Is It Possible To Remake Creationism Into A Scientific Theory?

[CraigD]

Shubee, have you any reference to a scientist or any other sort of person sharing you interpretation of this story as having a “quantum mechanical twist”

I expect that the most likely scholarly reference that might support my thesis would be from Sir Roger Penrose. Have you read the Penrose commentary on Mr. Tompkins?

I’ve not read Penrose’s forward. My copy of the book is an earlier edition, which lacks this new forward, and the Amazon link you post doesn’t include the forward in its book preview.

 

Can you quote the portion of the forward that supports your claim?

[Shubee]

CraigD,

 

I don't have the new book. I simply expect from the advertisement that Penrose would have an added commentary on all of the Mr. Tompkins adventures, including Maxwell's demon.

[Shubee]

The fudnamental dictum of geology - the present is the key to the past - is repeatedly validated.

 

I can't even imagine that to be correct. I think it's obvious that the fossil record is a record of catastrophes and that if we could map the extent of the geological layers, we would see that those catastrophes are on a fantastic scale.

 

I see the evidence in support of a global flood as truly marvelous, exquisite and compelling. Let's talk about the many enormous burial sites that consist of unimaginably large quantities of plant biomass residue and the graveyards of fantastically many, densely packed fossilized remains of assorted animals.

 

Fossil plant remains, such as coal, are almost 100 times more massive than living plant biomass (Poldervaart 1955; Ricklefs 1993). That's a highly relevant calculation. It's easy to conceptualize a pre-flood Eden-like world with 100 times the living plant biomass that exists today. The truly insurmountable problem is in trying to imagine a gradual, non-catastrophic process today that is on its way toward producing vast quantities of oil, gas and coal in highly concentrated pockets of the earth's crust.

 

The distribution of fantastic amounts of plant biomass residue in widely separated pockets on a continually changing planet is very strange. The existence of immense animal graveyards seems to be a remarkably similar phenomenon and equally mysterious. Can you explain the enormous graveyards of fossilized animals where the bones are found tightly packed and jumbled together?

 

For one such burial site, consider the Morrison Formation (Late Jurassic) in the western United States.

 

This formation has an average thickness of 100m (300 ft) and extends well over 1,000,000 square km (about 700,000 square miles), being found from Canada to Texas, the Dakotas to Idaho and Arizona to Oklahoma. It is known as one of the world’s richest sources of dinosaur fossils, but also contains fossil fish, frogs, salamanders, lizards, crocodiles, pterosaurs, dinosaur eggs, and shrew- to rat-sized mammals. The dinosaur bones occur in the middle green siltstone beds and in the lower sandstones of the Morrison Formation, often in graveyards composed of densely packed bones.

 

The Morrison Formation preserved the remains of millions of very large plant-eating dinosaurs as well as very large meat-eating dinosaurs ... but hardly any plant fossils.

 

It seems like such massive and concentrated burial grounds as are found in the Morrison Formation ... are best explained by very large catastrophic flooding events with massive sorting and transport ...--Sean D. Pitman, The Fossil Record.

There seems to be many unimaginably large animal graveyards that demonstrate that the rapid burial of large animal populations is widespread. How do theorists explain it? Robert Broom, the South African paleontologist, estimated there are eight hundred billion skeletons of vertebrate animals in the Karroo formation. --Adequacy of the Fossil Record, Norman D. Newall, Journal of Paleontology, vol. 33 (May 1959, p. 492).

 

Compared with any other fossil deposit in the world the Karroo must be regarded as phenomenally rich. Our fossil beds cover an area of about 200,000 square miles in almost any area of which fossils may be found. Some areas are rather poor; others are extremely rich. Great areas are covered by wind-blown dust, and vegetation; and as a rule it is only in water courses, and on slopes that fossils can be seen. I estimate that there are lying today exposed to view the fossil remains of five animals on average in every square mile. In some areas there are 100; in some none. For every fossil that is exposed to view there must be a 1,000 hidden by dust and talus. If there are the remains of 1,000 animals on the shale surface on an average in every square mile, there would be in the Karroo, if the wind-blown sand and dust could be removed, 200,000,000 fossil animals exposed to view. The fossiliferous beds are of great thickness. In some areas they must be 4,000-5,000 feet thick; in others perhaps only 2,000 feet. It would be a very conservative estimate that would put the average thickness at 2,000 feet, and at every few inches we have another page of the book, and another series of fossils to be revealed. I thus estimate that in the whole Karroo formation there are preserved the fossil remains of at least 800,000,000,000 animals. --Broom, R., The Mammal-like Reptiles of South Africa, H.F.G. Witherby, London, p. 309, 1932.

