here
-----
cretaceous invertebrate, amphibian, bird, mammal and dinosaur footprints
-----
Jurassic invertebrate, amphibian, dinosaur and mammal footprints
-----
Triassic invertebrate, amphibian, dinosaur footprints
-----
Permian invertebrate, amphibian footprints-reptile footprints
-----
Pennsylvanian invertebrate tracks, amphibian footprints
------
Mississippian invertebrate tracks, amphibian footprints
-------
Devonian invertebrate tracks no vertebrate tracks
------
Cambrian invertebrate tracks no vertebrate tracks
------Precambrian/Cambrian boundary Onset of FLOOD
Precambrian no tracks. a few fossils
We are not talking about tracks in the Precambrian or the Preflood era. The
entire column above represents several thousand feet of sedimentary rock.
Question: Why do invertebrate tracks continue throughout the entire column,
Amphibians first appear in the Mississippian (in the western US, Devonian in
Europe) and mammals appear last.
> Now, how did they get where they are?
They got where they are because the deposits represent millions of years of
deposition.
>Isn't Baumgardner
>suggesting thermal runaway?
runaway subduction. His model by the 6 author's own admission would create
too much heat and would fry the earth.
>Why do you think this is such a slam dunk for your view?
One of your lawyerly double questions. No I don't think it is a slam dunk.
Baumgardner's runaway subduction would generate 10^28 joules of energy. If
one needs to release this heat during the flood year, it would mean that the
earth would glow at several hundred degrees. Good for a sun tan or that
back yard barbeque.
glenn
Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man
and
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm