Evidence for God from Science

One of the biggest stumbling blocks for many Christians is the conflict of time between science and the Bible. I know this was true for me and it caused many hours of discomfort trying to reconcile the two subjects I hold dear.

I have spent the last three years diving into this subject and am happy to say that there are now theories about time and the nature of matter that can explain this problem away. As with any theory that deals with history we can't go back and test the creation at that point. We do have a book which gives us clues into ancient history and creation. In my eyes the Bible is our only reference to the creation account. We also have the creation itself to examine and see if the new theories match what we see.

The views and details I will talk about in this thread are mostly not my own work. I have gathered this information from a variety of sources.

Imagine if you will a ball of water about a light year across, all of the space of the universe is compressed into that ball. Then God places light into the universe. The density of the universe is so high that light for all practical purposes is motionless. God stretches out the universe separating the water in the center from the water which surrounds it. The fabric of space is not a void or a empty space but a real thing just like matter or light. God makes the sun and also makes dry land on the ball of water in the center of the universe. Stars or the raw material for them is placed into the space between the waters. God then stretches out the universe past its current size. Our current understanding of space-time would lead us to conclude that clocks on the expanding outside edge of the universe would go very fast while a clock in the center where no expansion is taking place would tick off normal time. Using the size of the universe we see today the expansion factor would give us an accellerated time of around 15 billion years. So galaxies would form and actually experience the 15 billion years. The galaxies would run into each other and show other signs of extreme age.

Now there are many other affects in this model.

Now I don't know if this model is true. But it does support scripture and science as we know it today. It brings together many areas of astrophysics and quantum mechanics into a model that is just as valid as other models that science seems to have no problems with. So this is good starting point to discuss astrophysics and geology.

One of the outcomes of this model is a changing speed of light from the change in density of the fabric of space (zero point energy, ZPE) this can account for light travel the entire universe in a short timeframe. The change in density can also account for the redshift of light from distant sources and the quantum steps in the redshift. The implications of the quantum steps in the redshift points to a changing decay rate of past atomic reactions. This would change the time scales for atomic decay so dating methods would have to be on a sliding scale.

The stretching out of space is mentioned many times in scripture. One has to wonder if this was placed there so modern man would have a hint at the true nature of the creation process.

In support of the young earth model you can look at geology to see enough evidence to start to question the old earth view.

If you look up the erosion in the midwest into the Mississippi river you can determine the amount of dirt that flows to the sea each year. You can go to the USGS website or you can go to the NASA website to obtain the raw data. Once you know the amount of dirt that flows to the sea you now need to find out how large the Mississippi delta is. This can be found by looking at topical maps and nautical maps of the area. Next estimate the volume of the delta. Next divide the dirt per year into the volume to see how long it took the delta to be made. I have done this and I came up with around 3000 years. I rounded off and used the coast line of Mississippi and Texas to form the dividing line for the delta. However if I assume that the delta extends into Louisana more than I expected the date could be 5000 years. In either case the date is young.

This can be done with any of the large river deltas in the world, they all are young. Erosion does not depend on atomic decay. This is why you have not heard of this dating method except on creationist sites.

According to geologist the states we consider the midwest were an ancient seafloor at one time. In fact there are many fossil remains that show that to be true. They are dated using a variety of methods and are said to be between 50 and 200 million years old. I looked up the area around Arkansas, Colorado, and Mississippi. All with different dates but all the same sea floor. This sea floor is the top layer or near top layer in these states so it rose out of the sea. For the moment lets say that the sea floor is 100 million years old. Using our amount of dirt that flows down the Mississippi and the volume of the midwest states above sea level we can determine how long it would take for the old sea floor to flow into the ocean. In fact the entire country erodes down to sea level in 10 million years. So how do geologist reconcile these facts? They don't mention them at all. The people dealing with erosion gather all this data. But the guys dealing with dates of fossils and rocks use other methods.

The model I have presented to show an ancient universe and a young earth is to show how the data of science can be used to support what we see around us. The accerated time at the edge of the universe does not change the six day creation. Time is just a thing and the time at the edge of the universe is not our reference. Since the earth/man is the focal spot and the purpose of the creation then the clock at the earth is the one we should be worried about.

God exist outside time but He did mention a few times that the creation process took six days. I of course have no reason to doubt that.

