ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Seashells On Top Mountains

With seashells being found on top of the tallest mountains in the world. With all the canyons and sand dunes which could only have been created by a Flood, why does science still reject the answers found right in front of them?

Join Our Free Chat and Take The Creationism Quiz
 ---David on 1/20/20
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



jerry6593:

I was speaking about the subject of abiogenesis. I didn't say I had irrefutable scientific proof that a bunch of carbon atoms bonded together to make DNA. I doubt you have irrefutable scientific proof that a divine being uttered sonic vibrations that made DNA either.

Exactly. On earth, left-handed molecules happened to win out. There is no chemical reason why that would necessarily happen elsewhere. It's 50/50 which one would happen first.

Why does have to? Darwinism is only one part of the picture. How does the Genesis Flood narrative explain the millions of species we have now, given that there wouldn't have been room for two of each of them on the Ark.
---StrongAxe on 2/21/20


ax: "I didn't say it produced life."

You said: "Abiogenesis: scientists have conducted experiments"..." Do I need to explain the meaning of biogenesis to you?


"Organisms based on left-handed molecules need left-handed molecules, and ones based on right-handed molecules"

According to Smithsonian Magazine, "On Earth, the amino acids characteristic of life are all 'left-handed'".


"Darwinism speaks only about improvement of species, and evolution of species from others"

From what species did the Cambrian life forms evolve?


---jerry6593 on 2/21/20


jerry6593:

I didn't say it produced life. It produced building blocks of life, which shows how organic chemicals are capable of self-assembly into more complex structures. The earth's early atmosphere wasn't full of oxygen as ours is now. Our oxygen-rich atmosphere is only as a result of photosynthesis, and that only happened after plants developed.

Organisms based on left-handed molecules need left-handed molecules, and ones based on right-handed molecules need right-handed molecules. If one kind got lucky, life would evolve from that kind before the other.

Darwinism speaks only about improvement of species, and evolution of species from others, NOT about creation of the first species. That is a totally different science.
---StrongAxe on 2/21/20


ax: The 1953 Miller experiment of which you spoke was NOT a replication of abiogenesis. It did not produce life - only some primitive amino acids which he had to maintain in an oxygen-free environment. So the atmosphere would have to simultaneously change for any supposed life form to survive. Not likely! In addition, both left- and right-handed amino acid molecules were produced. Right-handed molecules would kill any organism.

Why not try your hand at the Cambrian explosion. You Darwinists insist that life comes from life. Where did the Cambrian life forms come from?


---jerry6593 on 2/20/20


Samuelbb7:

Some creationists on here insist evolution contradicts Genesis 1 because the creation order is different, yet Genesis 2 also has a different order. They are consistent ONLY if order is unimportant.


jerry6593:

Aren't you doing the same? I mentioned several things, which you haven't explained yourself. You call my explanations lame. Can you do better?

Abiogenesis: scientists have conducted experiments where mixtures of basic substances (water, carbon dioxide, methane, etc.) were subjected to theorized ancient conditions (heat, lightning, etc.), and spontaneous synthesis of organic compounds like proteins and nucleic acids were observed to form over a period of mere decades.
---StrongAxe on 2/19/20




ax: Spouting off suppositions without any factual basis is an arrogant form of ignorance.

Explain the Cambrian Explosion and abiogenesis in your speculative paradigm. Your explanation for the miles-long unconformaties in the Grand Canyon was below lame.


---jerry6593 on 2/19/20


No Genesis one and 2 do not contradict each other. Just a different emphasis.

Telling the same story twice with a different emphasis is not a contradiction. It is more details.
---Samuelbb7 on 2/19/20


jerry6593:

Ad Hominem is a logical fallacy.

First, most that die are recycled (due to eating, decay, etc.) and very few become fossils. This is why there are gaps in the evolutionary record - many forms weren't fortuate enough to be preserved. Sudden encasing and preservation happens during cataclysmic events, like mudslides.

Second, it takes a very long time for mud to be compressed into sedimentary rock by subsequent layers - much slower than we can observe.

