Latest research from the prestigious Creation Science Museum

[Cypress]

Dino Trackway Leads Straight to a Young Earth

Uncovering animal tracks and trackways in sedimentary rocks is a testament to the Genesis Flood. Fascinating discoveries continue to be made with the latest trackway (200 footprints) being unearthed in Oxfordshire, England. The longest trackway is estimated to be 492 ft (150 m) in length and is probably longer. And therein lies the problem.

Many who are involved with uncovering these incredibly old footprints do not realize this remarkable physical evidence is a two-edged sword. Yes, they are beautifully preserved prints of extinct animals, but they cannot be as old as evolutionary theory states due to multiple catastrophic agents of erosion. If the earth is 4.6 billion years old, virtually every square inch of the Earth’s surface would experience a host of erosive events.

In addition, English paleobiologist Richard Butler made an interesting statement regarding the formation of this trackway, “We don’t know exactly what, but it might be that there was a storm event that came in, deposited a load of sediments on top of the footprints, and meant that they were preserved rather than just being washed away.”5 Storm event? A load of sediments? This observation certainly supports the Flood as described in the early chapters of Genesis

The footprints are so pristine that even after the supposed 166 million years scientists were able to identify which dinosaurs the prints belonged to. Evolutionist Emma Nicholls, a vertebrate paleontologist from Oxford University, said the three toes “are very, very clear in the print.”5 Perhaps it’s because they were made only 4,500 years ago.

The creatures making these fascinating tracks were 100% dinosaurs created on Day 6. The tracks are well-preserved like one would expect from catastrophic flood deposits. And finally, their amazing preservation rather than being totally destroyed isn’t what one would expect after supposedly 166 million years of nonstop erosive forces.

Dino Trackway Leads Straight to a Young Earth

Uncovering animal tracks and trackways in sedimentary rocks is a testament to the Genesis Flood.1–4 Fascinating discoveries continue to be made with the latest trackway (200 footprints) being unearthed in Oxfordshire, England.5 The longest trackway is estimated to be 492 ft (150 m) in length and...

www.icr.org

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I've often wondered how these weirdos explain away modern humans' DNA containing snippets of Neanderthal, Denisovan DNA. But not enough to sully my mind with that idiotic website. lol

 

[Cypress]

I've often wondered how these weirdos explain away modern humans' DNA containing snippets of Neanderthal, Denisovan DNA. But not enough to sully my mind with that idiotic website. lol

They normally point to any uncertainties in the science to claim the entire theory can't be trusted.

Almost nothing in life, outside of mathematical proofs, can be proven with 100 percent bullet proof confidence, so the CSM exploits this loophole to convince the gullible that the science is bunk.

 

[Tobytone]

Whatever helps a couple of dimwitted imbeciles to think they're 'intelligent' is fine with me. As the good book of Romans put it so succinctly. "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools" I see evidence of this truth everyday I log in here.

 

[Daylight63]

Whatever helps a couple of dimwitted imbeciles to think they're 'intelligent' is fine with me. As the good book of Romans put it so succinctly. "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools" I see evidence of this truth everyday I log in here.

I am still waiting for you to explain all about how you know sedimentary settling rates. You remember? You claimed some mysterious "knowledge" of this and said you'd explain it. But I don't see where you did.

For you to make any commentary on the work of actual scientists would seem to indicate you think you know something in this area. I'm still waiting to see if you are all just BLUSTER.

I suspect so.

 

[Daylight63]

They normally point to any uncertainties in the science to claim the entire theory can't be trusted.

Almost nothing in life, outside of mathematical proofs, can be proven with 100 percent bullet proof confidence, so the CSM exploits this loophole to convince the gullible that the science is bunk.

Yup. You see it a lot. People who don't like what the science says look for ANY indication that there's some question still outstanding and then they decree that all that science can simply be ignored and their "wishes" hold sway as the best explanation of the data.

 

[Tobytone]

I am still waiting for you to explain all about how you know sedimentary settling rates. You remember? You claimed some mysterious "knowledge" of this and said you'd explain it. But I don't see where you did.

For you to make any commentary on the work of actual scientists would seem to indicate you think you know something in this area. I'm still waiting to see if you are all just BLUSTER.

I suspect so.

Dude I put up a detailed explanation for that weeks ago, where were you? Maybe it was a different drone, I'll admit you're all like one big dumbass to me. You can go dig through my old comments if you'd like, I'm surely not going to explain it all again. LOL Talk about being a little late to the party.

 

[Daylight63]

Dude I put up a detailed explanation for that weeks ago, where were you? Maybe it was a different drone, I'll admit you're all like one big dumbass to me. You can go dig through my old comments if you'd like, I'm surely not going to explain it all again. LOL Talk about being a little late to the party.

Apologies. I just found it.

