Added: 4 years ago
From: dingorex
Views: 3,418
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (88)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @mindyisforu Wish I could have been there!

  • ironman197268 is a complete fucking moron and a goddamn walking hypocrit.

  • Just becasue a volcano can dump a little dirt is an eruption does not mean the earth is young. Logic error.

  • @gregrutz Greg, if the Earth is as old as you claim, then why has all that dirt not eroded away yet? Geologists have been measuring quantities of 10Be, an isotope of the element beryllium that becomes radioactive with exposure to the sun. The more 10Be that is present at a given site, the longer it has been exposed to the sun without being carried off by erosion. This system was used by dozens of geologists to estimate erosion rates around the world. Have you figured this one out yet?

  • @ironman197268 I'm betting something like this will be your response... "Read A Geology book dummy, the grand canyon has 44 distinct layers of wind blown sand, study history, the halphan people where farming with Egyptians 7000 years ago, that's not how you spell halfan, where's the flood mud layer named human?" Now Greg, if ANYthing I just said, has any relation to your response, that will be empirical evidence that supports what I said. So how bout that EROSION?

  • @ironman197268 Plate tectonics keeps raising up more mountians. I told you this before and you still don't understand Geology.

    And why does beryllium prove the earth is old?

  • @gregrutz If plate tectonics keep raising up more mountains, then erosion would keep eradicating the layers in the geological column. So if transitional fossils are supposedly found in deeper layers, then they should be flooding the mountain tops in the world, but they're not. Instead, mountains have MARINE life fossils on their tops.

    Where did I say beryllium prove and old Earth? That's quite an ignorant question from you, when you KNOW I believe in a YOUNG Earth. Read the comment again.

  • @ironman197268 ''If plate tectonics keep raising up more mountains, then erosion would keep eradicating the layers in the geological column''

    YES, and it makes a new geologic column in the low place where the sediments accumulate.

    Not everywhere in the world is eroding dummy. Read a geology book so you know how it works.

    .

    mountains have MARINE life fossils on their tops. NO THEY DON"T The whole top of the mountain is an old sea bed thousands of feet thick. Do you ever go outdoors?

  • @gregrutz Yes Greg, erosion is happening all over the world and there most certainly are marine life fossils on mountain tops. For you to say otherwise is just a major form of denial on you part.

    So the Egyptians were farming the nile delta 7000 years ago that means there should be 7000 years worth of mud in that nile delta right? Then why isn't there?

  • @ironman197268 There is no erosion at the bottom of a lake dummy. Sediments are building up.

    The top third of the Matterhorn is fossils and was part of Africa when it was under water millions of years ago. Read a Geolgy book.

    There is 7000 years of delta mud. There are tree rings going back 7000 years. There are coral reefs that took 7000 years to grow. There is human history that goes back 7000 years.

  • @gregrutz You love putting words in my mouth don't you? I did not say erosion is happening at the bottom of lakes, and the Nile delta does not show show 7000 years of dirt, no river delta does. How do you know that part of Africa was underwater millions of years ago, how many millions? Why doesn't human history go back 70,000 years? After all humans have been around for about 100,000 years right?

  • @ironman197268 Why doesn't human history go back 70,000 years?  IT DOES.

    ''was underwater millions of years ago'' Becasue it contains fossils of creatures that only lived a millions of years ago.

  • @ironman197268 Why doesn't human history go back 70,000 years? IT DOES.

    ''was underwater millions of years ago'' Becasue it contains fossils of creatures that only lived a millions of years ago. How long do you think it take to make a sea bed into a mountain?

  • @ironman197268 Man has been using metal tool for the last 200 years. DUH !

    You have no idea how many childern people had 100,000 years ago. Or what the death rate was.

    Science and Technology would be farther ahead if religion would stop spreading bull shit.

  • @ironman197268 Science is winning because it looks at the evidence.

    Evidence like tree rings that overlap and go back unbroken for 10,000 years, proving there was no global flood 4400 years ago.

    Now remind us that trees can make more that one ring in a year so you can ignore the evidence.

  • @ironman197268 How many up votes do you have? People are agreeing witn me, science and the evidence. You lost, evolution is taught as fact and prayer is banned.

  • @ironman197268 ''So, why isn't there a 17,000 year old tree somewhere?'' Gee, let me guess, maybe,TREES DON'T LIVE THAT LONG DUMMY.

    Tree ring dating is accurate to within one year. I has been tested along will all the other methods and they all cross check each other in blind tests. No matter what Kunt Hovind says.