I accept that God could make the universe any way He chooses. He could make it appear old but made in an instant. What I am showing from this model is that characteristcs of space that we measure today can be used to describe a possible creation process. I have no problems with science showing a different universe than the Bible. Man does not know what really happened so this is all curiosity and pondering. But some people take the sciences way too seriously. What I am attempting to do is show that the data of science can be modeled to support the creation process. This to me is an obvious conclusion that should be reached with the data. I have stated many times that I have yet to find one piece of scientific data that shows the Bible to be false, it can't happen.

Amen!

Wonderful post. Thanks for that amalgamated info you put together. Glory to God.

Another method of dating comes from the byproducts of radioactive decay. It seems that uranium (U-238) stuck in granite produces eight atoms of helium as it decays into lead. The helium atoms are small and don't react with the neighboring crystal structure in the granite so when they are made from the decay they start to migrate away from the lead. The rate of migration can be measured in a lab and accurate rates have been established. Using these rates and measuring the helium in granites, the granites of the world appear to be only a few thousand orbital years old.

Now if someone uses the ratio of lead to U238 and then assumes that the decay rate we currently see also is the same as you go back in time. Then you come up with millions or billions of years for the decay process to take place. But if you take a sliding time scale based on atomic decay rates being faster in the past then the two measurements match. That being the helium drift and the U-238 decay. So how do we determine the ancient decay rates of atomic reactions?

Light from distant sources has been traveling around the universe since it was created. As we look at light from distant objects we see that the light is shifted in frequency towards the red (lower frequency). However this redshift occurs in steps. So we see one frequency and another but nothing in between. Now you can shift a light frequency a number of ways but from a distant source two are important. The first way to shift the frequency is to move the source of the light. The movement (its velocity) adds or subtracts to the light, shifting its frequency(doppler effect). Objects moving away from us would shift the light lower or towards the red. Since large body movement is infinitely variable we would not see steps in the frequency shift. The whole idea of the big bang was due to the light from distant sources being shifted to the red. This would mean that everything is moving away from us. Thus the expanding universe model. There is another way to get a redshift in light. All light comes from an atom that emits a photon of light energy. This is done by adding energy to the atom and then at some point the atom releases the energy as a packet. This packet of energy for any given atom is (in a stable environment) the same frequency. But if we change the fabric of space the atom changes its characteristics. The atom resets itself at new points with the changing fabric of space. It does this in steps, quantum steps that we have some knowledge of. So with a stretching of space every atom in the universe would emit a slightly different frequency packet. All atoms would change in steps across the entire universe.

Since the light coming from distant sources is in steps (quantized) then the expanding model of the universe is false because it relies on the doppler effect which cannot produce quantized steps. What the light shows us is that the fabric of space was stretched out in the past and it had an effect on every atom in the universe. Looking at the farthest objects we see a greater red shift so the universe was stretched more as you go back in time. So God stretched out the heavens and then spaced relaxed somewhat.

The data from science matches the stretched universe model. The data from science does not match Hubble's expanding universe model.

Now atomic time and orbital time do not match. Orbital time is based on large body effects like gravity and the stretching of space has offsetting changes so large body effects did not change as spaced was stretched. For those interested in the math and detailed use of relativity see setterfield.org

Your idea is interesting regarding the Universe but I still can't see the support for a young Earth.

You look at the Mississippi River from a biased perspective. I look at it from another perspective: I look at the same river and see a river formed in the last 5-10 thousand years, but not from a Flood, but after the retreat of the glaciers that covered most of North America during the Ice Age. As they melted, the Mississippi River was formed. And the Mississippi River Delta has not been in the same position for it's entire existance. It was once further north and as sediment accumulated, new land was formed and pushed the delta south over time.

So, yes the Miss. Delta and River are indeed fairly young, but that doesn't do anything to prove the Earth is young since most geologists believe that the Quaternary Period is very Recent geologic history. This evidence has therefore be used to support both camps and is inconclusive.

Himantolophus,

I did not mention a flood in the creation of the river delta. I will post soon a detailed history of the earths geology with the major catastrophic events in earths past. The ice age occured postflood.

Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, He that created the heavens, and stretched them out; He that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; He that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

Let us start with time. There are two ways to measure time. One is to observe the planets go around the sun and then divide these events with a pendulum clock synchronized to the movement (orbital time). We have defined one earth cycle around the sun as one year (365 days plus a little extra). We have defined one complete spin of the earth as twenty four hours or one day. Hours and seconds are just subdivisions of these cycles. So a pendulum clock can tick off time and if set correctly will show the correct seconds, hours, and days for a solar year. The solar year is the reference and the pendulum clock uses large body effects to mimic the cycle. The other way to measure time is to observe atomic vibrations and set a number of vibrations to represent a second (atomic time). Just as a quartz crystal vibrates (like in your wrist watch) at a set frequency when subjected to an electric field many atomic structures can vibrate as well. The vibrations are due to characteristics at the atomic level. Both of these methods depend on characteristics of physics to be constant. Before 1960 the worlds' clocks were set using the solar year and earth day. After 1960 the world used atomic clocks as the reference for time.