If one demands literal accuracy of Bible accounts, Genesis 2 creation story contradicts Genesis 1, and if Genesis factually inaccurate that early, what can one expect about later chapters?

Creationism may be comforting, but it's not science either.
---StrongAxe on 2/19/20


ax: You obviously don't believe the accurate Biblical account and prefer the atheist Darwinian account. But back up a moment and explain why, if the earth is billions of years old, there are NO fossils being formed today as in past ages. While you are at it, explain the Cambrian explosion and abiogenesis. Explain also the vast unconformities in the Grand Canyon, and the disparity of its layer sequence with those of other locations worldwide.

Speculations may be fun, but they are not science.


---jerry6593 on 2/19/20


Samuelbb7:

Since the flood covered the earth within the first 40 days, that means that any dead bodies that were around would have been dead for almost a whole year, and be badly decayed. Can you imagine anything that has been dead for a year without refrigeration?!
---StrongAxe on 2/17/20




Not sure. But the carnivores would have had plenty of dead bodies to eat.

The omnivores would have done will also. But who many plants on were stored on the ark we don't know either. So we can only conjecture.
---Samuelbb7 on 2/16/20


jerry6593:

Why do they occur in specific horizontal layers? Why would there be no trilobytes, then suddenly a uniform layer of trilobytes, and then no more trilbyte?

The literal biblical flood model says that it rained for 40 days, and then the flood settled for around a year. This means a sudden huge influx of water, followed by a long, slow settling. A bunch of varied horizontal layers with a huge gash carved in it suggests a long slow settling, followed by either a very long-term slow carving, or very fast cataclysmic one. Again, a river cutting through mud makes rounded edges, not sharp jagged ones like we see.

Again, what did animals eat for the first year after they disembarked?
---StrongAxe on 2/15/20


David: You are on the right track. Keep searching and questioning everything you've been taught. That's what REAL scientists do. I recommend that you get a copy of "The Evolution Handbook" by Vance Ferrell. It's very cheap, and will answer all your questions.


ax: You need educating. No fossils are currently being made on the ocean floor or anywhere else. Why? The immense flat layers of the Grand Canyon were caused by seafloor turbidite action during the flood. The mud turned to stone later.


---jerry6593 on 2/15/20


jerry6593:

You wrote: David, the canyons were cut while the land was still flood mud.

How does "flood mud" explain many flat layers of different kinds of rock, layered one on top of the other, with marine fossils in some of them, and not others? If it were all flood mud, one would expect those fossils in all of the mud layers, but that isn't what we see. If it were soft, pliable mud, we would also see gooey rounded edges, not the sharp edges that are actually visible.
---StrongAxe on 2/13/20


David, the canyons were cut while the land was still flood mud.


---jerry6593 on 2/13/20


David:

You wrote: In the sedimentary layers of the Grand Canyon, you can find Marine fossils. The Colorado River didnt produce them, so how did they get there?

That just means that there are some layers of the rocks in the American southwest had been under water at some time in the past. It doesn't explain how layers of rock without marine fossils were deposited on top of those - which would also take millions of years.

If the Flood was strong enough to carve a V-shaped slice through that rock, how can that explain marine fossils radiating out sideways halfway up the walls?
---StrongAxe on 2/4/20


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


Non sequitur ---Cluny

Why not? Explain please.

Cluny
In the sedimentary layers of the Grand Canyon, you can find Marine fossils. The Colorado River didnt produce them, so how did they get there?
---David on 2/2/20


//If the Colorado River cut the Grand Canyon, through its erosive powers, as science believes, All Rivers, should be creating Canyons.//


Non sequitur.


\\ If that doesnt sound logical to you, it does to me. ]]

Fortunately, most people do not go by what seems logical to you.

I'm one of them.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/1/20


I'm not saying ALL rivers carve canyons. --StrongAxe

StrongAxe
If the Colorado River cut the Grand Canyon, through its erosive powers, as science believes, All Rivers, should be creating Canyons. If that doesnt sound logical to you, it does to me. Science uses comparatives in many cases to prove their point, but for some reason...they dont use it in this case.