  • @gregrutz Oh greg, Please tell me how a scientist can study an Egyptian farming site, that's over 8000 years old? That kind of site would be in the Desert, and covered with 1000s of years worth of your good buddy, the wind blown sands!! What scientist would go out and study such a thing as an Egyptian farming site, and how do they even know it's a farming site? Also, how do they come up with the age of it? Do they find cucumber seeds hundreds of feet in the sand that carbon date to that age?

  • @ironman197268 No dip shit, the Egyptians farmed the Nile delta not the desert. What an IDiot. And yes they find seeds and can date them. Get an education dummy.

    ''What scientist would go out and study such a thing as an Egyptian farming site''

    Well, someone smarter than you.

  • @ironman197268 '' clonal colony can survive for much longer than an individual tree. A colony of 47,000 quaking aspen trees (nicknamed "Pando"), covering 106 acres (43 ha) in the Fishlake National Forest of the United States, is considered one of the oldest and largest organisms in the world. The colony has been estimated to be 80,000 years old''

  • You see rapid, shallow, canyon formation because it was volcanic ash - soft layers that aren't even rock. Grand Canyon erosion is a mile deep, slowly cut through actual rock layers. This is creationist propaganda produced to keep a fresh crop of suckers for fleecing. Don't tithe a penny. Donate instead directly to real charities like The Red Cross. Make preachers and frauds get real jobs

  • The Coconino Sandstone, the third layer down in the Grand Canyon, is from wind blown, desert sands.

    We know this from the fossils in it. There are 44 Distinct layers of DIFFERENT KINDS OF ROCK exposed in the Grand Canyon.

    Some are slow growing corals like in the Redwall limestone.

    Floods don’t do that.

    Not all sedimentary rock is from water! Like ash layers and chalk.

  • wow! its incredible for me to watch these videos...Here i am in 2010, when tomorrow will be 30 years since the eruption on May 18,1980.. I was a survivor of that active volcano and watched it and lived thru it..Beautiful up there in the cascades,God's country until the mountain blew.at least 4ft of ash on my roof top.And yes we were in danger also of the dam breaking and flooding..I should have written my own journal...

  • There was a flood and that is why we only have one coal deposit in the world. LOL

  • Mt. St. Helens proves that not all sedimentary layers are from water. The Coconino Sandstone in the Grand Canyon is wind blown sand with desert fossils in it.

    Uniformatarianism says the processes are the same, not that it was gradual, uniform or always take millions of years.

  • @gregrutz

    True, now but before Christian catastrophists braved the way,orthodox uniformitarianism held sway in all the textbooks, even the ones I was force-fed in the 1980s. No catastrophism was allowed.

  • @dingorex Uniformiarianism has nothing to do with catastrophies. It only says the catastrophies today are the same as catastrophies in the past. That the laws of nature are always the same.

    Nothing to do with slow and gradual or uniform.

  • @dingorex Please tell us your idea of what uniformitarianism is. Do you think it means slow and gradual? You would be Wrong. Do you think it means uniform? You would be wrong again.

    It also does not say there were no ''catastrophies'', it says the PROCESSES WERE THE SAME.

  • @gregrutz With that clarified, I must just add that God can use natural processes, and does, to achieve His will for mankind---or AGAINST mankind's reprobate sinfullness which is what the Flood was about. I know you don't accept this so now amount of evidence will suffice for you.

  • @dingorex If you had evidence for a global flood I would accept it. But the evidence does not show any world wide mud layer with all the dead bodies in it.  The Chinese and Egyptians did not all die off in a flood and they have been around for 7000 years.

  • @gregrutz wow do you know of any calendar that goes back 7000 years if not how do you know the chinese and egyptians were around at that time?

  • @Cherubim64 Study History.

  • @Cherubim64 Scientists study Egyptian farming sites and date them to 6000 BC. Chinese history goes back farther yet. Geology proves the earth is millions of years old and there was no global flood.

  • @dingorex Any evidence of God would suffice. Show me some.

  • @gregrutz The Bible for one. It's fulfilled prophecies. The Dead Sea Scrolls which prove the Prophets wrote of Jesus before the Christian era. The Shroud of Turin (see my Dr0pDuckC0ver youtube site for the latest evidence). The Creation itself with all the intelligently designed biologically specific functionality. Mini-motors in "simple" cells. The image of Guadalupe ( a polaroid picture taken of a divine being in the 1500s). Your brain with an intellect capable of Reason &detection of Truth.