Three things happened to upset the relationship between orbital time and atomic time. First, some research into historical measurements of the speed of light showed that light was slowing down. Second, astronomers noticed that atomic clocks were slowing down when compared to the orbit of the earth. Third, the light coming from distant sources in the galaxy was quantized in their red shift. Quantized just means that the shift is in steps. This quantization of the redshift means that the redshift is not due to the Doppler (movement of the light source) effect but some other event. This other event is the lightsource emitting a different frequency in the past. This means that some constants of physics are not constant. What this means is as we go back in time the atomic clocks tick faster and faster. This also means that the speed of light was faster and faster as you go back in time. In fact observable evidence indicates that the speed of light was 6.25 X 10 to the 11th times its current speed in space. An examination of the constants of physics has shown that some are changing. This means that all theories that were based on these constants have to be reevaluated. As it turns out the rate of atomic decay is also not a constant. So carbon dating and similar dating processes must be reevaluated on a sliding scale. The red shift of light from distant objects is not due to the Doppler Effect as once thought. The red shift is caused by electrons being in different orbits in the past. This means the big bang must be reevaluated. It appears that the universe may be static (no expansion). Tests have shown that orbital clocks have been constant while atomic clocks have changed. Large body effects as in clocks had offsetting changes which allowed them to remain constant while other effects like the speed of light or atomic decay changed. This means that humans on the earth now and in the past would have experienced the same time for solar years. So with this in mind let us look at a chart that compares atomic years to orbital years.


Chart of time scales

Archaeozoic
Atomic Years Era Orbital Years (BC)
14-8 Billion Creation week 5810
8-4.57 Billion Unnamed 5810-5344
4.57-3.8 Billion Hadean 5344-5114
4.57-2.5 Billion Archean 5114-4594
2.5 — 0.9 Bil Early Proterozoic 4594-3677
900-600 Million Cryogenian 3677-3460
600-542 Million Ediacaran 3460-3418

Paleozoic
Atomic Years Era Orbital Years
(BC) (BC)
542-488 Million Cambrian 3418-3377
488-443 Million Ordovician 3377-3342
443-416 Million Silurian 3342-3321
416-359 Million Devonian 3321-3277
359-299 Million Carboniferous 3277-3231
299-251 Million Permian 3231-3182

Mesozoic
Atomic Years Era Orbital Years
(BC) (BC)
251-200 Million Triassic 3182-3139
200-146 Million Jurassic 3139-3092
146-65.5 Million Cretaceous 3092-3023


Cenozoic
Atomic Years Era Orbital Years
(BC) (BC)
65.5-23 Million Paleocene 3023-2988
23-1.81 Million Neocene 2988-2864
1.81Mil-2345 Quaternary 2864-2345


Catastrophes
Atomic Years Orbital Years
(BC) (BC)
730 Million 3554 Noah's flood
251 Million 3182 Rampant volcanism
(vertical)
65.5 Million 3023 Continental land
Mass division
Begins
2.6 Million 2900 Ice age starts


Chart from setterfield.org




The bottom line is that atomic dating has lead us to conclude that the earth is very old while in reality it is young. A clock on the earth would show 7800 years have gone by since the creation. But a clock at the edge of the universe could show 15 billion years have gone by. We thought that it took light 15 billion years to get here from the edge of the universe but in reality it took just under 8000 years. The changing atomic parameters were rapid 7800 years ago and started to settle around 2345BC. This means that atomic clocks and orbital clocks are close to each other since then but way off prior to 2345BC. It used to be that the age of the universe from scripture and the age of the universe from science differed by some 15 billion years but now the two seem pretty close. How many of us have taken science over the Bible and assumed that somehow the Bible could not be taken literally in some areas. As time goes on leading edge science confirms more and more of the statements made in the Bible.

Just to put things into perspective as to the age of the earth. The whole of western civilization believed in a young earth until around 1850. Then Darwin (biology) and Charles Lyell (geology) pushed the idea that long ages were required for natural processes to make life and the geologic column. Naturalism took over science and still holds onto it today. Naturalism is not science. The foundations of naturalism in evolution and uniformitarism cannot be tested with the scientific method because we cannot go back in time. So the basis for naturalism is theory not fact. Our schools however teach it as fact.