The challenge in predicting silt accumulation comes from the fact that Stokes' Law, it's only accurate in relatively calm water. You would really need to see the operation to grasp how turbulent it can become.

And whenever there's any energy in the system the smaller clay size particles remain SUSPENDED. Turbulence does nothing but INCREASE the time to settle out.

Remember your Hjulstrom Diagram? Yeah. That's the stuff.

Therefore you are still unable to account for things like the Grand Canyon in a global flood scenario.

 

[Tobytone]

Apologies. I just found it.



And whenever there's any energy in the system the smaller clay size particles remain SUSPENDED. Turbulence does nothing but INCREASE the time to settle out.

Remember your Hjulstrom Diagram? Yeah. That's the stuff.

Therefore you are still unable to account for things like the Grand Canyon in a global flood scenario.

Wrong, my experience in the dirt business told me otherwise on a daily basis. I remember going on about Stokes' Law, which is pretty much irrelevant in the chaotic, turbulent waters I dealt with. And the Hjulstrom diagram? It's just as useless outside a lab setting where there are no constants, especially without knowing how often there were smaller floods or extreme weather events.

Not to mention, if you entertain the global flood theory, you'd understand that the 370 days in the Bible refers to the time until the Ark landed on a mountain. The total time for the Earth to settle to its current state is unknown because it wasn't documented, but it was certainly much longer.

What we see at the Grand Canyon could very well be the result, in part or entirely, of the aftermath of such a cataclysmic flood. Remember, the Earth was around before the flood, and we have no clue how much, if any, of the canyon was already there or in what condition.

Given all that, would it be considered rude or dodging the debate to suggest moving on? This conversation just circled back to where it started with other people I think, two different theories, neither of which can be definitively proven or disproven if we're being honest. Agreed?

 

[Daylight63]

Wrong, my experience in the dirt business told me otherwise on a daily basis.

You really need to hit up the Hjulstrom diagram again.

 

[Tobytone]

You really need to hit up the Hjulstrom diagram again.

I really don't need to 'hit up the Hjulstrom diagram again' I'll be just fine with my current understanding. You apparently missed much of the debate that took place several days, if not weeks ago. Actually, I'm not even sure if you were talking about an evolution vs. design debate or if the thread title had something to do with a flood vs. no flood? I do know it wasn't here.

Actually, I don't really remember discussing the Hjulstrom diagram at all. Of course, here comes the 'You obviously don't understand it,' 'You're just avoiding the facts,' 'You're stuck in your beliefs and can't back them up.' Is that about right? I could continue the debate like this, but it's no fun when I already know the outcome.

If it helps, I'll concede the whole debate and call you the winner. The earth and all it contains and supports is not from design, it's all random. Or, you might say, 'I don't believe that, I just don't believe the Bible's account,' and when pressed, maybe you'd say, 'I believe in some kind of energy...... god.' If I'm way off base, then I apologize in advance, and I would love to skip right to the end and ask, what do you believe?

 

[Daylight63]

I really don't need to 'hit up the Hjulstrom diagram again' I'll be just fine with my current understanding. You apparently missed much of the debate that took place several days, if not weeks ago. Actually, I'm not even sure if you were talking about an evolution vs. design debate or if the thread title had something to do with a flood vs. no flood? I do know it wasn't here.

Actually, I don't really remember discussing the Hjulstrom diagram at all. Of course, here comes the 'You obviously don't understand it,' 'You're just avoiding the facts,' 'You're stuck in your beliefs and can't back them up.' Is that about right? I could continue the debate like this, but it's no fun when I already know the outcome.

If it helps, I'll concede the whole debate and call you the winner. The earth and all it contains and supports is not from design, it's all random. Or, you might say, 'I don't believe that, I just don't believe the Bible's account,' and when pressed, maybe you'd say, 'I believe in some kind of energy...... god.' If I'm way off base, then I apologize in advance, and I would love to skip right to the end and ask, what do you believe?

If you think adding energy increases the settling rate then you are severely confused about physics.

I mentioned the Hjulstrom diagram so that I could get a bead on how little you know about sedimentology. Now I see it is a lot.

 

[Tobytone]

If you think adding energy increases the settling rate then you are severely confused about physics.

I mentioned the Hjulstrom diagram so that I could get a bead on how little you know about sedimentology. Now I see it is a lot.

Called that one, I predicted your very predictable response in my previous statement. That said, I attempted to get you to stop beating around the bush and tell us all what you believe, if anything at all.

I guess you're not willing to share you beliefs. That's fine, I didn't expect you would. You'd rather pretend you have a clue about geology and physics. lol (you had forgotten that you'd looked up Stroke's law and attempted to use that to make your case before. Then when I told you why that's bullshit, you went back to google and found the Hjulstrom diagram and now pretend you were just testing me. LOL)

You'd rather play AI scientist than put an actual thought that belongs to you and only you out into the public domain for scrutiny. Libtards are many things, being a coward is only one, being a fraud is another. Again I can't help but think of:
Romans 1:22 "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"

 

[Daylight63]

Called that one, I predicted your very predictable response in my previous statement. That said, I attempted to get you to stop beating around the bush and tell us all what you believe, if anything at all.

