Complete Creation, 2nd Ed., Part 2 with Wazooloo

[AndyG792]

Ian, you do a fantastic job of explaining and demonstrating the truth of creation.

[odinata]

There is something dumber than an American creationist.

A Canadian creationist....

[MrBrittish]

wow, america has a real problem with creationists. this fat cunt thinks he can talk down lyell

[OtherGonzo]

There's a better definition of "Species" then there is for "Kind"

Can you define "Kind"?

[easymoney4ever]

Lee has a book. The case for christ. Sounds like he is presenting himself as a lawyer straight off. Where as Atheists are sneaky. They like patting themselves on the back for deceiving people. They laugh at how stupid the masses are and how they can minipulate them to gain control over them. They say one thing when the doors are closed and another when the light is on. Evil lies is what you kids are buying into. YOu Call us ignorant, stupid, and use names. Wake up people, youve been lied to.

[easymoney4ever]

I've read what Atheists have said about the polystraits. It's all woven bullcrap from desparate ideologs. They all know it was deposited by flood. They are lying to preserve their only hope. deep time.

[NorthForkFisherman]

@easymoney4ever "giggle' You really are a hoot, aren't cha? Polystrate trees and their formation was figured out over 142 years ago. Did you miss the memo? Of course there was flooding in the past. The same processes that worked then are still at work today. And your little "deep time" crack.....not even worth responding to. But I'll indulge you somewhat...I've got 9 trillion cu meters of salt that needs explaining down in Permian sediments. The Opeche Shale. Can you explain it?

[easymoney4ever]

@NorthForkFisherman Hmm, if a flood happened 45oo or so years ago, my guess would be it got deposited by hydrological sorting. It would be impossible for anyone to prove what was here before the flood, whether God caused it or not. And it was not answered. it was hypothesized only. Disguised as fact maybe but still hypothesis. I know scientists that are doing the experiments to prove hydrological sorting on a global scale. Evolution ended when hubble proved them full of crap.

[NorthForkFisherman]

@easymoney4ever So, what I'm getting from this somewhat rambling response that that you can't explain it, wave your hands around a bit, and invoke the preferred deity of Abrahamic monotheists? That about sum it up? And as far as Hubble, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that. What does the astronomer who discovered that our galaxy is one of many and red-shift have to do with geology? Don't worry about the salt question, I'll explain it to you in depth later.

[easymoney4ever]

@NorthForkFisherman What? You asked me and since no one knows. I hypothesized. You can lay all the data on the table and all you will come up with is an hypothesis. now your hypothesis may seem to you proof, but we are all ignorant of the truth. Even you all knowing hypothesizers. Shame I won't let you get away with acting like something you've learned proves anything. Flood hypothesis came from scientists that have more education than your all knowing self. You do your own homework.

[NorthForkFisherman]

@easymoney4ever You mean that YOU DO NOT KNOW. The evidence is quite clear, mon frere. Remember what I said about salt? Would you like to begin with that, or would you like to look at some pollen data first?

[easymoney4ever]

@NorthForkFisherman no one can explain it. They can only hypothesize. I laid out my hypothesis. You lay out your hypothesis. If you disagree with my hypothesis, then prove it wrong. You can't because no one knows. All I am saying is stop acting like you have proof enough to disparage any view without proof that earns you a right to disparage someone. The difference is I know the difference between assumptipon and fact. You don't have that ability it seems.

[NorthForkFisherman]

@easymoney4ever Now the Salina Salt of the Michigan basin contains at least as much salt as this formation (I'm still reading thru the data for that number) and would therefore require an equvalent amount of heat energy to be released for it to evaporate. And these are but two several hundred known salt deposits. Additionally, the pollen and animal detritus found all indicates deposition in salt pans and evaporative basins. (continued)

[easymoney4ever]

@NorthForkFisherman Why are you paroting? You can read until you are blue in the face. It doesn't change the universal facts. There is no proof, no matter how much you want there to be. All the so called facts of an old earth are woven opinions formed by biased minds to make us all bricks(not enlightenment as they portray).

Their goal is to eliminate the Bible, once the people forget God, they can be our rulers. They are making you a brick while you swallow all they throw at you.

[NorthForkFisherman]

@easymoney4ever The word is "parroting", dear., And it's hardly that. It's called research and understanding what the data means. Critical thinking for the critical hit. I always roll 20s beeyotch. And what universal facts might you be blathering on about? The fact that it requires a heat input to evaporate salt water. I think we've covered that pretty clearly. Do you really have anything more substantial than your veiled threats of "war and brimming with anger"? Can you refute the data or not?

