Intelligent Design: Find a Fertile Idea

Intelligent Design: Find a Fertile Idea

There are 430 comments on the www.christianitytoday.com story from Jun 5, 2010, titled Intelligent Design: Find a Fertile Idea. In it, www.christianitytoday.com reports that:

Leaders of the intelligent design (ID) movement—William Dembski, Stephen C. Meyer, Michael Behe, Paul Nelson, Jonathan Wells—write mainly for popular audiences and have a negligible presence—as ID theorists—in scientific literature.

To get credibility in the academy, these theorists need to engage the academy by publishing in its journals and attending its meetings. But first they need a fertile idea—one that generates new scientific knowledge.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.christianitytoday.com.

First Prev
of 22
Next Last

Since: Nov 08

Boise, ID

#425 Aug 12, 2010
afj wrote:
<quoted text>
If you read Newton, you will see he gives glory to God.
But he somehow left god out of his equations that described gravity. How strange.

Mendel was a monk, and Joseph Steno, the father of stratigraphy believed the flood was responsible for the currents that left the layers of sediment on our earth.
How did Steno demonstrate that stratigraphy was the result of a global flood? Lowell and others demonstrated quite the opposite.
"Application of the law of superposition
Steno himself saw no difficulty in attributing the formation of most rocks to the flood mentioned in the Bible. However, he noticed that, of the two major rock types in the Apennine Mountains near Florence, Italy, the lower layers had no fossils, while the upper ones were rich in fossils. He suggested that the upper layers had formed in the flood, after the creation of life, while the lower ones had formed before life had existed. This was the first use of geology to try to distinguish different time periods in the Earth's history an approach that would develop spectacularly in the work of later scientists."
How did Steno explain thick layers of shale that contained very fine clay particles, too fine to be laid down in one year much less a hundred. How did Steno explain lake varves that go back hundreds of thousands of years?
AFJ

Baton Rouge, LA

#426 Aug 14, 2010
Erasmus05 wrote:
<quoted text>
But he somehow left god out of his equations that described gravity. How strange.
He didn't leave God out in his calculations for the seventy weeks of Daniel. A demonstration that a Christian's mind is not somehow blighted by what you call "religion."

He left out the ancient Greeks also, does that mean they don't exist?
Erasmus05 wrote:
<quoted text>How did Steno demonstrate that stratigraphy was the result of a global flood? Lowell and others demonstrated quite the opposite.
You do realize if you are going to argue against water deposition, you are arguing against geology. Do you how many limestone deposits there are worldwide? If you want to argue with Steno, he gave stratigraphy it's foundational principles that are still taught today.
Erasmus05 wrote:
<quoted text>How did Steno explain thick layers of shale that contained very fine clay particles, too fine to be laid down in one year much less a hundred. How did Steno explain lake varves that go back hundreds of thousands of years?
Your assumption is typically uniformintarian. The interpretation is the classic seasonal sedimentation in still water. The interruptions of deposition are responsible for bedding planes between varves.

Berhault and Julienne did (little publicized) years of stratification experiments at Colorado State University. It is 1) shown that a sediment mixture of a single deposition in both dry and fluvial conditions separates according to particle size and/ or density, so as to form laminae. 2) That in current, the same physics are at work. With those particles in suspension separating, even forming bedding planes (planes of separation). 3) And dessication responsible for the appearance of bedding planes as the particles were of different size and/or density.

I really can't do the science justice, as I am not a hydrologist engineer like Julienne, nor a geologist like Berthault. I have a link to a refereed paper submitted the Science Congress in France in 1993, which explain the findings. I have already left it once and I didn't catch any responses to it.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#427 Aug 14, 2010
AFJ wrote:
<quoted text>
I really can't do the science justice, as I am not a hydrologist engineer like Julienne, nor a geologist like Berthault. I have a link to a refereed paper submitted the Science Congress in France in 1993, which explain the findings. I have already left it once and I didn't catch any responses to it.
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/henke_st...

"Through numerous laboratory studies, French young-Earth creationist (YEC) Guy Berthault claims to have discovered sedimentation properties that dispute several stratigraphic and relative dating principles used by modern field geologists. Although Berthault's hard work is very interesting, his knowledge of the sedimentology literature and stratigraphic field methods are decades or even centuries out of date. Because of his lack of knowledge, Berthault's experiments often involve "reinventing the wheel". When compared with Berthault, YEC Austin (1994, chapter 2 only) has a better understanding of these fundamental principles."

Most of Berthault's "discoveries" are not new. Although Berthault's hard work is very interesting, he and his YEC colleagues are often unaware that geologists knew about these "discoveries" in sedimentology and field geology decades or even more than a century ago. In other cases, Berthault's ideas (such as his comprehension of Steno's Principles and uniformitarianism) are grossly outdated. Because YECs Berthault and Austin's views of the geological properties of the Tonto Group lack sufficient detail, their "Flood model" utterly fails to explain the origin of the Group.

<Much more at link above>



“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#428 Aug 14, 2010
AFJ wrote:
You do realize if you are going to argue against water deposition, you are arguing against geology. Do you how many limestone deposits there are worldwide? If you want to argue with Steno, he gave stratigraphy it's foundational principles that are still taught today.
Do you know how much heat is released by the formation of limestone? Quite a bit. It is kind of like concrete in that way. You can't pour concrete in to large of slabs or it gets really hot while curing.

