Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

REGARDING THE GRAND CANYON

1. We know what to expect of a sudden massive flood, namely:
a wide, relatively shallow bed, not a deep, sinuous river channel.
anastamosing channels (i.e., a braided river system), not a single, well-developed channel.
coarse-grained sediments, including boulders and gravel, on the floor of the canyon.
streamlined relict islands.

2. The Scablands in Washington state were produced by such a flood and show such features (Allen et al. 1986; Baker 1978; Bretz 1969; Waitt 1985). Such features are also seen on Mars at Kasei Vallis and Ares Vallis (Baker 1978; NASA Quest n.d.). They do not appear in the Grand Canyon. Compare relief maps of the two areas to see for yourself.

3. The same flood that was supposed to carve the Grand Canyon was also supposed to lay down the miles of sediment (and a few lava flows) from which the canyon is carved. A single flood cannot do both. Creationists claim that the year of the Flood included several geological events, but that still stretches credulity.

4. The Grand Canyon contains some major meanders. Upstream of the Grand Canyon, the San Juan River (around Gooseneck State Park, southeast Utah) has some of the most extreme meandering imaginable. The canyon is 1,000 feet high, with the river flowing five miles while progressing one mile as the crow flies (American Southwest n.d.). There is no way a single massive flood could carve this.

5. Recent flood sediments would be unconsolidated. If the Grand Canyon were carved in unconsolidated sediments, the sides of the canyon would show obvious slumping.

6. The inner canyon is carved into the strongly metamorphosed sediments of the Vishnu Group, which are separated by an angular unconformity from the overlying sedimentary rocks, and also in the Zoroaster Granite, which intrudes the Vishnu Group. These rocks, by all accounts, would have been quite hard before the Flood began.

7. Along the Grand Canyon are tributaries, which are as deep as the Grand Canyon itself. These tributaries are roughly perpendicular to the main canyon. A sudden massive flood would not produce such a pattern.

8. Sediment from the Colorado River has been shifted northward over the years by movement along the San Andreas and related faults (Winker and Kidwell 1986). Such movement of the delta sediment would not occur if the canyon were carved as a single event.

9. The lakes that Austin proposed as the source for the carving floodwaters are not large compared with the Grand Canyon itself. The flood would have to remove more material than the floodwaters themselves.

10. If a brief interlude of rushing water produced the Grand Canyon, there should be many more such canyons. Why are there not other grand canyons surrounding all the margins of all continents?

11. There is a perfectly satisfactory gradual explanation for the formation of the Grand Canyon that avoids all these problems. Sediments deposited about two billion years ago were metamorphosed and intruded by granite to become today's basement layers. Other sediments were deposited in the late Proterozoic and were subsequently folded, faulted, and eroded. More sediments were deposited in the Paleozoic and Mesozoic, with a period of erosion in between. The Colorado Plateau started rising gradually about seventy million years ago. As it rose, existing rivers deepened, carving through the previous sediments (Harris and Kiver 1985, 273-282)

______
Ive got a nice compilation of geological facts on many Creationist "arguments". Ya see, you are from a long line of folks who try to make the same cases without doing any research to find out real answers. Instead you just blurt out the "A Worldwide Flood did it"
And that has been scientifically disproven by statements like the above. Ive got more just about the Grand Canyon, let alone any oter geological areas of interest.

Farmerman ...we all know that there has been books and books written giving one interpretation of what is HOPED happened based upon a secularist SALESMAN’s view point, that much is FACT, I totally agree.These salesmen can be pretty convincing can’t they.I am merely pointing out that there are other just as convincing and in many cases more convincing evidences that support the biblical view of how events transpired.The kids and adults for that matter should read up on it before they make up their minds.Red blood cells and skin tissue on dinosaur bones....come on!!! the secular scientist salesmen may have convincing fairy stories for some but not for others.These creatures were around in our recent history.Get real.

So then, there are spectators and players there are buyers and sellers as well.

you talk about the esxitnce of convincing evidence to support your worldview but you never present anything thats evidence.