[easymoney4ever]

@NorthForkFisherman I always roll 20s beeyotch. What the hack is that? You correct my spelling and then write that? You are a school girl with all your books right there and not one english book. lol 20's? Yea right. An Atheist with money? lol You people hate capitalism. Every Atheist I know are miserable and poor. Why would you be different. You got a sugar daddy? lol Or maybe you leech like Dawkins. Really. Name an Atheist that produces anything but hatred in the world.

[NorthForkFisherman]

@easymoney4ever It's "heck". And since you are not understanding of the vernacular, why should I waste my time with you? You really are such a blue pill, aren't you? Learn some geek speak, we run the world. Now as far as my question about the salt, according to your response, you apparently cannot refute it. Thank you for ceceding the field to moi. As is there were any doubt of the outcome of this battle of wits. Now, shall we look at some pollen data and watch you flounder to explain it?

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever "An Atheist with money? lol" "... miserable and poor." Goddamn Skeeter, each comment from you is a bigger trainwreck than the last! Bill Gates = Atheist George Soros = Atheist Warren Buffett = Atheist Lance Armstrong = Atheist Douglas Adams = Atheist Though the sheer magnitude of your incompetence is hysterical as you prance around, textually grunting like the mental cripple that you are, here's a tip for ya': *Think*... and *then* pound on your keyboard.

[easymoney4ever]

@NorthForkFisherman Well that fact that we have salt says nothing of where we came from. Well it indicates? or could indicate? No matter what paper you read from an Atheist that sounds good , you can always find their want of things gets morphed into facts. We got a bookworm that is believing everything she reads as truth. You have faith in the data's interpretation. The data can be interpreted many ways. Now if they blackball all views but evolution, all you get are one sided STORIES.

[NorthForkFisherman]

@easymoney4ever Of course, none of this matters with out data to back it up: Wilgus, Cheryl K. and William T. Holser, 1984. "Marine and Nonmarine Salts of Western Interior, United States," AAPG Bulletin. p. 765-766, and for the chemistry info, feel free to refer to any college chemistry text. It'll have all the table for heat of formation and evaporative processes. This is what happens when you really look at the evidence. It's overwhelming. And this is just one line of data. Pollen next?

[easymoney4ever]

@NorthForkFisherman Sure, as long as they can bring something to the world from their understanding. But to endlessly waste our money lying to kids about what is fact and what is assumed is a crime against humanity. And there will be a war if they don't stop indoctrinating our children and telling them evolution is fact when they know right well it isn't. Then you come here pasting these opinions disguised as facts. Word is out, the world is brimming with anger over this.

[101rstr]

Right on as usual Ian!

I hope that these Complete Creation videos help people to see the truth that biblical Christianity is the only worldview that doesn't destroy itself when applied to itself.

[TheMindMathematical]

...Ok I'm going to stop watching. This guy is not smart at all.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheMindMathematical Thanks for the enlightenment. And how do you know he lied about his mensa membership? That won't even make sense to the mathematical mind.

[steelcatena]

This guy doesn't know what he is talking about, Nicolas Steno never killed himself! That's a shameless lie, I certainly hope you didn't lie about other stuff as well, because if that's how you conduct research than nothing you say can be trusted.

[steelcatena]

Also: Steno's questioning mind also influenced his religious views. Having been brought up in the Lutheran faith, he nevertheless questioned its teachings,something which became a burning issue when confronted with Roman Catholicism while studying in Florence. After making comparative theological studies, including reading the Church Fathers and by using his natural observational skills,he decided that Catholicism,rather than Lutheranism,provided more sustenance for his constant inquisitiveness.

[ushouldbelieve]

What is your authority or source? How do you know it to be true? Easy for you to say... do you have a lecture you have recorded that does a better job? This post modern era's thinking is upside down and you seem to have bought into it. Sorry.

[steelcatena]

My authority? Don't turn it around now, the question is what is his authority or source? I did not say Steno killed himself. It is also wiedely known that Steno didn't do anything of the like, so when he says Steno did this and that it is also his responsibillity to back it up with facts and tell us where he got the Input from. He has to choose if he wants to fight evolutionists or catholics, because if he intends to do both at the same time he is going to fail miserably.

[easymoney4ever]

@steelcatena Funny you should say that. Evolutionists have been doing just what accused Juby of. Imagine that. Well the guy who headed the Genome project was a creationist. Maybe you believe the people you want to believe? And maybe you shouldn't call people liars when the hypothesis you bandy about was formed on a lie from a liar. And hasn't been rectified yet. Maybe you are barking up the wrong tree.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

"the guy who headed the Genome project was a creationist."