Broom is not the only person to remark upon the extraordinary abundance of fossils in the Karroo formation. The paleontologist Edwin H. Colbert, in his A Fossil-Hunter's Notebook [Dutton, 1980, pp.163-4], writes "...in the Karroo... it seemed that everywhere we went we found fossils. All of which is some indication as to the abundance of fossil reptiles in the Karroo beds. I have never seen anything to equal the numbers of fossil vertebrates in the Karroo, except perhaps the prolific occurrences of Oligocene mammals in the White River Badlands of South Dakota. Wherever one goes in the Karroo there is a feeling of fossil reptiles at one's feet — and more often than not the fossils are nearby..."

Where in the present do you see fantastic oil and coal deposits being created that compare in any way to the unimaginably huge and ancient oil and coal deposits that now exist? Also, please tell me where animal graveyards of immense size are currently forming. If fantastic numbers of animals were ever mysteriously drawn to specific locations that became immense graveyards of fossilized skeletons and densely packed bones, please explain the mechanism.

[Moontanman]

I can't even imagine that to be correct. I think it's obvious that the fossil record is a record of catastrophes and that if we could map the extent of the geological layers, we would see that those catastrophes are on a fantastic scale.

 

I see the evidence in support of a global flood as truly marvelous, exquisite and compelling. Let's talk about the many enormous burial sites that consist of unimaginably large quantities of plant biomass residue and the graveyards of fantastically many, densely packed fossilized remains of assorted animals.

 

Fossil plant remains, such as coal, are almost 100 times more massive than living plant biomass (Poldervaart 1955; Ricklefs 1993). That's a highly relevant calculation. It's easy to conceptualize a pre-flood Eden-like world with 100 times the living plant biomass that exists today. The truly insurmountable problem is in trying to imagine a gradual, non-catastrophic process today that is on its way toward producing vast quantities of oil, gas and coal in highly concentrated pockets of the earth's crust.

 

The distribution of fantastic amounts of plant biomass residue in widely separated pockets on a continually changing planet is very strange. The existence of immense animal graveyards seems to be a remarkably similar phenomenon and equally mysterious. Can you explain the enormous graveyards of fossilized animals where the bones are found tightly packed and jumbled together?

 

For one such burial site, consider the Morrison Formation (Late Jurassic) in the western United States.

 

 

There seems to be many unimaginably large animal graveyards that demonstrate that the rapid burial of large animal populations is widespread. How do theorists explain it? Robert Broom, the South African paleontologist, estimated there are eight hundred billion skeletons of vertebrate animals in the Karroo formation. --Adequacy of the Fossil Record, Norman D. Newall, Journal of Paleontology, vol. 33 (May 1959, p. 492).

 

 

 

Where in the present do you see fantastic oil and coal deposits being created that compare in any way to the unimaginably huge and ancient oil and coal deposits that now exist? Also, please tell me where animal graveyards of immense size are currently forming. If fantastic numbers of animals were ever mysteriously drawn to specific locations that became immense graveyards of fossilized skeletons and densely packed bones, please explain the mechanism.

 

First you are assuming that the fossils were all laid down at the same time in many different places and then assuming the event/cause was the flood described in religious texts. Nothing could be further from the truth. Some areas were at certain times more conductive to fossil formation than other places. Huge beds of fossils all the same age could well be the result of the some catastrophe but then again it could be that conditions for fossil formation were present in that one place for many thousands of years due to the conditions of low oxygen and deep sediments. All this aside, have you given any though to where the water for this flood came from or went to afterward? Why wasn't all sea life killed out right by all the freshwater? Of if it was somehow salt water why wasn't all fresh water life killed off at this time? Where did the water come from and where did it go? These two questions are more than enough to prove no world wide flood ever occurred.

