Hey, I’m all about that!
1 Like
Are you kidding? You want me to watch some youtube video? Any other factual material u want to share from the net?
2 Likes
I have no idea what you are trying to say… either you wouldn’t miss it … or you wouldn’t touch it…
Either way … don’t watch it. It will just upset you.
I wont touch it w a 10 foot pole. The net full of garbage and most prominently on youtube
Greg has hit on a foolproof way to never doubt his literal Genesis position. He just flat out refuses to read any scientific literature or watch any scientific videos that may cast even the slightest shade on his religious beliefs.
Of course ships which remain tied to the dock are safe but that’s not what ships are meant for.
2 Likes
I see that I did not explain myself very clearly. Let’s try again.
God said, “Let there be a dome in the middle of the water; let it divide the water from the water.” God made the dome and divided the water under the dome from the water above the dome; that is how it was, and God called the dome Sky. So there was evening, and there was morning, a second day.
God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let dry land appear,” and that is how it was. Genesis 1:6-9, CJB
There was one big ocean of water, then God used a dome to divide it into two parts. Since the sky is depicted as a dome here, the above-dome body of water is what gives it the blue coloring.
Note too that verse 9 says that first there was no dry land whatsoever; subsequently, God gathered the under-dome water into one place so that land could appear.
So first the earth’s surface was completely covered with water, then later dry land appeared. Does this chronology agree with the findings of geologists?
Best,
Chris
4 Likes
Well, while I don’t recall ever seeing or reading it stated that it was completely covered, it seems logical considering there’s the same amount of ocean water then as there is now, and the continental land masses that exist today weren’t there, yes I’d say that before the continents formed the ocean probably did cover the planet.
In a way that doesn’t refer to separation of waters by a solid dome. This isn’t a water cycle. It’s a permanent separation. If the purpose were to describe the water cycle, there are a great many quite clear ways to do it, even for ancient people. Genesis, elsewhere, even talks about something like it, when the earth is watered by a mist rising from the ground. Your identification here is farfetched and groundless.
The reason you can’t find anyone qualified to back it up is that you would have to be completely ignorant of earth history, as you are, to suppose that there ever was a mass extinction event where everything froze to death. You may be working from a garbled notion of the so-called “snowball earth”, but that was long before there was any macroscopic life.
You say that like it’s a good thing.
1 Like
475 mya is also long after the Cambrian explosion. And it’s worse than the diagram shows, since angiosperms didn’t evolve until around 130 mya.
Beg pardon? I know this is a joke, but where did you find it?
Hey, Carl Sagan… forget that blue dot business…
Earth… that silver glimmering bubble in the middle of a cosmos of blue waters … chaotic waters…
Fact remains. It does say it. Doesn’t say dome. Doesn’t say solid. Doesn’t say permanent.
There are Hebrew words for all of that. Didn’t use them.
Is it vague? Especially considering where it says it? After plant life, but before land animals. That can’t be just anything. But it can be the Cambrian Explosion.
“The researchers found that land plants had evolved on Earth by about 700 million years ago and land fungi by about 1,300 million years ago–much earlier than previous estimates of around 480 million years ago, which were based on the earliest fossils of those organisms.” -First Land Plants And Fungi Changed Earth's Climate, Paving The Way For Explosive Evolution Of Land Animals, New Gene Study Suggests | ScienceDaily
Amen. Genesis is the truth. I have no confidence in people being able to figure out a perfect creation or how a fallen one works. we get boundaries with genesis and then can figure out a few things. however creationists can debunk and destroy the hopeless guessing of modern origin research.
Good thread.
1 Like
Words for a solid firmament were used.
1 Like
That’s an excellent example of you distorting both the science and the Bible.
The Bible doesn’t just say plant life, it says land vegetation, including fruit trees.
Science doesn’t say that the atmosphere cleared because of a reduction in carbon dioxide, but because of a reduction in methane and other hydrocarbons. Carbon dioxide is transparent to light in the visible range.
2 Likes
He is a very good teacher. But you are a very bad pupil. It’s impossible to teach some-one who already “knows”.
1 Like
Wow.
There are a couple of minor obstacles to this idea:
- The stars. They’re in all directions, including straight up from the poles, so would always have been visible even from polar continents.
- The size of the continents. They cover ~30% of Earth’s area, and simply won’t fit inside the polar circles, which are only 8%. The sun and moon would be visible from the edges of the continents just as they are in Canada, Scotland, and New Zealand today.
Ideas that can be holed this easily represent a triumph of optimism over reason.
Context restored:
Do ICR and other creationist study centres actually teach quote-mining as a necessary skill?
2 Likes
This is an interesting article about “living fossils” in the case anyone is interested to hear from a young earth scientists perspective on the topic: Should We Drop the Term 'Living Fossil'? | The Institute for Creation Research
That’s what they called the sky.
The atmosphere becoming transparent is what made the stars visible. Continents. Moving only addresses the sun/moon/stars being “set” in the sky.