You've been corrected on this bullshit elsewhere.

The fact that you continue to repeat it makes you not mistaken, but a liar.

Francis Collins is the name of the man you continue to drag through the mud.

He is a Christian.

He is also fully accepting of the Earth's age *and* Darwinian evolution, more understanding of the molecular evidence for common ancestry than *you* can ever hope to be.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead we are mocked for believing in a magic fairy, He believes the magic fairy made life through evolutionary process. So why don't you call him names and mock him, is he not reasonable? My stand is that we were created. From there we need to figure out how. No matter how much you know, evolution is only hypothesis. the question of God has nothing to do with finding proof of the hypothesis. That fact that some creationists believe in evolution comes from the conflict with the Bible.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

In your staggeringly inept and dishonest rush to take the opportunity to pile *more* lies on top of lies already articulated here, you seem to have stumble-fucked right past my question yo you:

Are you going to provide a citation for the words that you attributed to Charles Lyell, "[I]f I can show the earth is older than 10 thousand years, I will disprove the Bible without ever saying that was my intension [sic]"

Or do you by default concede that you are, in fact, a slimy liar?

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead Ok. Lyell's sister published some of his letters. As he was a lawyer, he was sure he could disprove the Bible. So he set out to make his own history. Darwin had his book.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

"Ok. Lyell's sister published some..."

Lyell's *Sister-in-Law*, Katherine Lyell, edited a double-volume set entitled "Life, Letters and Journals of Sir Charles Lyell"... which does not contain the quote you've attributed to him.

I have both volumes in electronic form, as well as printed form.

You have boasted repeatedly about your I.Q. of "138";

Do you have the ability to provide me with a proper (meaning title, pg number, year, etc), verifiable citation for the quote...

or not?

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead I don't need to provide you with something you already have. He was a lying lawyer. For you to read them and not know it makes you a liar. He set out to disprove the Bible. That was his motivation, and he set out to hide it. He was not in it for truth. Nor are you. You can pick apart his words all you want deceiver. He was out to deceive from the getgo just like you are doing. Go ahead post his quotes. I dare you. Then if you selectivley post as you will. I'll show whatyou missed

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

You sound like an 8 yr old caught in a lie, whimpering "I don't need to..."

You *won't* provide a source because you *can't* provide a source. It's just that fuckin' simple. If Lyell *had* ever said such a thing, you'd be all too happy give verifiable evidence. As I've pointed out numerous times on other vids, you are a liar. Again, it's just that simple.

And what's the only defense you're capable of mustering when called on your bullshit...?

You point at everyone under the sun

[TheHatefulDead]

You've repeatedly been shown as a liar; all too happy to spin one more lie to cover the last lie.

There's nothing honest or honorable about you.

Grace and dignity are alien concepts to you and your ilk.

As Francis Collins himself noted, it is sickening & despicable liars such as yourself that is sounding the death knell for Christianity, turning people away by the *droves*.

You offensively ignorant Liars for Jesus will be the death of Christianity...

*YOU* create more atheists than I ever could.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead Ah you admit you have an alterior motive. That is axactly how I feel about Atheists. The number 1 killer on man in the history of the world. So get off your high horse and admit the man you mock(he is historical now), did more for the world then all of the murdering atheists combined. All people have to do is read your reply's. You state an opinion elevate it to fact and call people names. God help us if you ever get power. Oh no, Your people do have the power. Proof? broke world

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

3)

"You state an opinion elevate it to fact"

Fact: Francis Collins *REJECTS* Creationism *AND* Intelligent Design, saying: "Creationism has done more harm to serious notions of belief than anything in modern history" & "I'm not an advocate of intelligent design"

Fact: Collins *accepts* that the universe is about 14 billion yrs old, & that the earth is 4.5 billion yrs old.

Fact: Collins accepts that no special supernatural intervention was required in the evolution of life.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

FACT: Collins not only *accepts* evolution as the explanation for Earth's biodiversity, he actively *contributes* to our understanding of evolution; saying: "the evidence that comes out of [genetics] is overwhelmingly in favor of a single origin of life from which various forms were then derived by a process which seems entirely consistent with Darwin's view of natural selection."