"Fossil fish on mountain tops" has not been the sales pitch of valid science since Leonardo first posed it and speculated how the earth "must hve moved in many wondrous layers".Its a conclusion that has only been developd by th evidence Ive been presenting. You really are ignorant of what goes into the scientific theories.
The Flood STory, though romantic , is hardly supported by anything valid. Ive only given you a teeny amount of the evidence that geology ha been able to compile just on this rather minor aspect of earth's history which supports the "Stages" in which evolution occurs.
ALL these pieces of evidence have been studied very hard in field and lab not just for academic interests but for hard economic reasons.
EG Many of these rock units of the Colorado Plateau act a resrvoirs for water , oil, and as storage units for radioactive minrals that ere deposited in collective dune deposits and in ancient lake deposits (lakes that lie in large open range areas during each ice ages.


Lots of money has been spent to understand th geology and hydrogeology of the west (and of the East) All this money is spent expecting returns ferreted out by pinpointing the nature and physics and ages of rocks. Even the old prospectors recognized that heavy minerals were located in Quartz deposits that seemed to cut into and crack the surrounding country sediments andold igneous rocks like a gold filled fluid

In my career in exploration geology and teaching it to a generation of new geologists. Ive seen the science really "Tighten up" mostly due to technology developed during WWII to find buried armaments on land and submarines in oceans. Also, the tricks of aerial magnetometry and resistivity have turned oil discovery from a 50/50 proposition to a science of over 97% accuracy.

To deny the facts and evidence of science youd also have to deny the science and engineering behind
1Microwave Ovens

2Nuclear Power and weapons

3mass spectroscopy and gas chromatography used in chemistry an medicine, the "bending of light " due to a masses chemical makeup

4 evidence in genetics about how things can change with tiny changes in their genomes. This has been much of the bases of learning about the novel covid-19)

5 Multispecral analyses and things like LIDAR

6Cell and satnav phones and their use of relativistic operation

When someone denies the conclusions derived via technology, In my mind you deny the technology as well. The evidence WORKS (as Richard Dawkins once said when he was arguing with some English Creationist). When Creationists say that their "evidence" comports with the world as it i, thats mere ignorance speaking. I find that many Creationists Ive debated in Community programs arent stupid, they are quite passionate and go long ways to create these pockets of explanations to make them feel they have some cred. (tuff like "polystrate Fossil trees", The Paluxey Footprints, Fossilized hammers in coal mines. C14 testing of Cretaceous fossils, "Irreducible Complexity" etc etc. Theyve found as many means to explain their beliefs (ALMOST ALL are evidence-free though). If they didnt have IDers on their side to at lest accept the fact that evolution does occur but "under planning and direct construction management of a "Higher power"), they would be completely dispossessed of any credibility at all. Theyre not dumb, they are just fully ignorant about what science is about.


Its all been debated I knowand as I said before, you guys dont seem to come up with any new findings, youre still arguing 80 to 100 yer old stuff. Meanwhile science has cracked the genome, been able to document "Intermediate fossils" by the thousands . The actual intermediate fossils of entire Orders of animals (like whales and hominiMs). Weve also had a revolution in the 1970's about how the land moves on the planets surface and ho mountains are built and their lives.

And we still wak up in ignorance every day to trundle off to our jobs investigating (or applyig the results) to our planets history.

We dont need to make **** up to try to force fit some old religious dogma.It seems that the Creationist Fundamental sects are getting smaller and smaller in their "flocks"

Its even a bit laughable how major universities dont accept transfer credits from students who come from unaccredited colleges. (Accreditation regions wont accredit college courses that are somehow a bit sketchy in the sciences)
Youll never see a big geology program or evolution science program in many of the Fundamentalist College. They offer biology programs but they are usually technician or nursing level without "theory" and genetics or disease ecology and macro evolution.

We dont use salesmen, we try for evidence whether it supports a hypothesis or not. Salesmen are only use when you have nothing to back you up.
Yourve still avoided any real evidence .