OK, so the earth is younger than we thought and fossils and what not are not as old as we have been told. What does that mean about the history of the earth?

Earth is Created 5810 BC (approx)

Thus says God the Lord, Who
created the heavens and stretched
them out. Isaiah 42:5

When the morning stars sang
together, and all the sons of God
shouted for joy? Job 38:7

The stretching of space changes the characteristics of some of the fundamental quantities of space, energy, and mass. Some of these changes affect atomic decay rates and the speed of photons (light) through space. In the big world the effects of the change was not noticed because the changes in mass and the speed of light cancelled each other out in planetary motion, inertia, and other day to day occurrences that a man would observe. As space relaxed it started to settle into its current form. The change was rapid at the beginning and slowed down quickly. This took approximately 3,465 orbital years.

Think of space as just one ingredient which sets the conditions for light to move from one place to another. As space relaxes the light traveling through it slows down.

But a mist went up from the
Earth and watered the whole
face of the ground. Genesis 2:6

Now a river went out of Eden
to water the garden, and from
there it parted and became four
riverheads. Genesis 2:10

God decides to transform the earth. This is the judgment of man before the flood. This is the fall of Adam and Eve which brought death to man and all of the creation.

“Cursed is the ground for your
sake;
In toil you shall eat of it
All the days of your life.
Both thorns and thistles it shall
Bring forth for you,
And you shall eat the herb of
The field.
In the sweat of your face you
Shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.”
Genesis 3:17-19

All of creation changed at this time. Death was now a part of creation where before the fall there were no predators. The lion and the lamb slept together before the fall. At the end of the earth when a new earth is made there will be no predators.

A second judgement was placed on man at the time of the flood.

It may be that the earth had a balance of internal heat that powered the geysers. God may have increased the heat above equalibium. The heat would have been enough to transform the Earth. Imagine if you will an earth with a smaller ocean. Water geysers were everywhere from minerals (hydrated silicate) in the earth having water driven out due to heat. A thick water canopy and even temperatures on the surface.

You are about to read a history of the earth that includes several events that appear to be natural events but were prearranged by God. God created the universe and is also timeless. If He decides to strike the earth with a meteor on a certain day He can and includes the meteor in the creation at the beginning. Most events we see as natural are just that, random events that we must deal with, others are judgments. When these events happen it is obvious but there are some people that place all natural events into judgments. I describe some of the events that take place on the early earth in naturalistic terms because we see evidence of these events, the cause of the events originates in the supernatural world which we have no understanding.

Noah born 4154 BC

Noah told to build the Ark around 3656BC

"Make yourself an ark of
gopherwood; make rooms
in the ark, and cover it
inside and outside with pitch.
Genesis 6:14

The First Catastrophe 3554 BC

Over time the heat built up in the earth and the water from the breakdown of the hydrates could not escape to the surface of the earth fast enough. Giant gushers flooded the whole continent of Pangaea (one giant continent). As the water is released the surface of the earth in some places sank to form giant valleys. The hydrated minerals contained up to 20% water and as they gave up their water the resulting rock was smaller. The water rushed over the continent and the surface rock was washed into the valleys and off the edges of the continent. The first major sediment layer was made. The axis of the earth changed causing a temperature gradient. The weather changed and rain poured from the sky. This was the first rainfall on the earth.

Noah's flood around 3554 BC

"...on that day all the fountains
of the great deep were broken
up, and the windows of heaven
were opened." Genesis 7:11

The waters prevailed and greatly
increased on the Earth, and the
ark moved about on the surface
of the waters. Genesis 7:18

The Second Catastrophe 3182 BC

Magma makes it to the surface as the internal temperature of the earth increases. Massive land shifts. Rampant volcanism. Massive tidal waves wash vegetation into valleys creating the major coal deposits. Most land movement is vertical at this time. The internal heat generated pressure that needed to be equalized. Possible large meteor hits, some evidence of these around Australia in this time frame. Around 3230BC

The Continent Divides 3023 BC

The time of Peleg 3023BC

The name of one was Peleg,
for in his days the Earth was
divided; Genesis 10:25

Some say that the divided earth means the people were scattered due to the new languages from the tower of Babal. Many believe as I do that this refers to a geologic event.