The amount of limestone deposition world wide, if all laid down at once the way "flood geology" claims, would have release enough heat to...literally...boil the oceans. The planet would have been sterilized.

Since we are here, alive, it means that limestone was laid down over a very long period of time...millions of years and not thousands and certainly not one year.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#429 Aug 16, 2010
AFJ wrote:
You do realize if you are going to argue against water deposition, you are arguing against geology.
As a YEC you have no excuse at all whatsover (not even a ickle tiny bit) to not know that a statement like this has caused the sacrifice of a really cute kitten.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#430 Aug 16, 2010
AFJ wrote:
<quoted text>

You do realize if you are going to argue against water deposition, you are arguing against geology. Do you how many limestone deposits there are worldwide? If you want to argue with Steno, he gave stratigraphy it's foundational principles that are still taught today.
Do you REALLY want to joust on your geology horse, when FossilBob is a friggin' Ph.D in geology, while you are...uh...what's your geological background, again? You should defer to the experts when you're not one of them.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#431 Aug 16, 2010
AFJ wrote:
You do realize if you are going to argue against water deposition, you are arguing against geology. Do you how many limestone deposits there are worldwide? If you want to argue with Steno, he gave stratigraphy it's foundational principles that are still taught today.
Do YOU realize that just because some of geology is the product of water deposition, that does not mean that ALL of geology is the product of water deposition?

Geology shows that your idea of "everything was water" is false. It also shows that the Noachian Flood never happened. To think otherwise, you have to ignore practically every lesson geology teaches us.

For example, you have ignore completely the point I made about limestone generating heat. If all the limestone on Earth was laid down in the last few thousand years, the oceans would still be boiling from the heat. Literally.

So, yes, those limestone deposits are the result of water deposition. But they also happened over the expanse of hundreds of millions of years.

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

#432 Aug 17, 2010
Well, sure... ALL flood rocks are "water rocks", therefore all "water rocks" are flood rocks...

Wait a minute...

That's "Ken Ham logic"!(did I just use "Ken Ham" and "logic" in the same sentence?:) THERE'S an oxymoron!

Since: Nov 08

Weaver, AL

#433 Aug 17, 2010
AFJ wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't leave God out in his calculations for the seventy weeks of Daniel.
Then let's see those calculations and the verification of those calculations.
He left out the ancient Greeks also, does that mean they don't exist?
It demonstrates that the ancient Greeks are irrelevant to how gravity works, just as God is irrelevant to how species change over time. In fact, God is irrelevant to how all of nature works.
<quoted text>
You do realize if you are going to argue against water deposition, you are arguing against geology. Do you how many limestone deposits there are worldwide? If you want to argue with Steno, he gave stratigraphy it's foundational principles that are still taught today.
Do you know how limestone formed? Do you know what coccolithophores are? Do you understand the shear mass of life it takes to produce these deposits?
<quoted text>
Your assumption is typically uniformintarian. The interpretation is the classic seasonal sedimentation in still water. The interruptions of deposition are responsible for bedding planes between varves.
In Lake Suigetsu the seasons are marked by diatom blooms that occur in the warmer months. How does a global flood produce alternating patterns of fine silt deposits and diatoms without introducing a single marine plankton species? Care to explain?

Since: Dec 06

Urbana, Illinois

#434 Aug 17, 2010
AFJ wrote:
<quoted text>

...Your assumption is typically uniformintarian. The interpretation is the classic seasonal sedimentation in still water. The interruptions of deposition are responsible for bedding planes between varves.
Berhault and Julienne did (little publicized) years of stratification experiments at Colorado State University. It is 1) shown that a sediment mixture of a single deposition in both dry and fluvial conditions separates according to particle size and/ or density, so as to form laminae. 2) That in current, the same physics are at work. With those particles in suspension separating, even forming bedding planes (planes of separation). 3) And dessication responsible for the appearance of bedding planes as the particles were of different size and/or density.
I really can't do the science justice, as I am not a hydrologist engineer like Julienne, nor a geologist like Berthault. I have a link to a refereed paper submitted the Science Congress in France in 1993, which explain the findings. I have already left it once and I didn't catch any responses to it.
Nothing new about this. One would think that geologists didn't know about facies changes, etc:)

The fact is that folks like Berthault do lab experiments, monitor results... and then some folks take the results to illogical extremes.

Just because under SOME conditions, particular processes might operate in certain ways does NOT mean "always" or even "often".

There are many features that indicate otherwise...

The trouble is...folks like you have to declare EVERYTHING to be an exception, declare all contradictory evidence "false" (can't have that radiometric dating!), and ignore ALL the little details.

You'd flunk my class...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 22
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Liberty University Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Trump names gay nominee as U.S. ambassador to G... Sep '17 L Craig s Hush Pu... 3
News Evangelical advisers stay with Trump as others ... Aug '17 KEEPER of the SHEEP 90
News Falwell Jr.: Trump 'Does Not Have a Racist Bone... Aug '17 dbiggs69 4
News Grads returning diplomas to protest Falwella s ... Aug '17 shocking 1
News Trump's Evangelical Advisers Stand By Their Man Aug '17 surfinboy0022 1
News Liberty University: Watch Trump's Full Commence... (Jun '17) Jun '17 Bert 1
News Ted Cruz: 'Majority of violent criminals' are D... (Dec '15) May '17 JUST SAYIN 3
More from around the web