How many canyons do you say were created by floods, and can you give geological evidence for your assertions?---Cluny

Cluny
All of them.
There are Petrified trees, standing vertical, in million year old sedimentary layers. Which means the trees being buried, lived millions of years while being buried. River erosion could not do this.
---David on 1/31/20


Cluny and David:

I'm not saying ALL rivers carve canyons. Water moving over the ground causes erosion, that depresses the land. We see this with rivers and river deltas all the time. Mud flows and collapses, so if the land is depressed enough, the banks of the river will collapse and get carried away. Cliffs made of soft wet mud don't last long.

When rivers flow across solid rock, on the other hand, erosion is much slower, and the rock isn't soft. Rock cliffs can support themselves.

It is like the difference between using a chisel to carve a statue out of a piece of marble (which works very well) and using a knife to carve a statue out of soft butter (which doesn't work well at all, and if it does, it doesn't last long).
---StrongAxe on 1/30/20


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


Some rivers carve canyons, some don't.

How many canyons do you say were created by floods, and can you give geological evidence for your assertions?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/30/20


The Grand Canyon was carved by the Colorado River.---Cluny

Cluny and StrongAxe
If the Grand Canyon was formed by the Colorado River, as science says, why arent other rivers creating canyons too? If this is how Canyons are created, we should have them in every river bed, shouldnt we?
---David on 1/30/20


//
I, on the other hand, see the only plausible explanation to the creation of places like the Grand Canyon and sand dunes in the Sahara Desert, to be a great Flood. //

Please give the geological evidence that supports your view, David.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/30/20


David:

We see erosion cutting rivers through mud, getting deeper over time. With rock it takes much longer (e.g. millions of years for the Grand Canyon). A similar process makes stalctites and stalagmites, one drop at a time, over millions of years, building rock spikes tens of feet long out of dissolved minerals.

Like lasanga, the GC exposes many rock layers deposited one on another over similar time periods.

A high power source (e.g. water hose or flood) erodes faster, but the resulting canyon pattern would look very different. It would also smash stalactites and stalagmites, rather than creating them.
---StrongAxe on 1/29/20


Send a Free Holiday Ecard


//
I, on the other hand, see the only plausible explanation to the creation of places like the Grand Canyon and sand dunes in the Sahara Desert, to be a great Flood. //

The Sahara was a grassy meadow supporting all kind of fauna after the time of the flood.

The Grand Canyon was carved by the Colorado River.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/29/20


Science can't explain how the miracle happened, but it CAN analyze the normal aftereffects.---StrongAxe

StrongAxe
Very Good explanation! Now I understand your thought process, and also the reason you bring up the receding of the flood waters. If we can not explain where the flood waters went...then the argument is made mute. I can see your wisdom in that argument.

I, on the other hand, see the only plausible explanation to the creation of places like the Grand Canyon and sand dunes in the Sahara Desert, to be a great Flood. Scientifically speaking...What do you think created the Grand Canyon?
---David on 1/29/20


David:

The Bible itself says heaven and earth declare the glory of God.

Miracles are when causes outside nature temporarily override natural law, but the results are natural. Miraculous healings leave humans whose bodies function normally. Multiplying fish feed people's bellies normally. Floods leave residue. Fire falling from the sky burn buildings and people normally leaving ash.

Science is making theories about how natural law works, and conducting experiments to validate those theories. Miracles and the hereafter are, by definition, outside of natural law, so science cannot and need not explain them. Science can't explain how the miracle happened, but it CAN analyze the normal aftereffects.
---StrongAxe on 1/28/20


Unlike you, David, I have no problem with God working through natural processes that He Himself decreed.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/28/20


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


StrongAxe
I am a fish out of water here. I have no answer that could cause you, to have faith in all of Gods word. You need science to prove the Bible, when I am a man who simply has faith in Gods word. If the Bible says it happened, Thats good enough for me.