  • @dingorex Yes, the Bible did steal most of it's stories from previous religions. What prophecies were fulfilled? The Shroud of Turin was dated, wrong date. ''Mini-motors in "simple" cells'' ?? Doesn't that make them complex cells then?

    ''polaroid picture taken .. in the 1500s'' LOL Polaroid pictures were not invented until 1948 !

  • @gregrutz The Hungarian Pray manuscript has a depiction of the Shroud of Turin dating from A. D.1190s. It shows the herringbone twill weave of the fabric (distict of the Cloth) & the unique poker holes found on the shroud, and predating the 1532 fire damage. This dates the shroud to well before the C-14 test date range.Again, watch the Dr0pDuckC0ver vids to see the evidence of the problems with dating the shroud. The Shroud is scientific proof of Christ's resurrection....Heaven, Hell,etc.

  • @dingorex IF you can prove some guy was wrapped in a cloth 2000 years ago how does the prove he resurrected?

  • @gregrutz Not some guy. The Man said He was, is and will be Devine for Eternity everlasting. No artist could have forged all the knowledge encoded on the shroud with a 15th century education.

    There is also specific dirt(testable proof) found only around Jerusalem that is only seen under a modern microscope. What forger would have thought to deceive a Catholic in 1350 with some evidence that even the artist couldn't see? Read Ian Wilson's work and be enlightened and not self-inflictedly dumb!

  • @dingorex You did not answer the question. How does a burial cloth prove someone resurreected?

    It proves someone died.

  • @gregrutz There is no known human artiface capable of reproducing this scientifically. Something beyond the scope of nature is by definition supernatural, ipso facto, God 's Resurrection of Jesus after three days being dead by the power of the Holy Spirit. If the shroud had remained around a dead body that did not rise again then the corruption of a decomposing corpse would have not left such a pristine image(given the fact of all the fire damage and poker holes,etc.)

  • @dingorex ''no known human artiface capable '' Why do you people think that 'not knowing' is proof of something?

    IF Jesus was a god why did he need two other god's, Father and Holy Ghost, to resurrect him

  • @dingorex And how do you explain the fact that we are clasified a Great Apes?

    The Dead Sea Scrolls proves the bible stole most of it stories from earilier religions. LOL

  • @gregrutz What are you, twelve????

  • @dingorex Are the questions too tough for you. I was trying to keep it simple for you, at a 12 year old level.

  • @dingorex There is no geologic evidence for a global flood, None.

    What evidence would prove evoultion to you? Nothing? That is called brainwashed.

  • Stupid. No one would conclude that 600ft of volcanic pyroclastic flow took millions of years to lay down because we know it doesn't and plain common sense tell us that.

    He keeps calling it a flood,but its a pyroclastic flow,which is like calling an apple a T-Bone steak. You can't just call it something else to make it jive with your stupid story.

  • Just matter in motion as humans are no more that mere earthworms according to Carl Sagan. No, the evidence is that strata do not take millions of years to form as atheists have hoped in their nothingness dreams everlasting.

  • Please show me where any scientist said it came as a total surprise that volcanic material doesn't take millions of years to be laid down. We've know for a very very long time that SOME kinds of materials can be layed down quickly. By your logic,since a kayak can be built in a few hours that means that it proves a cruise ship is also built in a few hours. How would you explain large deposits of materials like chalk which we know for a fact take long periods of time to be laid down?

  • Diatoms are the source for a similar substance like calcite--diatomaceous deposits. A full whale fossil is found in Lompoc California proving catastrophic forces preserved the whale as scavengers and natural decay and dissentergation would have quickly have brought about no complete fossil. There are many crustateons and plants, fully preserved (quickly or else nature would slowly destroyed a full fossil--quicker than the slow deposition the scientists use to play pretend as a cause) in chalk.

  • (By ur logic,since a kayak can be built in a few hrs that means it proves a cruise ship is also built in a few hours)

    No, in fact, that type of exaggerated extrapolation is the evoists gig. Typical, you attribute Creationists with evoist ridiculousness. As when Creationists are painted to be the lying fraudulent ones. Although evoists have a wrap sheet a mile long. When viruses mutate into a merely variated virus, evoists say Titanic canoes prove macro evo. The Illogic is from evoists

  • You're not refuting anything I said,all you said is "no" and then used childish names.Why dont you address the point on the relevant topic,which is this video? Claiming a volcanic deposits prove the earth is young is dumb because no one says ALL strata require long amounts of time,and choosing one of the quickest examples and claiming it for the whole earth is nonsense.