So yeah, sure... Collins "is a creationist"

To exactly the same degree that you're an atheist

Idiot.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead You guys are so deluded. I came here with you folks calling people liars. Lyell is a liar. Then you folks defended him and then you were called ignorant or liars. The lies were here before I arrived. I know I don't lie. I may be wrong but I know the Atheist got caught too much for me to trust any of them. But I am glad you support a creationist. So now that you admit creation is legitimate. We can discuss how. Alien or supior being, or we could have done it ourselves, long ago

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

1)

"I know I don't lie... I am glad you support a creationist. So now that you admit creation is legitimate..."

You can't even pound out a denial of being a liar without sliding in *MORE* lies.

You've shown conclusively, time and again, that you're unable to *not* lie.

Every comment that you post is a testament to your disdain & low regard for honest & thoughtful discourse.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

2)

Anyone that you disagree with you call either "ignorant or a liar"; then you whine like a bitch standing in a puddle of piss when like is returned for like, "Oh, you're so mean to me"!

You arrogantly prance about parading your abysmal ignorance with no defense of it but an abject lack of understanding, intelligence or scruples & a 2nd rate regurgitation of AiG talking points...

Fuck You.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead regurgitate? I give my opinion and claim it to be my opinion. You regurgitate over and over and over. All you do is regurgitae. You are a mean little spirit that hides behind the anonymity of a pc. Your Atheist PHILOSOPHY has made you that way and it is obvious for all to see. And when all is said and done, you are no closer to proof you profess. You are either ignorant or a liar. I always say that to respond to know it alls. This all started by Ian being called a liar, remember?

[easymoney4ever]

@easymoney4ever All the evil spirits were showing long before I got here. You Atheists were calling Ian stupid, liar, ingnorant, and a host of hostile slurs. I give a little piece back to you dog turds and you whine like a little girl, and start acting all bad on a pc. Man it is exactly how the commies are. We must reeducate the ignorant. And it shows in all your personalities. I bet the people around you don't know who you really are. But we on youtube do, don't we?

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

"I give a little piece back to you dog turds and you whine like a little girl"

Really?

That's your retort?

The textual equivalent of, "I know you are, what am I"?

Damn sparky, for a tuber your debating skills are truly formidable...

I'll bet you're the hero of every 8yr old in your trailer park.

"You Atheists were calling Ian stupid..."

I would point out, however, that *not one* of my comments have been directed at Ian's incompetence... yet.

Nor have I touched upon 'philosophy'

[TheHatefulDead]

Why would I attempt to tackle something as abstruse as the subtleties of philosophy with someone so undiscerning as to confuse demonstrably observable *facts* with wishful thinking?

"I know the difference between assumptipon [sic] and fact."

No you don't. You don't know the difference between a creationist & an 'evolutionist': "some creationists believe in evolution"

You don't know the difference between logic & rampant idiocy: "we could have done it (creation) ourselves, long ago"

[TheHatefulDead]

And, you damn sure don't know honesty.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead Foul mouthed huiman being, you can't even control your tongue you are so closed minded. Variation is fact. To suppose beyond that is hypothesis and needs to be proved and has not. Look at your screen name. Atheist are hateful, you are proof. Evolution is dead, they have no proof.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead Trailer park? I am a capitalist my man. I got pleny of money. You are the poor one all bitter at life on earth. You learned this crap from poor bitter people who produce nothing. They leech just like you. That is why you Atheists run around all foul mouthed and arrogant. Your brokeness led to your Atheism and bitterness. I can't help it you believe everything your masters tell you to read. Maybe you should stop buying it hook line and sinker. You call us sheep? lol

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

"You call us sheep? lol"

I *never* called you a sheep, you blithering fuckwit.

You call yourselves sheep.

*Proudly*, you call *yourselves* sheep.

"Look at your screen name. Atheist are hateful, you are proof."

Really?

Look at your screen name. You are a liar, and your comments are proof.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead Your Atheists idols are always saying things like that. Atheists are running around now whispering how they have to rid the world of it's useless populations, so only the top 500,000.000 will be preserved. You only seem to want everyone else to be the liars you folks are. Atheists are liars by proxy. Amoral in that the ends justify the means. Lyell was a snake you support, no more. A trained deceiver. Like you maybe.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

In case that isn't *clear* enough for your fermented brain to process, try to digest the following:

"Creationism has done more harm to serious notions of belief than anything in modern history"

- Francis Collins, Fmr Head Human Genome Project and *Current* Director of the National Institutes of Health

This, of course, showing that Collins is a *REAL* scientist...

and *you* are just another 'Liar for Jebus'.