After he begot Re'u, Peleg
lived two hundred and nine
years, Genesis 11:19

He maketh the deep to boil
like a pot: he maketh the sea
like a pot of ointment. Job 41:31

After the flood the heat continued to build inside the earth's crust. Land masses were uplifted and some areas sank. The oceans were much larger now. The single continent of Pangaea was now riding on a layer of hot water. Many asteroids were hitting the earth and the Moon. The current asteroid belt could have been a planet that blew up due to similar internal heat. The asteroids that hit the Earth and the Moon probably came from this source. Pangaea split along faults dating to the great flood. As North and South America drifted away from Africa and Europe great tsunamis washed across the continents creating the next major layer of sediments. The Dinosaurs were wiped out from the changes in weather and from the meteor hits. It took 200 orbital years for the continents to arrive in their approximate current positions. As North and South America slid away from Europe the mountain ridge from Alaska to the southern tip of South America was formed.

The Ice Age 2900 BC

The Earth's axis tilts to approximately 28 degrees. Probably due to continued meteor hits and the shifting plates of the continents. This caused massive extinctions and favored mammals. The time of Job and the first Dynasty of Egypt around 2767 BC.

They are gaunt from want
and famine, Fleeing late to
the wilderness, desolate and
waste, who pluck mallow by
the bushes, and broom tree
roots for their food. They were
driven out from among men,
they shouted at them as at a
thief. They had to live in the
clefts of the valleys, in caves
of the earth and the rocks. Job 30:3-6

A hot ocean and increased tilt of the planet would greatly increase snowfall. So much so that it would not all melt before the next winter. Sea levels would go down and massive ice sheets would appear. Storms were so massive that they changed the ice sheets quickly. This made it appear as if we had many ice ages.

This happened very quickly. This is why mammoths are found frozen in Russia with flowers still in their stomachs.

Axis tilts back

Another meteor hit likely changed the axis to 23.5 around 2345BC in the 5th Dynasty of Egypt. The time of Abraham 2304 BC to 2129 BC.

The bottom line is that atomic dating has lead us to conclude that the earth is very old while in reality it is young. A clock on the earth would show 7800 years have gone by since the creation. But a clock at the edge of the universe could show 15 billion years have gone by. We thought that it took light 15 billion years to get here from the edge of the universe but in reality it took just under 8000 years. The changing atomic parameters were rapid 7800 years ago and started to settle around 2345BC. This means that atomic clocks and orbital clocks are close to each other since then but way off prior to 2345BC. It used to be that the age of the universe from scripture and the age of the universe from science differed by some 15 billion years but now the two seem pretty close. How many of us have taken science over the Bible and assumed that somehow the Bible could not be taken literally in some areas. As time goes on leading edge science confirms more and more of the statements made in the Bible.

Interesting idea and alot of theoretical stuff. I don't have any background in physics so I cannot refute any of this, nor will I attempt to. I find the interpretation of this "time compression" can go both ways. You say that time was somehow faster the further one goes back in time, which allows us to compress 4.5 billion years into 7000. So, does this mean that things moved in super-fast forward motion back then? Who's to say that time didn't actually slow down so 1000 years=1 billion? This would fit into the Day=Age Theory for the Genesis account. Again your space-time hypothesis is possible but is highly theoretical. Again, so is alot of secular scientific theory in the Universe!

Just to put things into perspective as to the age of the earth. The whole of western civilization believed in a young earth until around 1850. Then Darwin (biology) and Charles Lyell (geology) pushed the idea that long ages were required for natural processes to make life and the geologic column. Naturalism took over science and still holds onto it today. Naturalism is not science. The foundations of naturalism in evolution and uniformitarism cannot be tested with the scientific method because we cannot go back in time. So the basis for naturalism is theory not fact. Our schools however teach it as fact.

Naturalism was being slowly interoduced well before Darwin and Wallace. Linneaus in the 1700's introduced ideas of species relationships and geologists in the 1800's began to study the geologic column. Most importantly, the people had NO other alternative for belief. The only one out there was Creationism. So how could Man believe anything else prior to 1850 if there was nothing else to believe?
Of course we can't test something that occurred so long ago, but the same goes for your theory as well. If you say naturalism isn't a science because it can't be tested, then the same goes for creationism. Although I argue you can study past relationships by studying the present (what we see in the fossil record, geology, and relationships between species all implies slow change).