Being a man of science and of faith, how does science explain the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ? How does science explain the miracles Jesus performed? How does science explain the Hereafter?

Science can not explain any of this, and yet, you believe it to be true.
Why??
---David on 1/28/20


David:

If all the glaciers on the earth melted, the sea level would rise by around 230 feet. However, to cover all the mountaintops (as in the Flood account), the sea level would have to rise 29029 feet, which is more than 100 times as much. This means that less than 1% of the flood waters is stored in glaciers. Where did the other 99% go?
---StrongAxe on 1/27/20


StrongAxe
My point was, the glaciers could be where some of the flood waters went. The rest, could be stored in our ground waters. With the absorbed waters, The earth may actually be larger now, than when God created it.
---David on 1/27/20


I find it funny that scientists are so in awe that our planet is so unique, but can't figure out why, and believe there are other life bearing planets out there. So much is right in front of us, just like Romans 1-2 say, but even back then before the flood when it was more jaw dropping (that GOD created this world) ....they didn't believe it then either.

But there are Christian scientists who do believe and do show awesome facts that only God could have created this universe and made this earth a marvelous place as a gift for us to live on and take care of. My problem is Christians who think it's ok to trash this awesome gift of this life giving planet while where all still here.
---kathr4453 on 1/25/20


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


David:

You wrote: Have you ever wondered, What would happen if all the Glaciers of the world melted?

This is is one of the warnings of climate change. Sea levels are predicted to rise three feet by the end of the decade, and there are several island nations like Narau and the Marshall Islands that could totally disappear as a result.

BTW, thanks for not correcting me on my vocabulary. The spell correction on my IPad changes my words and apostrophes on words are made impossible.

Everybody makes typos. Spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors only become problematic if they are so bad that they cause confusion about what is meant, e.g. if they cause ambiguity in meaning, or if they are total word salad.
---StrongAxe on 1/25/20


I am not sure. But why is it important whether I do or don't?---StrongAxe

StrongAxe
Because when I discuss the Bible with folks, whether they choose to agree or disagree, I sometime see the Bible as my evidence. But if that person doesnt believe whats written in the Bible, as factual, its a waste of my time using that evidence. So, I will try to use your science.

Never really gave much thought to where the flood waters went, but then again,....maybe they didnt go anywhere.
Have you ever wondered, What would happen if all the Glaciers of the world melted?

BTW, thanks for not correcting me on my vocabulary. The spell correction on my IPad changes my words and apostrophes on words are made impossible.
---David on 1/25/20


ax: "But why is it important whether I do or don't?"

If you don't believe that Noah was real, and that you are related to him, then you don't believe that Jesus told the truth when he talked of Noah and the flood. And if you don't believe in Jesus, well .....



---jerry6593 on 1/25/20


David:

You wrote: Since you view it as a parable, Do you believe Noah even existed?

I am not sure. But why is it important whether I do or don't? Why is it important whether you do or don't? Is there anything important in life that you would do one way if Noah was an actual real person, and a different way if he were merely a character in a parable? If not, then the fact of his reality has no vital importance to your life.
---StrongAxe on 1/24/20


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


The Bible includes many stories, whose purpose is to teach us how to relate to God - i.e. to teach us faith.

Jesus constantly taught in parables - non-factual stories that taught truths.
---StrongAxe on 1/23/20


The parables, good example, now I think I understand your point. You see the story of Noah in the way I look at the Lords parables.
Since you view it as a parable, Do you believe Noah even existed?
---David on 1/24/20


David:

You missed my point. The Bible includes many stories, whose purpose is to teach us how to relate to God - i.e. to teach us faith. The purpose of the Bible is NOT to each us science.

Genesis 1+2 orders of creation contradict each other.

1 Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2 imply Pi (ratio of circumference to diameter) is 3 (30/10), yet it's actually 3.14159... So one must conclude one of the following:
1) The Bible is wrong
2) Fundamental laws of physics have changed in the last few thousand years, or
3) The numbers given were approximate, because the Bible is not a book of science.
I personally go with 3.