It also answers the question you left on my channel...

fucktard.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead lol Creationism built the world you Atheists keep destroying. All founding sciences progressed directly due to creationists ability to do real search for knowledge work, and you Atheists keep saying we prevent advancement. And your brilliant philosophy leads you to name calling? What a crock. You are a know it all sir. You should not be so sure of yourself, lest your mind be shut.

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead He was a creationist. lol No matter how much you try, he is still a creationist. He agrees with me that we were created. Not you. me. lol Mean spirited name caller needs a spanking. :) Don't be angry with me cause lyell was a lying lawyer.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

"He agrees with me... Not you. me. lol"

What a sickeningly pathetic child you are. You "lol" like some prissy 16 yr old grl, nervously hoping to lighten that which would offend any honest man.

>The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that<

-Francis Collins

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

"some creationists believe in evolution"

You are not only completely at ease with lying, you are demonstrably stupid as a bag of shit.

Yeah, he not only *accepts* evolution, he is an active geneticist who adds to our knowledge of evolution...

but, to you, he's "a creationist". You don't have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about.

Amazingly, you think that if you call an ostrich a box turtle...

that will make it a fuckin' box turtle.

You are astounding in your stupidity.

[NorthForkFisherman]

@easymoney4ever "cause lyell was a lying lawyer"? What's the primary occupation for the most widely known creationists.......(like Lee Strobel, Master of Studies in Law)?

[easymoney4ever]

@TheHatefulDead Atheism is evil. it has a death list unsurpassed. I don't like the way you talk to people. You are a mean spirit. You call me trailer park? lol There is nothing wrong with trailer park people. People like you is what is wrong with the world. You always accuse people of stupidity. Maybe you should read some other books. Anyone who insults an inferior mind is a bad person. You call retarded people names too? Get the point genius? What do you produce? oh, your an Atheist! You leech.

[magick205]

@12:18 Ouch or Amen? My ass. Genesis was written not as a literal fact but as a metaphor, an attempt to explain what earlier peoples had no way of understanding with a pre-literate low-tech cutlure. Two say that there are only two interpretations does a great disservice to those who actually lived and wrote it as well as all those who work in the sciences today. No flood. Period. Reynolds number calculations for shales and their constituent particles show that quite clearly.

[Daytimeofnight]

The logic in this video is so bad. Geologists do not claim that every single inch of sediment took millions of years to accumulate. Of course there are mudslides, local floods, etc. And geologists have no trouble explaining polystrate trees. Layers of sediment can take a long time to harden. Meanwhile, dead trees can fall into the bog/soft earth and sink down through the soft layers of sediment. Viola, a polystrate tree.

[magick205]

@Daytimeofnight: It's not the fact that this guy is lying or at the very least greatly misrepresenting the data. It's the fact that so many believe it uncritically because it supports their preconceptions. That and the fact is just spen over an hour on this and the previous one. One more to go.

[easymoney4ever]

@magick205 What it does for us is contest the so called unified view that has no counter part. It gives us another side of the story. Story yes. evolutionists have no proof. So we see both sides and make a choice. You Atheist want to ram your ideology down our throats and call it truth. Now all we get are one sided views, not answers to universal truths. Ian is but the beginning of balance.

[wILLiamking777]

ian juby may god bless you brother thank you for you're work.

[qwuad61]

great video ian,it was nice having you in cape breton and look forward to seeing you again hopefully we will get to the beach at low tide next time. p.s the tent I will take back to walmart lol.

[edensmama27]

Great Evidence that I had never heard referenced!!!! Thank you and God Bless!!

[blackblackheart1988]

Hey, ths guy taught me. he is a reat uy and what he says makes more sence then huans coming from aliens or apes. YOU GO JUBY1!!

[kp13822]

The explanation for the uprite trees at the Joggins Fossil Cliffs is ot early as outrageous as this guy claims. Take this guys explanations with a grain of salt. RESEARCH IT!

[easymoney4ever]

@kp13822 What? no answer from the all knowing? 

[Bowlfulosoul]

If god made this stupid fuck, he definitely made some awful flaws. Didn't he?

[KnowledgeAddicted]

u know what totally gave me a goosebumps?

Those dissapearing footprints of a dino. DAMN!!!

The very moment captured!!! it was just plain AWESOME.

[wazooloo]

The trees are stipped of branches, roots and bark. The tree rings don't match. But I'm happy to hear your argument here - what's the "eocene" strata volcanoes got to do with it?

If the roots are gone, how can they be in situ? Every single polystrate deposit I've studied is the same: roots and branches have been stripped off. At Joggins, there's even some stumps buried upside down.