The stretching of space changes the characteristics of some of the fundamental quantities of space, energy, and mass. Some of these changes affect atomic decay rates and the speed of photons (light) through space. In the big world the effects of the change was not noticed because the changes in mass and the speed of light cancelled each other out in planetary motion, inertia, and other day to day occurrences that a man would observe. As space relaxed it started to settle into its current form. The change was rapid at the beginning and slowed down quickly. This took approximately 3,465 orbital years.

I find it AWFULLY convenient that you slow down time just in time for the emergence of the great civilizations. If man cannot observe it even if it was happening, then how do you know it actually happens in the first place? It's a double unknown in that it's not happening today NOR can you prove it was happening if you were there 5000 years ago. See my post on making up stories to fit beliefs.

All of creation changed at this time. Death was now a part of creation where before the fall there were no predators. The lion and the lamb slept together before the fall. At the end of the earth when a new earth is made there will be no predators.

I need you to find any proof of this cuz it didn't happen... Ever since life appeared on the Earth, it either derived light from the Sun (Photosynthesis) or Chemosynthesis OR got it's energy from eating other organisms. From the beginnings of heterotrophy, organisms have eaten each other or plants. And eating plants is considered "killing" since plants are living things. If you pull a plant out of the ground, it dies. Not to mention that most carnivorous animals are incapable of eating plants. They do not have the dentition nor the stomachs to eat plants. How do you suppose filterfeeders (who eat zooplankton) separated phyto from zooplankton? How did deep sea organisms survive with no plants? How do you justify herbivory as non-lethal?

It may be that the earth had a balance of internal heat that powered the geysers. God may have increased the heat above equalibium. The heat would have been enough to transform the Earth. Imagine if you will an earth with a smaller ocean. Water geysers were everywhere from minerals (hydrated silicate) in the earth having water driven out due to heat. A thick water canopy and even temperatures on the surface.

Speculation since we cannot prove this happened. There are geysers on the surface today and there was definately alot more volcanism back in Earth's history but you have not answered my last post on how you can have a dense atmosphere and no rain. If there were indeed this many volcanic geysers, the atmosphere of the Earth would be raised to toxic levels with volcanic gases. Not to mention heated up to a sauna. And to let you know, the Vapor Canopy model has been abandoned even by creationists since it cannot physically exist.

Over time the heat built up in the earth and the water from the breakdown of the hydrates could not escape to the surface of the earth fast enough. Giant gushers flooded the whole continent of Pangaea (one giant continent). As the water is released the surface of the earth in some places sank to form giant valleys. The hydrated minerals contained up to 20% water and as they gave up their water the resulting rock was smaller. The water rushed over the continent and the surface rock was washed into the valleys and off the edges of the continent. The first major sediment layer was made. The axis of the earth changed causing a temperature gradient. The weather changed and rain poured from the sky. This was the first rainfall on the earth.

Where did the minerals go from all of these hydrates. The methane and annonium hydrates on Earth today are found in layers of sediment, not in the crustal rock. The methane and ammonium would have entered the atmosphere and water, altering both and adversely affecting life. This wouldn't be a problem if we were on a pre-Life Earth but you assume everything is on Earth at the moment. The rest is unsupported by evidence. Surely we'd see present-day examples of this surface rock crumbling into the valleys? And what geologic layer coincides with this first layer? Were there fossils in it? If not, what prevented them from forming? If there are, they should contain the bones of continental creatures, where are they?
You also have to deal with all the other problems of the Noah story that you have not attempted to answer.

Magma makes it to the surface as the internal temperature of the earth increases. Massive land shifts. Rampant volcanism. Massive tidal waves wash vegetation into valleys creating the major coal deposits. Most land movement is vertical at this time. The internal heat generated pressure that needed to be equalized. Possible large meteor hits, some evidence of these around Australia in this time frame. Around 3230BC

So, the Flood is 3554BC and this is 3230... this event is not part of the Flood yet is sounds just a catastrophic! Wouldn't the Bible mention something like this? I'd say God would have to save Man again. All of these events would wipe all the life off of the planet. Rampant volcanism and extensive plate movements would put tons of ash and poisonous gas into the atmosphere. The plant and animal life would be stressed by this alone. Tidal waves would only wet the forests and flatten them, it would not cover them with sediment. I thought the Flood created coal deposits? They would do a better job at killing even more animals. And the coupe de grace, meteors would have finished off life on Earth (well maybe bacteria and cockroaches would live). Meteors not only vaporize everything for hundreds of miles around the impact, they cause a nuclear winter. There are hundreds of known impact craters! If there is nothing in the Bible saying that God protected his Creatures from this Second event, then how did life survive?