  • "All I said was no"? Thats one hell of a no, don't you think? "No" is only 2 characters. Oh boy, this is already sizing up to be a good hunting trip. It's a good thing YouTube is huge and I'm quite obscure. You don't know the Ape Hunter, do you?

    If its dumb to use layered strata, quickly formed by catastrophe, as evidence of Earth Jr. Then what do you suggest should be used?

    {no one says ALL strata require long amounts of time}

    Maybe not, but they do say that of Grand Cyn. Which by default,

  • means that evoists are also claiming the existence of mountain climbing water. Now thats as dumb as it gets. 10 year olds with down syndrome know better than that. Now using Helen's layered strata & 1 day created canyons as evidence of Earth Jr. is only dumb if you deny it. Otherwise prove that you can piss on clouds

    Gotta go! I feel dumb refuting grade schoolers.

  • {No one would conclude that 600ft of volcanic pyroclastic flow took millions of years to lay down}

    No one but evoists! Your beginning from the standpoint of knowing that it was volcanic pyro flow. But there are places in the world where the pyro flow may have been laid a few thousand yrs ago and evoists say it took millions of years

    {You can't just call it something else to make it jive with your stupid story}

    Once again, typical evoist cretinism. The only one whom mentioned apples & T-Bones

  • was you. Although Creationists in the video & comments are only talking about the natural materials that are present during eruptions & floods. The Geologist said the "glacier" on Helen's melted. Indeed it did. Thats water flow. He also suggested that Grand Canyon was carved by water flow. "Water flow & water flow". Where do you get apples & T-Bones from? I'd imagine the same place where Tyrannosaurus Chickens come from? Don't forget ancestral amoebian forbearers??????

  • It hurts when old earth hypothesis is debunked, doesn't it.

  • And which one is debunked here?

  • The one that is debunked is the one that presents no real evidence for their hypothesis, and bases all their hypothesis "on" another hypothesis.

    Mt St Helen's gives empirical evidence on how the grand canyon could have been formed.

    Mind sharing a river running uphill that can carve out the grand canyon? Give an observed example on a smaller scale like they have done here.

    If you present nothing, then you are nothing.

  • @jazzyhap The Super Group of rocks is below the level layers of the Grand Canyon. They were laid down level, block faulted into mountains, worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over it. Then another 5000 feet of rock was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some corals. Then the whole area was raised to 8000 feet ASL. THEN the canyon was cut by whatever. How long do you think this took?

  • @jazzyhap There are many rivers that run through mountain ranges, it is easy to explain, the river was there first. The problem with the Grand Canyon is that the river carved the canyon in the last 6 million years and some geologists thing the whole are was raised up at the same time as the rocky mountains, 75 million years ago. A flood does not expalin all the different layers exposed in the canyon.

  • @jazzyhap The Grand Canyon has 44 distinct layers of different kinds of rocks, some wind blown sands. Floods don't make distinct layers of different kinds of rock. Geology involves more than 'one flood did everything'. There are ash layers, slow growing corals, sedimentry layers not from water, etc.

  • /watch?v=-dB5afjmHOs

  • John Morris is always a good for a laugh.

    The eruption of Mount St Helens occurred 28 years ago. I am always curious, what ICR have been doing since then? Have they explored any other volcanoes to confirm their "hypothesis?" Saddly no. If they did, they would find that the events at MSH is no different then any other large volcanic eruption. But, no evidence of a flood.

  • The receding waters of God's Genesis Flood plus the attendant vulcanism is the nexus of commonality here but your points are well taken. Thanks for your comments on my first attempt to recreate the success of BereanBeacon's site:)

  • But this is not what Morris is saying. His suggestion is linking the onset of the flood with the eruption of Mount St Helens. He is not associating the eruption to the so-called recessive period. If Morris and Austin really want to be taken seriously, they get off their duffs and start visiting other volcanoes. But then they would find, a volcano is a volcano is a volcano.

  • John Morris is always good for a laugh! If I was a member of Oklahoma University, I would be revoking his PhD in Geoenginering.

    I am always curious. The eruption of Mount St Helens occurred 28 years ago. What has ICR been doing since that eruption? Have they sought out other volcanic fields to test their hypothesis of a "global" flood based on volcanic deposits? The sad answer is no. They prefer to play a shell game instead.

  • I'm not sure that your making any debatable point but rather introducing philosophical sophistry.