So how can you say they're in situ?

[lawilson200]

You really have not kept up to date with Spcimen Ridge have you? This is not surpising coming from a guy who cannot distinguish between shale and sandstone.

Ralatech found parasoils and root systems all along Specimen Ridge. Frtiz also found roots in many of the fossilized trees.

Just where did you go to geology school at?

[Science4God]

About the tree roots...Why is there evidence of roots broken off on at least some, or many trees at Specimen Ridge? Did they grow where they are buried? Just because some MAY have roots means nothing...trees can be ripped up with roots still attached and redeposited...I have photos to prove this...

[lawilson200]

Specimen Ridge is one of about a dozen sites in Yellowstone where petrified trees are found, each are in close proximity to ancient stratovolcanoes that were active 50 my to about 30 my. Out of all of the sites, Specimen Ridge is perhaps the best known and subject to the most study.

The first geological study was performed by WH Holmes during the 1870's (I have the report) and during the mid-20th, Dorf expanded on the work.

[lawilson200]

Specimen Ridge has interest to YECers though because Holmes and Dorf declared the trees were buried in place over the span of 20,000 years and a former Seven Day Adventist turned agnostic Ronald Numbers (who wrote a good book on the history of creationism in the US) cites Specimen Ridge for his reason for finally rejcting the YEC version of events.

During the 1970's Coffin and several other members of the Seventh Day Adventist Church focused on Specimen Ridge.

[Science4God]

I see you, lawilson200, didn't answer my questions...

[lawilson200]

Sorry for the long answer, but that is the problem when you are limited to 500 characters at a time.

[lawilson200]

In 1979, Coffin published a paper declaring that Specimen Ridge trees were floated to the location. A year later Mount St Helens erupted and suddenly, the trees blown into Spirit Lake became an analogy to compare with Specimen Ridge.

However, Fritz (a former member of the SDA) also studied Specimen Ridge and found that while many of the trees were tranported by mudflows, again using MSH for his comparisson, most of the trees were buried in place (agreeing with Dorf and Holmes).

[lawilson200]

This was followed by two additional geologists, who found root systems and ancient soils.

So after this long entry, the fact is most of the trees were buried in place and some trees were transported from higher elevations.

At the root of all of this was Mount St Helens, but Coffin looked at the wrong place. He should had looked at the South Fork of the Toutle River.

[Science4God]

I appreciate your historical approach...I would like to see the photos and analysis of the paleosols. I've seen a number of paleosols that just plain are not paleosols. Stating something is a paleosol does not make it so. I'd appreciate any suggestions to track down this research. Thanks.

[lawilson200]

Yellowstone fossil forests: New evidence for burial in place," Richard F. Yuretich, Geology, Volume 12, Issue 3 (March 1984) pp. 159--162

[Science4God]

Thanks, I will take a look at this. As far as paleosols at Specimen Ridge, I'm assuming one of the things they document is smectite in the layer below the trees? You do know, of coarse, that smectite can also be a result of the weathering of volcanic ash (which of coarse was THE major reason these trees were preserved at this location - volcanic activity)... If this is their evidence (and I will see) it really wouldn't impress me that much. I will give a more detailed comment later.

[lawilson200]

Have fun trying. You should know that according to my sources with the NPS at Yellowstone, there has not been any serious research conducted at Specimen Ridge since 1986. While I do not have my entire file on this subject handy, there is about 6 really good and well documented studies on this subject and corallery studies performed at Mount St Helens by David Yammaguchi.

My advice is to check with Geo-Ref.

[Prophetes]

Great Lecture

[lawilson200]

I have always found it amazing how YEC numbnuts seem to forget that geological study has advanced over the past 180 years since Lyell (and Lyell was not the one who originated the law of uniformity, that honor goes to Hutton). To fault Lyell (Hutton) for errors is like faulting Newton for failing to explain matter and energy with his theory of gravity. This guy is being dishonest!

[wazooloo]

I can't help but notice that you didn't attempt to show where I was in error, but instead resorted to false accusations. Could it be that it's because you know that I'm right? Lyell took Hutton's ideas and ran with them; Hutton was merely the one to suggest layers were formed over long periods of time. Lyell was the one to develop the uniformitarian principles.

By falsely accusing others of being dishonest, you are the one being dishonest.