Some say that the divided earth means the people were scattered due to the new languages from the tower of Babal. Many believe as I do that this refers to a geologic event.

You say the continents divided immediately after the Flood... how could they divide again in 3000 BC? This is a good example of the ambuiguuity of the word "Earth". It can mean people or geology. See the flooding of the "Earth", maybe it was also ambiguous.

After the flood the heat continued to build inside the earth's crust. Land masses were uplifted and some areas sank. The oceans were much larger now. The single continent of Pangaea was now riding on a layer of hot water. Many asteroids were hitting the earth and the Moon. The current asteroid belt could have been a planet that blew up due to similar internal heat. The asteroids that hit the Earth and the Moon probably came from this source. Pangaea split along faults dating to the great flood. As North and South America drifted away from Africa and Europe great tsunamis washed across the continents creating the next major layer of sediments. The Dinosaurs were wiped out from the changes in weather and from the meteor hits. It took 200 orbital years for the continents to arrive in their approximate current positions. As North and South America slid away from Europe the mountain ridge from Alaska to the southern tip of South America was formed.

Huh? I'm confused. I assume this is still around 3000BC, over 500 years since the Flood. Obviously the Flood Waters have receded into the valleys by now. How did this process you describe above get jump-started? Where is the evidence for any of this? You say the oceans were larger AND Pangaea was on top of water. How does rock float? Where did the extra water do when the oceans got smaller? Where is the water under the continents today? Seismic data finds only the mantle of hot magma, not water. Next, we will forget the assumption that asteroids would kill off all life on Earth. If they all occurred at this time, you'd find all impact craters in the same layer of rock (or under it if it was laid down afterward). Instead you find impact craters under many layers of rock and also on the surface. This means they hit at different times. We have craters uncovered by deposits showing they hit more recently. So in 3000 BC there was ANOTHER tsunami that wiped out life on Earth. I thought the Flood was the only Flood??? You have mentioned two separate layers of sediment laid down, one right after the Flood and one about now. How do current fossils indicate this event? Why are there dinosaurs in this layer and not in the prior layer? All evidence points to the COLLISION of plates as creating mountain ranges... how can the pulling apart of plates raise mountains? Why are the Andes still rising today? The Andes and Rockies are formed from different rocks and are at the boundaries of different plates.

The Earth's axis tilts to approximately 28 degrees. Probably due to continued meteor hits and the shifting plates of the continents. This caused massive extinctions and favored mammals. The time of Job and the first Dynasty of Egypt around 2767 BC.

An impact storm would not favor mammals, it would favor bacteria. Explain the selective pressure that would cause mammals to emerge from this event. Not to mention that the rise of Farming and advanced civilization would be negatively affected by impact events (see today's fear of asteroid impacts).

A hot ocean and increased tilt of the planet would greatly increase snowfall. So much so that it would not all melt before the next winter. Sea levels would go down and massive ice sheets would appear. Storms were so massive that they changed the ice sheets quickly. This made it appear as if we had many ice ages.

This happened very quickly. This is why mammoths are found frozen in Russia with flowers still in their stomachs.

Ok, with oceans being hot (how hot?) how could ice sheets form? The ocean's temp. is the major driving force behind the global water cycle and also climate. Ocean currents would spread this ocean heat into the atmopshere. Look at todays climate patterns and also thermohaline circulation. It is all tied to the ocean. Now, I could explain a WARMING trend by a warm ocean, but not a Ice Age. Explain how a hot ocean leads to an ice age. Also, how would storms change the Ice Sheets? Maybe add to them. And the continous addition to the Ice Sheets would still be interpreted as a single Ice Age. You'd have to have them melt and form over and over again to explain multiple Ice Ages. And this would require the oceans to cool and heat up at a rapid pace, as well as rapid fluctuations in sea level over the span of a few years. Also consider the effects of climate shifts this rapid on Earth's life (see the Day After Tomorrow).
On the Earth's axis, we know that the Earth's axis "wobbles". It has done this many times, not just once. It also flips it's magnetic poles fairly frequently. This doesn't go against scientific theory. A meteor hit that is great enough to "knock the Earth" on it's axis would most likely cause another mass extinction.

In conclusion, I think that this explanation not only pushes the limits of plausibility, but also pushes the Bible to the limits of interpretation. You have a few points (mostly pertaining to the Universe and time-space) but the whole history of the Earth scenario is far-fetched at best. You have to explain all of the impossibilities and contradictions you see today.