Jesus constantly taught in parables - non-factual stories that taught truths.
---StrongAxe on 1/23/20


In the original creation, God drew it from the primordial water.

After the flood, God drew Noah's family and preserved species through the water.

For the establishment of Israel, the Hebrews were drawn through the water twice: the Sea and the Jordan.

And in Baptism, we are drawn from the water.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/22/20


My point is, the Bible is a book about faith, not science. ---StrongAxe

Exactly my point. Which is something about you and Cluny, folks like me fail to understand about your faith. The Bible is a book about faith, which has stories you dont seem to believe. And yet, you have faith in the teachings of the bible. If you could explicitly your view of Noah, that would be a big help.

Do you see it as just a story someone tells children? What is the point of having it written in the Bible?
---David on 1/23/20


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


The Bible says that there is water above the Dome of Heaven. Our space exploration efforts have failed to discover that water.
---JS1234 on 1/22/20


David:

800 million cubic miles of water is MANY more cubic miles of steam. Where would that go?

My point is, the Bible is a book about faith, not science. You would read the Joy of Cooking to make a pot roast, but not to study nuclear physics. If we read too closely between the lines of any book to discover facts about a subject that is not its main focus, we are often forced to make many inferences, most of which are total speculation.

God omitted many details from the Bible, because presumably he didn't consider them important for us to need to know.

Reality is reality. Things are the way they are, regardless of how we think about them. Our perceptions of reality may differ, but actual reality does not.
---StrongAxe on 1/22/20


// God could have simply opened up a crack in this ring and turned the flood waters into steam. //

And where did this steam go, David?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/22/20


StrongAxe
All great questions..but don't you agree, the Christian must suspend our realities, when having faith in God?

For my own personal understanding, could you tell me why you believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, but don't believe the story of Noah. If it is not true, why do you believe it is written in the bible?

My own personal belief, my only plausible thought about where the flood waters could have gone, is found in the ring of fire. God could have simply opened up a crack in this ring and turned the flood waters into steam. The Grand Canyon was formed, much like Lake Peigneur in Louisiana.
---David on 1/22/20


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


David:

Areas once at the bottom of the sea could later move to high places due to geological forces, over a very long time. One year of erosion wouldn't create the Grand Canyon.

Another problem - where did the water "recede to"? One mile deep water (to cover most mountains except Everest) is 800 MILLION cubic miles. One theory is it came from perpetual cloud cover (explaining no rainbows before) but we don't have that now.

Jesus fed people with miracles. No mention of Noah doing that, and no mention of him running all around the world to feed animals after they left. One can explain any inconsistency by pulling the word "miracle" out of nowhere, but that is intellectually dishonest.
---StrongAxe on 1/21/20


Shells of creatures that died millions of years ago on top of a mountain aren't compatible with a flood that happened less than six thousand years ago either. ---StrongAxe

If not by flood, do you think they got there?

Do you know how much food would have to be stored on the Ark to feed two of every species of animal for a year?---StrongAxe

Do you know how much food it would take to feed 5,000 people? Yet According to (Matthew 14) Jesus fed over 5,000 people with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish. If Jesus could feed so many people, with so little, do you think God could have fed the animals in the same manner?
---David on 1/21/20


Shells of creatures that died millions of years ago on top of a mountain aren't compatible with a flood that happened less than six thousand years ago either.

The Bible is not a textbook of rigid science. If you try to take it as such, there are many things that start to fall between the cracks.

One thing that strains the Flood narrative is the problem with food. Do you know how much food would have to be stored on the Ark to feed two of every species of animal for a year? But ignoring that for a moment, think AFTER the flood. What did animals eat after they landed? Most plants would be dead after drowning for a year. What did herbivores eat until new crops grew? And what about carnivores? There were no animals to eat.
---StrongAxe on 1/20/20


There are other explanations for the sea shells.

Do you know of any canyons or dunes created by a flood?

the Bible was NOT intended to be a science or history book as we understand those disciplines today.

It is rather a SPIRITUAL interpretation of history or science.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/20/20


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.