Platetechnoics does it for me! LoL
The reverse polarization of the magnetic material along the ocean floor of the Atlantic stemming from trench really seems like some pretty reliable material to me!
(*I apologize for any grammatical errors, lol)
2007-09-27 08:48:10 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
how about the grand canyon?
its mostly granite. it is known that water eroded the canyon out. it is also known how long it takes granite to be eroded by water. a FRIGGIN long time....literally millions of years for water to etch the canyon out of that much granite.
2007-09-27 08:51:29 · answer #1 · answered by Free Radical 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
None. There is no geologic, astronomical, physical, fossil or shred of scientific evidence for an "old" earth. All that exists in these fields are liberals refusing to see truth and patting each other on the back.
I'm sure they did this when the scientific "consensus" was a flat earth, and doctors "bled" their patients to get the "bad" blood out of them.
Platetechnoics could have done strange things when the "fountains of the deep" were opened in Genesis 7:11: In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
IF THIS OCCURRED, which you deny, the plates lost their lubrication and NOW behave differently. Perhaps if the data were reexamined, ASSUMING the FACT of the flood, very different thoughts would be concluded.
BTW, I am an ASNT level II in several disciplines of NDT, including MT.
2007-09-27 22:26:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
That's assuming that the plate tectonics separated through a slow and gradual means versus a catastrophic event. To assume that you would also have to assume that the rate of movement has been consistent over time with no rate of change. But what if some past catastrophic event caused the reverse polarization of the magnetic material to occur at a faster rate than what is currently taking place? Would it then be possible for this event to happen in a shorter amount of time than previously believed?
2007-09-27 17:30:11 · answer #3 · answered by Bruce Leroy - The Last Dragon 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Coral reefs.
We know the rate at which coral polyps spread.
So a coral reef like the Great Barrier reef would have taken far longer than the Creationist's young earth would allow for, to develop.
It also would not have survived a global flood lasting 40 days and 40 nights just 5000 years ago.
2007-09-27 15:57:47 · answer #4 · answered by pixie_pagan 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because the Bible kinda says so
Passage Genesis 1:2:
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
It doesn't say how long it was in this formless state before the six days of creation began.
2007-09-27 17:09:05 · answer #5 · answered by Rockford 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
How about Einsteins Time Dilation
Or do you dispute Einstein
If the EARTH and SUN are SLOWING in space (impossible to tell, based on Einstein and Plank and Heisenberg) then TIME dilation occurs
What seems like centuries are only decades.
It's NOT an impossiblity and SCIENCE backs it
2007-09-27 16:20:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The evidence for pangea. It took a loooooooong time for all those continents to move that far apart.
spleenwater: You are wrong about the grand canyon; it was Paul Bunyon dragging his axe that created it. : 0
2007-09-27 15:54:25 · answer #7 · answered by Pat Fortam 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Lack of any corroboration for Moses's story about a young Earth, or that the god of Abraham had created Earth.
2007-09-27 16:14:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Who knows? Maybe science. Everything I have seen by reputable scientist points to an OLD Earth.
2007-09-27 15:55:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sounds reasonable.
2007-09-27 15:51:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