Himantolophus wrote:I need you to find any proof of this cuz it didn't happen... Ever since life appeared on the Earth, it either derived light from the Sun (Photosynthesis) or Chemosynthesis OR got it's energy from eating other organisms. From the beginnings of heterotrophy, organisms have eaten each other or plants. And eating plants is considered "killing" since plants are living things. If you pull a plant out of the ground, it dies. Not to mention that most carnivorous animals are incapable of eating plants. They do not have the dentition nor the stomachs to eat plants. How do you suppose filterfeeders (who eat zooplankton) separated phyto from zooplankton? How did deep sea organisms survive with no plants? How do you justify herbivory as non-lethal?

Nice points,

NOt to mention the different behaviors, the different brain, the differences in the sets of eyes between herbivores and carnivores.

I find that the "no death of animals armgument" ends up putting God as either a bad designer (the carnivores looked the same and had the same design but this design was completely mismatched to the carnivore) or changing his design compeltely after the fall (which you have pointed out, would mean turning the entire eoclogical deisgn around as well as the design of the animals). Not that this would be outside His powers, but I find it highly unlike HIs character in the scripture.

Here are three predictions

Isa 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

Isa 65:25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.

Isa 11:7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

Prediction of no curse

Rev 22:3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
Rev 22:4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
Rev 22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign forever and ever.

The fall of man included the whole universe. The death predicted by God was death for the whole universe. The fall created the predator and prey we have today.

Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

God did not give flesh to Adam to eat. But after the fall flesh was eaten.

Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

After the fall

Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

Now taking all of this together one could make the case that before the fall there were no predators. If you don't see the connection thats OK.

There have been two deep earth wells. Both hit water, very salty water. Interesting reading.

Another thing: you may try and make each of these catastrophic events into each of the several "mass extinctions" we see in the geologic record that are supposed to be separated by millions of years. That explanation does not make sense since we see in reality that each mass extinction affected almost completely different sets of species and families. For example we see mostly sea creatures in the Permian mass extinction (>95% of taxa were wiped out). In the Cretaceous we see various marine taxa and all the dinosaurs. In the Holocene, we see the Ice Age megafauna (whiuch coincides with the rise of early man and the end of the Ice Age). There is no fossil overlap bewtween these three mass extinctions. If they occurred within a span of 100-500 years, you would see the same stuff dying in each mass extinction. This suggests they were separated greatly in time.

Another HUGE point. These mass extinctions usually impacted the top predators and largest creatures. How was man able to survive such catasrophic changes and still maintain a healthy population. Crops and animals would be killed and humans would be physically roasted or washed away! There is no mention of additional arks... Noah and the Ark floated in 3554 according to your account, it didn't help in 3230 or 3000BC with those disasters.

There have been two deep earth wells. Both hit water, very salty water. Interesting reading.

Source? There is no problem for Old Earth geology to find water sources at depth. There are superheated areas of water underground in a lot of places. Water can seep through cracks and gather in certain areas. Geysers are formed by the interaction of superheated water and thermal activity (magma). However, there is alot of deep ocean drilling and oil drilling and they mostly just find rock and oil and gas. You would not need to physically drill to find a supposed underground ocean that you say exists. You would just need to send seismic waves through the ground like they do with earthquakes. If there was water anywhere in huge amounts, the seismic waves would be refracted. Instead, they are refracted and blocked by the only liquid we know to be there, the molten rock of the outer core.

I will not respond to questions that will make tangents to this thread. I have stated that this model fits that data we have in front of us and scripture pretty close. Many of the relationships I bring up can be investigated so you can form your own conclusions. It took me years to find and piece together this information so it would takes years on this thread to duplicate that path. Obviously that won't happen.

Some of the events and predictions I have posted require supernatural processes to be carried out. Some of these have happened in the past such as the creation itself. I have also referenced supernatural processes predicted for the future. My belief in God makes it easy for me to accept the past and future supernatural processes without question. Where natural events and processes are evident I have tried to supply enough detail to allow someone to get a good feel for the event and if they so desire to do their own research. I have a lot more data to present on this thread and do not need it taken off on the evolution path. I would be very interested in a world history lesson by someone who has done independant research and also has that history linked to scripture. The model I propose has that purpose in mind. So if you know of a better model that supports scripture I am all ears. But a science lesson that I had 30 years ago in physics or biology is not the purpose of the thread. I would hope that many models of the past supporting scripture would be available for Christians to ponder. I have seen many and this one that I am posting is the best mix that I have found so far.