Transitional / intermediate

[crochet1949]

May I ask where you live? Country that is. Maybe a better question -- do you watch the world news reports in the evenings?

The number of murders , say, per million population as you were commenting -- guess I don't look at it in that way. Stats like Austin / Chicago , etc. having how many hundreds of murders last year. That's what I 'hear'.

And I pay attention to the illegal population in this country -- those who are Here Not legally. The crime committed by Them. A comment was made that the influx has been going Down. No doubt -- most of them are already Here.

The crime committed from drugs / prostitution / murder / rape , etc, etc. The parts of towns, cities where even the Police don't go into after dark // the rioting that goes on // police being killed // ambushed.

I interpret this kind of activity as civilization Degenerating.

Literacy -- what proportion of the world is -- there are areas in Austin, tx. -- high illiteracy rate but lots of people are content with what little bit of reading English Or Spanish they can achieve. Some years ago I was Trying to work with the Literacy Office -- lots of us were Willing to help adults improve their English, but not much interest.

Yes, this world now has more technology than ever before. How is it Used?

And when a person hears about the terrorist attacks -- the various organizations that claim responsibility for purposely killing as many people as possible through busses or trains or by whatever means.

But this is way off topic.

Referencing Oard's paper -- page 3 "For example, many sedimentary layers were laid down quickly by huge, powerful currents, with little or no sign of erosion between layers.

The paragraphs "The Ice Age affected all the world,....." A lot of that information -- it makes sense to me -- and others might say "What?"
The next page -- second paragraph -- Cooling mechanisms caused by the Flood, in combination with a universally warm ocean, would result in a snow blitz;, or a rapid ice age. -- the rapid ice age caught my attention. That's on page 4.

Are any of my comments making sense?! Sure hope so.

[hughfarey]

I live in the UK, which may be why I have a broader view of the world than many on this site, although Steven Pinker, who accumulated the historical and global data for his idea that the world is better off now than ever before, is American.

However...

Referencing Oard's paper -- page 3 "For example, many sedimentary layers were laid down quickly by huge, powerful currents, with little or no sign of erosion between layers."

There are a few minor local rock formations which may have been laid down as a result of flash floods, landslides and earthquakes, but overwhelmingly the geological strata which cover the earth show very clear signs of very gradual accumulation, mostly at the bottom of continental shelves. The graduations between grain sizes are particularly good indicators of this. And, lying at the bottom of the sea, its hardly surprising there is no erosion of these layers. That occurs when the sea either dries up for one reason or another, or the seabed is lifted above the surface by tectonic drift.

"The Ice Age affected all the world,....." A lot of that information -- it makes sense to me -- and others might say "What?"

Michael Oard knows very well how easy it is to persuade non-scientists of more or less anything with a few carefully selected bits of evidence and by skating over insurmountable difficulties. He is well aware of the insurmountable difficulties, but, being convinced of the conclusion, sincerely hopes that they will be overcome in time. So far, however, 200 years of ever-increasing knowledge of geological processes has not suggested any such probability.

The next page -- second paragraph -- Cooling mechanisms caused by the Flood, in combination with a universally warm ocean, would result in a snow blitz;, or a rapid ice age. -- the rapid ice age caught my attention. That's on page 4.

Yes, in common with many people who try to work from a conclusion backwards, Oard is full of guesses about what would have happened if, without any evidence regarding whether it actually did happen.

Are any of my comments making sense?! Sure hope so.

They're getting clearer!

[Kurieuo]

I live in the UK, which may be why I have a broader view of the world than many on this site,

pommy bastard.

[Philip]

hughfarey wrote: I live in the UK, which may be why I have a broader view of the world than many on this site,

Yep, no arrogance there, none whatsoever!

[hughfarey]

It's what we do...

[bbyrd009]

The crime committed from drugs / prostitution / murder / rape , etc, etc. The parts of towns, cities where even the Police don't go into after dark // the rioting that goes on // police being killed // ambushed.

I interpret this kind of activity as civilization Degenerating.

well, but marginalizing those people--just like how 50% of the world is about to be marginalized, by robots--that do that stuff, removing the same opportunities from them, that your people get, that is ok, right. Making "the war on drugs," and "the war on poverty" into good things, regardless of their dismal failure. Better to maybe recognize that those are manifestations of reaping what we sow, imo.

And then it might further be seen that we are being manipulated, into believing that the earth is "degenerating," even though murder, rape, crime, starvation, all of these, are on the decrease, wildly, actually, but the MSM just plays up what remains, apparently to good effect, if anyone is then led to say "the earth was better before," which is of course not true, the earth is a better place now than it ever has been, by any standard you might care to use, which of course no one ever challenges me on that, but the next day they are back to talking about civilization degenerating, when it is in fact improving every day.

[RickD]

It's what we do...

Many Americans think that the world revolves around America. But Brits know the world revolves around them.

[Audie]

It's what we do...

Many Americans think that the world revolves around America. But Brits know the world revolves around them.

How foolish. It revolves around me.

[crochet1949]

Actually Everything Really revolves around south, central Texas -- just ask all of us who Live here.

[crochet1949]

Actually Everything Really revolves around south, central Texas -- just ask all of us who Live here.

[crochet1949]

Didn't mean to put 'me' in twice. And I'll save 'someone' the trouble of saying -- 'ya, one of you is enough'.

[Audie]

Didn't mean to put 'me' in twice. And I'll save 'someone' the trouble of saying -- 'ya, one of you is enough'.

Yeah? Well I am the center of the Universe.

I tolerate satellites. Sometimes.

[crochet1949]

Didn't mean to put 'me' in twice. And I'll save 'someone' the trouble of saying -- 'ya, one of you is enough'.

Yeah? Well I am the center of the Universe.

I tolerate satellites. Sometimes.

Well -- let's see -- the Universe was Created by God -- so.........

[Audie]

Didn't mean to put 'me' in twice. And I'll save 'someone' the trouble of saying -- 'ya, one of you is enough'.

Yeah? Well I am the center of the Universe.

I tolerate satellites. Sometimes.

Well -- let's see -- the Universe was Created by God -- so.........

Said fact not in evidence is asserted by a religious minority. So...?

[crochet1949]

And every so often -- the religious minority is Right.

I've No problem with Any of the many fields of science. Where would this world be Without scientific discoveries / medicine, electricity, transportation, etc. But occasionally science Does go out on a limb Because science = scientists-- People. Their personal biases -- professional pressures. And, generally speaking, when a person has degrees by their names, it's accepted that Their additional study in a given field allows them to be 'listened to' more than the 'average person' would be. After all They are the ones who've really dug into their particular area of science. So -- we tend to Not question their conclusions. Even when our personal beliefs differ from what the 'experts' state. But Some of us Do question -- and Maybe our 'other perspective' goes in a very Different direction.
So we Try to find a middle ground. Maybe Theistic evolution. It allows God to be in the picture but not in any Major way. Pretty much in the background. But - are we going to be satisfied with That? Not really -- because we Do have the Genesis account of creation. And Then we have Big debates about 'what that means'.
Lots of people fight tooth and nail to discredit God's Word -- it's reliability -- Anything to get 'it' out of the picture.