I guess you're not willing to share you beliefs. That's fine, I didn't expect you would. You'd rather pretend you have a clue about geology and physics. lol (you had forgotten that you'd looked up Stroke's law and attempted to use that to make your case before. Then when I told you why that's bullshit, you went back to google and found the Hjulstrom diagram and now pretend you were just testing me. LOL)

You'd rather play AI scientist than put an actual thought that belongs to you and only you out into the public domain for scrutiny. Libtards are many things, being a coward is only one, being a fraud is another. Again I can't help but think of:
Romans 1:22 "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"

Explain how adding energy to a body of water will DECREASE settling time.

As for my "beliefs" I believe in the science. Which is why I bothered to learn some.

 

[Tobytone]

Explain how adding energy to a body of water will DECREASE settling time.

As for my "beliefs" I believe in the science. Which is why I bothered to learn some.

Maybe I'll go apply science in an attempt to answer questions. You go learn you some science. lol Hey then you could believe even more science. Sadly, you have no idea how stupid your comment is, obviously not, you did say it.

Again, it just fits so perfect. Romans 1:22 "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools," That's you 'learning some science' then believing in it. ROFL

 

[Daylight63]

Maybe I'll go apply science in an attempt to answer questions. You go learn you some science. lol Hey then you could believe even more science. Sadly, you have no idea how stupid your comment is, obviously not, you did say it.

Again, it just fits so perfect. Romans 1:22 "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools," That's you 'learning some science' then believing in it. ROFL

So you don't really understand sediment settling.

I knew that. I just needed your confession. Thanks.

 

[Tobytone]

So you don't really understand sediment settling.

I knew that. I just needed your confession. Thanks.

Yeah ok, if that helps you have a good day, I know absolutely nothing at all about anything to do with dirt, water, air, or even how a libtards mind works. Does that help? I hope so, you poor bastards have suffered so badly you need something to cling to for at least a day. Being helpful, as usual.

 

[Daylight63]

Yeah ok, if that helps you have a good day, I know absolutely nothing at all about anything to do with dirt, water, air, or even how a libtards mind works. Does that help? I hope so, you poor bastards have suffered so badly you need something to cling to for at least a day. Being helpful, as usual.

If you don't understand the reference to the Hjulstrom diagram then you don't understand this topic at all.

If you think adding energy to a body of water will INCREASE the rate of settling of <2um particles then you don't understand this topic at all.

 

[Tobytone]

If you don't understand the reference to the Hjulstrom diagram then you don't understand this topic at all.

If you think adding energy to a body of water will INCREASE the rate of settling of <2um particles then you don't understand this topic at all.

Dude, I hate to tell you that you're a moron but it's necessary. When did I say what you think I said? Dipshit. You're hung up on something I've talked about before and you're acting like it matters. You should just go on 'knowing science' and 'believing science' like only a dumbass can. I have no problem with anyone's beliefs, everyone has the right to their own. Morons like you act like you know the deal because you 'know science' LOL That very statement proves your an idiot.

Believe what you want, be as much of a fool as you want. I couldn't possibly care any less what you believe. I had a couple of good conversations with a few people, you are not one of them. If you'd like to feel better (God knows you need it) Than go ahead and say something like "you just don't know what your talking about so you're running away" LOL Yes, I'm running for a moron that can't get a simple statement through his head. So, like I said enjoy 'knowing science' Maybe science will save you from being the fool you are now. Daylight will say "At least I don't believe in some fairly tale" lol That's right you 'believe in science' I'm really happy for you.

 

[Daylight63]

Dude, I hate to tell you that you're a moron but it's necessary. When did I say what you think I said? Dipshit. You're hung up on something I've talked about before and you're acting like it matters. You should just go on 'knowing science' and 'believing science' like only a dumbass can. I have no problem with anyone's beliefs, everyone has the right to their own. Morons like you act like you know the deal because you 'know science' LOL That very statement proves your an idiot.

Believe what you want, be as much of a fool as you want. I couldn't possibly care any less what you believe. I had a couple of good conversations with a few people, you are not one of them. If you'd like to feel better (God knows you need it) Than go ahead and say something like "you just don't know what your talking about so you're running away" LOL Yes, I'm running for a moron that can't get a simple statement through his head. So, like I said enjoy 'knowing science' Maybe science will save you from being the fool you are now. Daylight will say "At least I don't believe in some fairly tale" lol That's right you 'believe in science' I'm really happy for you.

You claimed to know something about sediment settling but you don't even know what the hjulstrom diagram is. Sad.