Oh yeh, "Fih on mt tops" The Appalachian mountains are like a pile of rugs that have been folded and rolled so their are actual rug layers. Think about some 400 million yer old rug at the bottom of the pile has been rolled up and then someone has gone over the top of the collective pile and shved it all flat. Wed see a layer of the bottom rug apparently at the edge of the tops of the pile. Weve got layers of fish fossils in the anticlines and synclines of the Appalachians. We actually can see the older layers (containing fish of an early age) on a mountain top the famous 20ft bone headed Silurian fish called Dunkelosteyus was discovered that way from road cuts in a new Pa Highway.

The farmer is getting better at cut 'n paste!

I don’t deny science at all.There is nothing wrong with science.Some science is bad science though and there are alternative explanations for the same evidence.I am merely highlighting the fact that there are alternative explanations.Evolution is not FACT and so people need to be made aware of this when dodgy salesmen come along like yourself.

Your argumEnt in support of Creationism IS??
Whatever you hucksters preach has never worked. There was the story of Hayseed, who used creation "science" to drill oil , he found out that money lenders dont buy Biblical Bullshit, they need facts.

Apparently you want to deny science by saying that you dont deny science.(Good negative argument).
Therefore I conclude that you hve no idea what science is about.
Science COULD live with a designer, its just that no evidence exists of one. You guys, on the contrary require your comic book be theonly truth.
Even the Hassidic Jews and Lubovitz have said that th Bible is a book of moral tales.
Kinda like Kipling

why should I bother with the Creqtion/IED clowns. As I said, the arguments of science are constntly added to. The Cretionists dont come up with a nything since Behe got laughed out of court.


Talk about cut n paste, you dint even remove your wiki references

I give wiki credit when used. Why would I be ashamed of my sources?

But now I understand why you wanted to debate via PM instead of publicly.

Btw, in case you wanted a better explanation of the protein folding problem, this sexy beast does a much better job of it than I.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yhJWAdZl-Ck

interesting stuff. As Doudna said about peptide linkages,Protein folding, methylation , e"tc.

" "CRSPR"-Cas 9 , if we can understand the patterns involved, can knock off many units of time in evolution.

Impressive hand waving!

didnt you think of gene editing in general??

Yes, but that is several layers of code above the subject of proteins. Which if you think about it, is the real problem of protein folding. 99% of the hard work is done before folding even starts. And we STILL are only 90% there on folding, even with the help of AI. And Even though we have the finished product in front of us as example.

We are truly without excuse.

You know, the funny part about the current medical talk about using engineered 'nano robots', is that that is exactly what proteins are.

When you knock off units of time you are doing it by introducing a complex system that performs a task similar to artificial intelligence. The time is being knocked of by making choices to input new information to reach an outcome faster than random choices of new information can be reached without this newly discovered system of patterns that produces new patterns. That system producing patterns, is always more complex than the task it is performing.

The reason the "we" in your statement are struggling to understand it the complex patterns is because we with our intelligence cannot replicate them, and there fore can only struggle to understand.

Except nano robots cannot self replicate for millions of years nor create better nano robots unless we create them with real intelligence.

Technically speaking, proteins do not reproduce themselves. As I told farmer, that job is several pay grades higher. Which is the real problem that proteins pose.

And besides, you haven’t convinced farmer that there is any information in molecular biology. I didn’t do any better.

still the old passive aggressive eh.
The issue was protein and causes in peptide linkages /folding etc.
You guys are comparing this to som kind of Sacred BAR CODE. Thats basic bullshit and you guys know it.
EG proteins fold and can achive some stability based o enviiiiironmental n pH /REDOX/ sidechain groups, existence of N=H instad of NH3 .(imine v amine)

Its YOU guys that need to read microbio and biochem.

I guess youre convinced that your god is busy addressing evolution by changing the environments in which the pre aminos exist.

You guys make a lovely cabal based on Bibilcal BS , have at it. Ive gotta plow snow .