 

Second you are assuming that all hydrocarbon deposits were formed in a short period of time, again nothing could be further from the truth. oil deposits are slowly refilling, even now, but at a rate too slow to do us any good. There is reason to think that hydrocarbon deposits have nothing to do with fossils of complex organisms at all. some would even say the hydrocarbon deposits are only geology reworked by biology not biology reworked by geology. but even if hydrocarbon deposits are indeed geology reworking biology it happens so slowly we would never expect to see significant hydrocarbon deposits form in historic times. Creationism raises far more questions that it can even begin to answer, it is not and cannot be science, ever!

[Shubee]

First you are assuming that the fossils were all laid down at the same time in many different places and then assuming the event/cause was the flood described in religious texts.

 

That's almost correct. I am assuming a worldwide flood (my third axiom) but I am not presupposing any of the specific details in Scripture. Where is it written that I can't borrow all the world's global flood legends and those Biblical passages that indicate a theory of devolution and make scientific postulates out of them?

 

Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

I don't believe that you have grasped the first axiom of quantum creationism. Where is your refutation of the mathematical proposition that there is no limit to improbability in quantum theory?

 

All this aside, have you given any though to where the water for this flood came from or went to afterward?

 

I have answered that question in post #28:

 

Can you really prove that no fantastic quantum mechanical explanation exists that might justify the third postulate? Here's someone with enough imagination to at least believe that the third postulate is conceivable:

 

 

Why wasn't all sea life killed out right by all the freshwater? Of if it was somehow salt water why wasn't all fresh water life killed off at this time?

 

One possibility is a fantastic quantum improbability. If fast and slow moving molecules can be separated and prevented from mixing, then the same trick can be applied to freshwater and saltwater. I went into incredible detail how this could be done on a molecular level in post #35.

 

These two questions are more than enough to prove no world wide flood ever occurred.

 

I have refuted your refutation decidedly by invoking my first axiom. Your proof is clearly invalid.

 

Second you are assuming that all hydrocarbon deposits were formed in a short period of time,

 

Yes, I believe that's a reasonable conclusion from what I've written.

 

oil deposits are slowly refilling, even now, but at a rate too slow to do us any good.

 

Where? When will the processes be completed? I think you're making ridiculous assertions without proof.

 

but even if hydrocarbon deposits are indeed geology reworking biology it happens so slowly we would never expect to see significant hydrocarbon deposits form in historic times.

 

That makes no sense to me. If Darwinism is correct, then we should expect that vast quantities of plant biomass is already on its way toward producing large deposits of oil and coal in every stage of development. Where is it?

 

Creationism raises far more questions that it can even begin to answer, it is not and cannot be science, ever!

 

David Hilbert's Philosophy of Physics is the highest and purest form of science ever conceptualized by the human mind. When Darwinism is compared to any true science, it is found that Darwinism is just an anecdote. See The Incorrigible Dr. Berlinski.

[Moontanman]

Mr. Shubee, I am sorry I interrupted your fight into fantasy, the supernatural, self indulgence, and BS with science. I mistakenly thought you were listening to the points put forward that showed your premise to be impossible and not even close to real science. BTW, post #28 proves nothing, explains nothing, it is bull **** pure and simple.

[Moontanman]

This thread sinks to high heaven of Troll, A troll has found a way to argue to infinity a premise that is total BS simply by invoking quantum theory which was and is not meant to be used in this way. Yes in theory almost anything can happen but in the real world where we live impossible things simply do not happen. Not only will The universe will not exist long enough to make any of these "creationist" things likely enough to call them improbable much less possible, no matter how long the universe exists they will still never happen because passing time doesn't make them any more probable. Each time the universe allows for chance the probability is the same "each time" no matter how many times these possibilities happen the probability is the same "each time"

 

When you toss a coin and get heads four times in a row what is the probability the next throw will be heads?

 

We need to call a spade a spade and Shubee a troll. He has totally ignored every attempt to show him the light, to explain why he is taking the idea of quantum probabilities totally out of context and assuming properties to it that simply do not exist. Things that are likely to happen often take place, things that are at the very limits of probability do not happen if they did our universe would come unraveled almost immediately. A pot of water over a flame will never get cold as the flame gets hotter and creationism will never be science.