Why do you prefer that explanation to those found in the aforementioned article?
What about it?
In what way? I find many of his positions in conflict with the scriptures. Also, so many of his positions conflict with what God has clearly revealed in his created universe. I prefer God’s revelations to r_speir’s.
OK. I too believe God is omnipotent. Lots of us on PS believe God is omnipotent.
I don’t either.
I agree that God transcends nature and can “control” nature—but I’m not sure what “alters it with a wink” means. I see no evidence that God alters nature casually and regularly. (Do you have evidence of that? The Bible makes no such claim.)
Perhaps you mean millions of stars in our galaxy.
The Bible doesn’t claim that God created all of the stars at the same time. Stars continue to form over time.
Yes they do.
As Hugh Ross likes to say, “The Bible describes a worldwide flood—but not a global flood.” The Hebrew text of Genesis says nothing about a global flood. It describes a flood of the ERETZ (“land”.)
You’re not stupid or unintelligent but you’re woefully ignorant on most aspects of modern science, especially evolutionary biology. You also lack the critical thinking skills which let everyone else spot snake oil salesmen like Wise a mile away. The good news is ignorance is curable as is lack of critical thinking skills but first you have to want to learn. That means going outside of your religious bubble and dealing with some scary reality, like geologic formations which 100% disprove a global Noah’s Flood or genetic data which 100% disprove a literal Noah’s Ark.
Mr Horton. U keep bringing up the mammal fossil thing, but you continually ignore the context in which wise was using this data. The study performed in the late 60s determined that the there was a common type of mammal in the fossil record that related to existing mammals in Europe at the time to point out that perhaps evolutionist claims that the fossil record is largely incomplete may actually be untrue. This was not brought up to show that these fossils are EXACT in nature compared to their counterpart in existence in Europe at the time.
Your bringing this up now at least 5 or 6 times shows a level of unsophistication that makes me not want to trust your opinion on anything. Please TRY to have self control and hold back future comments in these regards because they are misleading.
That wasn’t Wise’s claim. He claimed that 80-90% of living existing species were found in the European fossil record to back up his “Flood happened 4500 years ago” assertion. Not their similar ancestral relatives. Existing species.
I have to keep bringing it up because you keep ignoring the fact Wise got caught in such a blatant falsehood. It’s a classic case of your religion-induced blindness which won’t let you see when you’re being played like a Stradivarius.
Of course he makes a case for a young earth. He is a young earth creationist! In that segment, he brought this up to specifically point out that, in the matter of animal types in Europe at the time (1968) the fossil record holds a large number of counterparts. Was it 80%? This data runs completely contrary to the evolutionist claim that the fossil record only records a small number of animal types
Pretty interesting study! I will pass it along to Dr Wise. I think is is really sad how you show him disrespect as one who is “puzzled” because he had not read that study you probably googled and pulled up on the internet. The study is only a hypothesis anyway.
I absolutely respect Dr. Kurt Wise as i see in him a passion to understand the rocks and fossils. And i also see in him w a cherishable childlike faith in a Great God who imspired the Scriptures for us to revere as the very words of God. Regardless of stance on young earth, old earth etc, the balance of those enduring qualities in a man who is obviously smart and obviously was taught by Gould at Harvard and is well informed about mainstream views i think is worthy of more respect than you give. Do you think it is easy being a YEC around you all? We love Scripture and just have no conviction anywhere in our bones that reinterpreting Genesis into long ages evolutionism is right. Fair enough? We are all going to one day leave this earth, and chances we are all going to find out what really occurred…in view of the nature of the God in scriptures, in my estimation Wise might really be on the right track.
He purports to be a trained professional geologist yet he can’t be arsed to do the tiniest bit of research on a well known geologic phenomenon before declaring “everyone is puzzled”? Yet I could find the f***ing explanation with a 5 second Google search.
Tell me again why this man deserves any respect from the science community?
Look it up. Old earthers have calculated that only 2% of all animals that ever existed are represented in fossils. I may not be saying that w correct semantics but this makes the point perfectly in principle according to old earth evolutionism
Read the article for yourself. In it it clearly states that these kilometer thick salt deposits were troubling to explain for all of science…and this a new hypothesis. It may very well be an incorrect hypothesis.
A small percentage of the overall number of species which ever lived is not the same as a small absolute number. Wise was certainly equivocating between the two ideas.
The key word is WERE. They WERE puzzling but with all the new evidence they’re NOT puzzling to anyone anymore. Except to serial prevaricators like Wise.
It is impossible to argue the terms when one person speaks from a view that places focus on a Great God who can do things that appear to have age but really dont, and the other leans naturalism over billions of yrs. Like someone fr the Ukraine trying to speak to another fr Canada
It’s also impossible to discuss science with someone like Wise for whom lying comes as naturally as breathing. I honestly feel sorry for you in trying to defend his BS.
I cannot judge whether they are on the right track or not. I can tell you that i have read a lot of science about evolution, and i think explaining the existence of the human body w sexual reproductive parts, eyes, ears, interacting organs, a nervous system that is astoundingly complex via godless naturalism is the downright most idiotic idea ever dreamed. So if the science that goes into explaining in such a foolhearty naturalistic manner is similar to the ways geologists explained salt reserves, please dont mind if i have reservations…