  • The point is simple. In the real world, scientists do not rest their laurels on one event, one example of research and more. If the scientists really wants to establish their idea as a standard theory, they would attempt to apply the lessons learned to multiple places from around the world.

    Volcanology did not begin with Mount St Helens, nor did it end there. However, YEC "geologists" point only to MSH and declare their work is done. When in fact, they had hardly begun.

  • Most of what happened at Mount St Helens in 1980 was water related? I always known that John Morris was good for a laugh or two. Gee, from what I recall, it was a landslide that dislodged the glaciers on top of MSH, which was later rapidly by pyroclastic flows. The only evidence this gives is the weapons available in a volcano's arsenal.  But no flood!

  • Heat + glacier = water

    Scoffers never pay attention!

  • Wrong!

    The landslide which triggered the eruption was not a water based event, It was the result of overburden caused by the cyrptodome. The lateral blast was the result of the magma chamber becoming suddenly exposed, releasing volititle gases. Meanwhile, the landslide dislodged several glaciers into the Toutle River Valley. Rapid melting did not occur unitl 12PM when pfs buried the dislodge ice, triggering the largest lahars of the day. Pay attention, you might learn somehting.

  • I think the pressure on the north side of the dome triggered the eruption as on the seen photos testify. Reports each day documented the swelling increased until it ripped the dome seam.

    Could the pressure be from steam? Oh no...more water!

  • The Grand Canyon type effects were from waves of mudslide. Mud is water and dirt, last time I checked...also, Spirit Lake is recreating coal beds with logs standing straight up through the sediment.

    This all involves water and is a reflection of the Geneses Flood model.

  • Wrong! The Grand Canyon is composed of granite, shist, sandstone, limestone, and shale. With mud, you get one feature. Mudstone.

    Wrong! Spirit Lake temperature is 33 degrees F. This is too cold to form peet, let along coal.

    Wrong! The Coffin claimed model was descredited and does not remotely compare to any real world situation.

    You talking to a guy who worked at Mount St Helens. Do you really care to walk down this path and continue demonstrating your profound ignorance?

  • Hey! I've yet to demonstrate my profound ignorance...I've got a lot more where that came from!

    Go to sleep!

  • Learning about the actual events at Mount St Helens is as easy as looking up the Cascade Volcano Observatory, who maintains an extensive website on Mount St Helens.

    I do find it truly pathetic for creationists to completely misrepresent the eruption, because they are doing a profound disservice to people like you. The eruption was fascinating and we did learn learn much. It this story, I truly encourage you to seek out and learn.

  • I'm a big boy, I can discern truth from error. Don't blame creationists for my making a couple of mistakes in a youtube forum.

    There are many lessons to be learned by Mt St Helens' eruptions ...I don't see any that actually support a billion year old earth...lots of evidence that encourages a younger earth...you seem to thrive on downing the theories of John Morris and others.

  • "don't see any that actually support a billion year old earth."

    Mount St Helens is a volcano, 1 of 13 in the Cascade Range and 1 of 1,500 holocene volcanoes around the world. While the 1980 eruption was spectacular, it wasn't the biggest durong the 20th Century and even by MSH standards, the 1980 eruption was small.

    If creationists truly believe volcanic eruptions can explain a young-earth or a flood, they would focus at all volcanic eruptions, not just MSH. They don't.

  • Mount St Helens plays no role in determining the age of the planet and even less of a role on biological evolution. Creationists have constructed an entire house of cards with the 1980 eruption, fooling low-information people into believing something that was never there to begin with.

    Perhaps the most important contribution the eruption made to geology is ability to focus pending volcanic eruptions, giving people time to get out of the way. MSH you might say is saving lives. That's science!

  • I intended to say "forecast" pending volcanic eruptions.

    We have learned that when there is an increase in earthquakes, increase in deformation and an increase in volcanic gases, an eruption is likely and people living at the feet of the volcano had better get out of the way.

    This is all due to real scientists studying Mount St Helens. Creationists do not come anywhere close to this level of contribution, except more misinformation.

  • Wrong!

    Magma rising through the edifice, became trapped by the Summit dome at 9,000 feet, forcing a bulge to develop above the Goat Rocks Dome at 7,000 feet. The resulting cyrptodome grew at a rate of 5 feet per day, resulting with an overburden of 450 feet on May 18, 1980. Sulfer Dioxide and Hydrogen Sulfide, mixing with groundwater, developed sulfuric acid, which chemically altered the surrounding rock to clay. The triggering event was a 5.1 mag earthquake, 1 mile below MSH.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more