[lawilson200]

I standby my statement. Your use of uniformity to characterize the in situ petrified forest located at Joggins Cliff to "debunk" gradualism is a prime case of your dishonesty. Even Lyell recognized the trees at Joggins were buried in place through a process of localized flooding, which buried, but did not necessary kill the trees. There has not been a controversy at Joggins since the 1850's. Lyell was a strong advocate of gradualism, but he never did rule out localized catastrophism.

[wazooloo]

I've spent hundreds of hours at Joggins, you obviously haven't spent any time there, as your comments betray you. There are roots and rootlets stripped from stumps, the ones that have both show negative geotropism. Furthermore, in future Complete creation videos I'll continue to show why your claims here are falsified; parrallel layers, post-burial bending of the plants, extent of the layers, etc...

It always amazes me how quickly anti-creationists whip out the accusation of deceitfulness.

[lawilson200]

ou finally found something correct. I have not spent anytime at Joggins. But, I do know how a look up an actual peer reviewed study on geo-ref when I need to.

As for your last comment, I am not the one lying in the name of Jesus.

By the way, I have noticed that you did not respond specifically to my comments. Care to try again?

[wazooloo]

Which specific arguments did I not reply to? Secondly, you're bringing up arguments I answer in the other 15+ videos in queue (part 3 will be posted tonight), so I'm not going to respond on a text message when I'm already going to blast your arguments into oblivion in future videos.

[lawilson200]

I wrote that even Lyell recognized Joggins as a product of localized flooding (if you did read PoG, Lyell never discounted catastrophic processes completely). I noticed you had no response. Care to try again?

[wazooloo]

Ah. I did answer, but in fairness, I wasn't very clear; I will be addressing that more specifically in video 4 or 5; there is no time gap between the layers; the entire formation was deposited rapidly, and then tilted when the plants were still green and soft, bending them in unison on the layers.

[lawilson200]

In the end though, as you are perhaps fully aware, gradualism was abandoned decades ago, replaced by actualism. The present remains the key to the past, be geologists today recognize that nature is far more complex then the slow changes observed by Hutton's and Lyell's European Countryside.

Failure to mention actualism, is just another example of your dishonesty.

[wazooloo]

The present cannot be the key to the past, as you will see in the next videos. I also deal with actualism later on, although I don't call it that, I refer to it as "the New catastrophism" as Ager put it.

I already presented some evidence that demans a global flood, and strangely, you have ignored it. Instead, you continue to hurl personal attacks; could it be because you know I'm right and have no response to the evidence I presented? I think so!

Well, rail on - you only prove my case.

[lawilson200]

All you managed to accomplish is to formulate a string of straw man arguments, the apparence of falsification of which, we are somehow suppose to draw the conclusion that some global flood is the real answer. This is a common YECer tactic. It is not evidence.

[wazooloo]

Actually, it is powerful evidence that you have no response to.

[lawilson200]

Straw man arguments is not evidence. Instead, straw man arguments is a logical faclicy (not to mention dishonest).

By exposing your claims on Joggins Cliff (which you have not replied on), I believe it is unneccessary to waste time to respond to each of your other points. You have already demonstrated your lack of worth and dishoesty.

[wazooloo]

I did answer - you ignored it. Roots and rootlets have been stripped off of some of the stumps. This is evidence of in-situ growth?

Secondly, I deal with this in more detail in a future video. Your continual diatribe of "deceit" and "dishonesty" is simply false because I am responding to your false claims in a future video.

[lawilson200]

In some cases yes. As what one would expect from a localized flood (see Specimen Ridge).

As for your second paragraph - bring it on!

[biggbaddjohn]

If I didn't know better law200, i'd sware you were just a plain jack-ass

[lawilson200]

I like to think of myself as a pain in the ass, thank you.

[lawilson200]

But let's talk about evidence. In Eastern Oregon, you will find the John Day Fossil Beds, where you find wonderfully preserved, many species of mammals from the Miocene and Oligocene. These animals were largely buried by various pyroclastic flows that covered the region from nearby volcanic vent centers.

Which part is pre-flood, flood and post-flood using your model. If you claim Noah's Flood is a "science" then I should find a predicative element to it. So, please explain.

[wazooloo]

Actually, I've driven through there, but haven't studied that area yet. I'd suggest trying to nail down something we've both studied to debate that, but I'm too busy editing the videos which respond to most of the arguments you've thrown out here. I'm not going to sit here and reinvent the wheel, posting replies to your comments I've answered in the video series. Maybe in the future we could organize a video debate on youtube?

[lawilson200]

Okay. Let's talk about the Channeled Scablands of Eastern Washington. I belive you and I can agree that this region was carved from glacial floods. Near the Grand Coulee Dam, you will find Columbia River Basalt overlying Granite. The CRB is columnar jointed. Tell me. Which part was laid down during the flood and which part is post flood.

If the region was covered during the flood, why don't I find much evidence of pillow lavas in the CRB?

[wazooloo]

Open your eyes! I've got photos of TONS of pillow basalts in that area, not to mention some pillows on the same level as vertical jointing, and other pillows actually forming vertical jointing.

[lawilson200]

Yes, there are some pillow lavas in localized areas like my favorite town of Starbuck, Washington. But, the bulk of the CRB from Eastern Oregon and Washington to the Coast is columnar jointed. Therefore, the region wasn't covered in water 17 mya when the faults were active. If the CRB is only a few thousand years, then you have other problems (like how did the CRB reach the coast if the Cascade Range was already there?). So far, I see no evidence of a flood.

[wazooloo]

What? I never claimed the Cascade range was there - I think there's ample evidence (which again, future videos) that the Rockies rose from the west to the east. I cite Walt Brown's hydroplate model as explaining both the CRB and the mountains. Also, apparently you missed my point: pillows are found right beside vertical columnar basalts - meaning BOTH were in the water. Fast-flowing lavas underwater don't necessarily produce pillows. Did you not know this?

[lawilson200]

This is funny, coming from a guy who cannot tell the difference between Tapeats Sandstone and Hermit Shale in the Grand Canyon.

This is the probelm when you try to shoehorn 140 mya of geology into a one year time frame. I can always find places that does not neatly fit into the little flood model that you proposed.

Give it up, you are not fooling anyone now!

[lawilson200]

Late response-Yes in fact I did (there is a perfect example near The Dalles, Oregon), but no you are wrong, both were not in water. Basalt behaves differently in a water environment then on the surface. There in some cases hundreds of individual basalt flows, at The Dalles, early basalt flows entered into a large lake (forming pillow lavas). When later basalt flows arrived, the lake was gone, leaving regular columnar jointing.

All of this defeats Noah's Flood as a science!

[lawilson200]

If the CRB example is not good enough, how about Specimen Ridge at Yellowstone?

Here again, you have in situ trees of Eocene in age. Coffin attempted to claim these trees were floated in by the flood waters and then buried by an erupting Yellowstone. What he ignored was the nearby Absaroka Range, which during the Eocene were stratovolcanoes. Are you familiar enough with this location to address?

[easymoney4ever]

@lawilson200 Lyle quote. "if I can show the earth is older than 10 thousand years, I will disprove the Bible without ever saying that was my intension". Dishonest? You people have the market cornered on dishonesty. After all, will you be consistant In calling an admitted liar that was given credibility, and has yet to have Atheists admit or pointed it out? No, you will ignore it so you can retain your lies. This man believes what he says. But Atheist are aloud to bear false witness huh?

[lawilson200]

@easymoney4ever - I do enjoy visiting old postings. Seriously, why do you even bother interjecting yourself into something that was long over 2 years ago? However, your point makes little sense, It suggest a degree of agnsts and personal issues that your might be dealing in your life. But, that's okay! I hear there have been wonderful advances with medication that might help you with your problem.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

"Lyle quote..."

Really? Wow! Are you going to properly *cite* that 'quote'...?

Or , can we go ahead and use it as yet *another* example of your feeling compelled to make shit up in support of your made up 'creationism', itself made up to support your "Holy Book", itself made up to herd fucktards like you...

You know, all this lying to cover the lies that you told to cover the other lies that you told...

well. that makes the Baby Jebus cry.

[TheHatefulDead]

@easymoney4ever

BTW...

Charles Lyell was, like Francis Collins, a devout Christian...

you despicable piece of foul shit.

[easymoney4ever]

@lawilson200 but lyle was the first liar outed by admitting it himself. So he had motive to fudge the numbers. His 15 minutes. All deceptive from word 1. And they still need his lies to keep the faked fact.

[lawilson200]

@easymoney4ever - You cannot even spell L-y-e-l-l correctly. Go bother someone else.

[meinaim]

man, you are good and telling the truth.

Amen

[bhoidas]

Ian Juby really knows his stuff and he presents it in a very creative manner. He deals in facts not fiction. It's time that the public realizes that educators and many scientists are trying to shove limited theories from over 150 years ago that have never been proved. Ian deals in faxts not fiction.

Bill Hoidas

[galileanED]

Excellent expose' of the work, motivations, and mistakes of Sir Charles. Thanks for taking the time to pull this video together.